HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alsaggaf@athena.mit.edu (M. Saggaf)
Subject: Seyon 1.2 is out
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 03:55:48 GMT


Version 1.2 is out. You can get it from the usual place, sipb.mit.edu
at pub/seyon. Notable in this release is a revamped dialer with
multiple dialing and dial timeout. This is the final piece of the
puzzle and Seyon is now at the same level of functionality as most
descent DOS communication programs. This doesn't mean that I won't
continue maintaining Seyon and adding features to it, but I suspect
that versions will come in at a slower rate from now on. I've also put
a binary of seyon-cmd on sipb for people having trouble with compiling
or running seyon. I think I will also upload this version to other
major linux ftp sites (but sipb will always have the latest release.)

For those having trouble running Seyon, please read on to the section
'Important -- linux users' below. The following is the introduction
followed by the change log from the previous version:

Introduction:
=============

	This is Seyon, an X-based communication package that has its roots
	in xcomm 2.2. Seyon has a descent dialing directory where hosts
	can be chosen by clicking at them. Seyon has the same script
	language as xcomm 2.2, which is quite good. Seyon avoids the
	problematic terminal emulation of minicom and other communication
	programs by using xterm as its terminal emulator. Hence, Seyon can
	emulate vt100 and color ANSI (the latter only if color xterm is
	used). If you use Seyon and like it, please let me know by email.
	This will give me the incentive to continue maintaining it. Also
	let me know how it works out whenever you upgrade to a new
	version.

	Please read the FAQ. I've put a lot of effort into making it
	complete and up-to-date. It serves as the documentation for Seyon
	(until a kind soul writes a good documentation for it).

Important -- linux users:
=========================

	Q: I get 'killed by siganl 11' when I start seyon.

	A: You must be using old versions of libraraies. Test that by
	   using

				ldd seyon-cmd

	   This will tell you what libraries you have linked Seyon with.
	   If you get anything other than

			  /lib/XawVen.so.2.1 (Classic 2.1)
			  /lib/libX11.so.2.1 (Classic 2.1)
			  /lib/libc.so.4 (Jump table 4.1)
		
       it's time to upgrade to newer libraries.

Changes:
========

Version 1.2:
	* Setting the baud rate interactively is now fully supported.
	* The 'show' button has been removed since it's no longer needed.
	* The dialer timeout is now fully supported. Use the resource
	  "dialTimeOut" to set it (default is 45 sec).
	* Added multiple dialing. Seyon will now circulate through
	  selected items in the dialing directory until a connection is
	  made. Refer to the FAQ to see how this is used.
	* Added two new resources, dialPrefix and dialSuffix.
	* The dialing directory and transfer console now have scroll bars
	  and would can be scrolled if they contain more than 10 entries
	  (no limit on the total number of entries).
	* Cleaned up the dialer code quite a bit

--
/M. Saggaf
 alsaggaf@athena.mit.edu
From: nk24+@andrew.cmu.edu (Nicholas Kramer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: stdlib.h
Date: 16 Nov 92 13:17:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.4f22kPG00iV148aF13
Organization: Freshman, MCS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


 Where might I get stdlib.h for Mach? Any ideas why I didn't have it?


						Nick
From: magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: Mach Kernel in OS/2
Date: 18 Nov 92 05:21:46 GMT
Organization: DarkTower Software
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Mark Kovarski (kovarski@zooid.guild.org) wrote:
: 
: Peter,
: you are certainly correct about this. However, if memory serves me correct,
: they showed it at the Unix Expo as well. In one statement that I have read,
: IBM will be showing it at COMDEX but beta testing will start in late November.
: Can some IBM official explain why IBM is waiting until November, and possibly,
: what might we expect to see. Thanks

I heard it was a mach platform they were using under OS/2 for their
RS6000 line of RISC machines.  I don't believe it's for the intel line
of computers (I mean, computers that use Intel cpu's).

-Louis
--
---------------------------------------------------------
 Louis J. Giliberto, Jr.   ! magus@drktowr.chi.il.us
   -sysadmin drktowr       ! lgilibe@orion.it.luc.edu
  Chicago, IL  USA         ! 
---------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: BNR2SS Status
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:48:33 GMT

In article <88a4TB1w165w@underg.ucf.org>,
  max@underg.ucf.org (Max Cray) quotes Mary Thompson:

| We are not distributing the BSDSS/BNR2 stuff because [...]
| we cannot distribute it to non-licensed sites
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Since when did BSD NET2 become ``licensed software'' (aside from the
standard Berkeley license)?

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Alternate hosting of kernel build...
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:12:56 GMT

I'll trot out this old chestnut once again... (what a metaphore!)

Has anything been done anywere to allow building of the MACH3 kernel
stuff with something other than the license-required CMU tools?
Either by changing the build method or by integrating the CMU oddities
into GNU make?

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: BNR2SS Status
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 15:30:27 GMT

In article <BxvEo5.7t7@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>,
 rmtodd@kittyhawk.ecn.uoknor.edu (Richard Michael Todd) writes:

| witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow) writes:
| 
| >In article <88a4TB1w165w@underg.ucf.org>,
| >  max@underg.ucf.org (Max Cray) quotes Mary Thompson:
| 
| >| We are not distributing the BSDSS/BNR2 stuff because [...]
| >| we cannot distribute it to non-licensed sites
| 
| >Since when did BSD NET2 become ``licensed software'' (aside from the
| >standard Berkeley license)?
| 
| It hasn't (yet), but the USL/AT&T lawsuit [...] has obviously made CMU
| very nervous.

Which means the ``cannot'' should probably be ``will not''.  I could
comment about standing up to a bully, but it isn't my cross to bear and
CMU has to do what they feel is best for them.  Sigh.

P.S.  Rumor has it that tar snapshots of BSDSS/BNR2 (from just before it
was jerked) can be had from various places for the asking.  Of course that
is just a rumor---I wouldn't want to be accused of sanctioning the
trafficing of this allegedly contraband code.  AT&T's ``beady eyed toon 
shysters'' might get it into their miniature brains to come after me.

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
From: magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: Licenses/Availability of Unix server with Mach 3.0 ??
Date: 21 Nov 92 22:24:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: DarkTower Software
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Thomas A Stewart (ughtas@pencom.com) wrote:
: What is the current (11/92) state of Unix Emulations/Server code and licensing  
: for mach 3.x?  Can I get copies of BSD source and build them, or do I have to  
: have an AT&T Source License?

I need the info as well, so please post it here.

-Louis
--
---------------------------------------------------------
 Louis J. Giliberto, Jr.   ! magus@drktowr.chi.il.us
   -sysadmin drktowr       ! lgilibe@orion.it.luc.edu
  Chicago, IL  USA         ! 
---------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: BNR2SS Status
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:38:57 GMT

In article <BRIAN.92Nov19082155@dsm.dsm.fordham.edu>,
 brian@dsm.fordham.edu (Brian Downing) writes:

|  Rumor? Care to spread it this way? 

Well, I got a cryptic and possibly apocryphal message on my answering
machine overnight that stated that it was available on genie and compuserve
in their unix fora.  I wonder what effect this posting will have?

No doubt your posting will result in mail from others who can tell you
ftpable locations.

-- 
 Robert Withrow, Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
 R.W. Withrow Associates, 21 Railroad Ave, Swampscott MA 01907-1821 USA
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Mach and OSF/1
Keywords: Mach OSF/1 operating systems
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 09:57:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.182135.12294@awdprime.austin.ibm.com>, pbahrs@netftp.austin.ibm.com (Peter C Bahrs (boca)) writes:
> In article <1992Nov18.131151.2051@cs.tcd.ie> dherity@cs.tcd.ie (Herity D.) writes:
> >dbehr@dos-lan.cs.up.ac.za (Danie Behr) writes:
> >
> >>Can anyone help me with the differences/similarities between OSF/1 and Mach 
> >>please.
> >
> >Me too. OSF/1 is a branch off from Mach. AT this stage, I'm quite bewildered
> >by the different MK numbers from two different sources. Can anyone point me
> >at the pedigrees of the various versions of ASF/1 and Mach ?
> >-- 
> OSF/1 is an operating system that is implemented on top of Mach, either 
> with an intergrated kernel (procedure calls) or micro kernel (message
> passing).  The kernel used is Mach (2.5 is proc, 3.0 is ipc).
> In particular the OSF organization created the OSF/1 operating system; a
> very robust operating system with unix type interface.  I think
> the current OSF/1 os (which comes with their mach enhancements) is 4.0.

Close.

There are three main versions of OSF/1 available and with differing
purposes.

OSF/1 IK (Not the official name but makes it easier to talk about it) is
the Integrated Kernel version. It was originally based on Mach 2.5 (X115
or thereabouts), what was to be BSD 4.4 and a large engineering effort by
OSF. The first version, 1.0, was shipped in November 1990 and the current
release is 1.1.1 (with 1.1.2 due soon). The architecture is still much
like that of Mach 2.5 in that the Unix and Mach parts reside in the same
address space and access each other via direct procedure calls. This
version comes from OSF Engineering and is intended to be the basis for
people who want to build products.

The OSF Research Institute has two other versions that are available to
OSF members with an OSF/1 source license.

OSF/1 MK is a single server version of OSF/1. The kernel is Mach 3 and the
server architecture is much like that of the CMU BSD server in that it
uses an emulator. This system is primarily a research vehicle at the
moment but we are making architectural changes (like removing the
emulator) which will make it more suitable for general use. The current
release is V4.1 which is based on OSF/1 IK 1.0.4. V5.0 (based on OSF/1
1.1.X) will probably out sometime during Q2 next year.

OSF/1 AD is the version developed for Multicomputors. This is again based
on Mach 3 and started from OSF/1 MK, although obviously significant
changes have been made. Intel have used OSF/1 AD as a basis for their
OS on the new Paragon machines. This version is also being used as a
starting point for the OSF RI work in clustered systems, ie a single 
system image across a number of machines on a fast network. 

I hope this makes things clearer.

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
From: magus@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: Mach and OSF/1
Date: 21 Nov 92 22:24:10 GMT
Organization: DarkTower Software
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Herity D. (dherity@cs.tcd.ie) wrote:
: Me too. OSF/1 is a branch off from Mach. AT this stage, I'm quite bewildered
: by the different MK numbers from two different sources. Can anyone point me
: at the pedigrees of the various versions of ASF/1 and Mach ?

Me 3.  I'm lost as well.
-Louis
--
---------------------------------------------------------
 Louis J. Giliberto, Jr.   ! magus@drktowr.chi.il.us
   -sysadmin drktowr       ! lgilibe@orion.it.luc.edu
  Chicago, IL  USA         ! 
---------------------------------------------------------
From: dbehr@dos-lan.cs.up.ac.za (Danie Behr)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Mach and OSF/1
Keywords: Mach OSF/1 operating systems
Date: 18 Nov 92 06:05:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: dos-lan.dbehr.63.722066744
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Pretoria


Can anyone help me with the differences/similarities between OSF/1 and Mach 
please.
------------------------------------------------
Danie Behr
Dept Computer Science
University Pretoria
RSA
(dbehr@cs.up.ac.za)
From: doyle@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: The BNR2SS Revival
Date: 20 Nov 92 17:28:08 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Originator: doyle@freya.cs.umass.edu


	Now that the issue of BNR2SS has been revived on this newsgroup, I
was wondering if there is any loose cooperation of developers outside of
CMU that continue to work with the code?

	I have been very lax with my work on Mach and Unix server
applications since mid-September ; Since my financial situation is now much
better, I've recently gained more potential time to resume my work.

	When last at it - I had gained a copy of BSDSS4 from a friend
shortly after CMU pulled it from SUP. We ran it here on our 486 development
machine for awhile ; it was a bit buggy... There were deadlocking problems
in NFS/RPC that needed to be resolved - so we switched back and forth
between UX34 as a Unix emulation environment.

	Is there any mechanism (mailing list, FTP repository for notes
and source) to bridge all the independent workers that use BSDSS4? - if
not then if enough people read this and are interested, perhaps something
can be arranged. 

..... J.D.
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Subject: need site name for Mach 3.0 i386 X archive
Organization: Precipitating Pendulums Postal Party Poopers
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 18:38:59 GMT


Someone a few months ago mentioned a site that had X11R5 binaries for
Mach 3.0 on i386 platforms available for FTP. Could they or someone
else repost this information.

-- paul
-- 
There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a
little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider
price only are this man's lawful prey.
						John Ruskin
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: rmtodd@kittyhawk.ecn.uoknor.edu (Richard Michael Todd)
Subject: Re: BNR2SS Status
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:16:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow) writes:

>In article <88a4TB1w165w@underg.ucf.org>,
>  max@underg.ucf.org (Max Cray) quotes Mary Thompson:

>| We are not distributing the BSDSS/BNR2 stuff because [...]
>| we cannot distribute it to non-licensed sites
>                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^

>Since when did BSD NET2 become ``licensed software'' (aside from the
>standard Berkeley license)?

It hasn't (yet), but the USL/AT&T lawsuit against UC Berkeley has obviously
made CMU very nervous.  Can't say I'm too surprised; after all, USL's legal
arguments (such as they are) claiming that Net/2 is AT&T intellectual 
property can just as easily be applied to the Mach 3.0 microkernel.  Not
surprising that CMU wants to keep their head down...
-- 
Richard Todd   rmtodd@chinet.chi.il.us  or  rmtodd@essex.ecn.uoknor.edu  
                        or   rmtodd@servalan.servalan.com

Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: mjl@bos.locus.com (Mike Leibensperger)
Subject: Re: Mach and OSF/1
Organization: Locus Computing Corp., Boston Massachusetts USA.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 19:22:26 GMT


Greetings.

I keep seeing posts wondering about the relationship between OSF/1 and
Mach, so I guess I need to post a reply rather than reply to all the
posts!  So:

Mach and OSF/1 should be thought of as completely different animals.
Mach is an operating system, OSF/1 is a different operating system.
However, Mach is an operating system that allows user space code to
perform higher complexity operating system functions based on the
primitives that Mach provides.  For example, a task running under Mach
can provide OSF/1 semantics.  This Mach program exists; it is called
the OSF/1 single server (SS).  Other Mach servers have been written
for BSD4.3 and DOS, and still others are in development.

Now the OSF/1 that vendors are currently shipping happens to be based
on an earlier version of Mach that, for ease of Mach development,
happened to have a lot of BSD code in the microkernel itself (as
opposed to in a user space server as outlined above).  This is called
the OSF/1 integrated kernel (IK).  OSF's goal is to move away from an
IK implementation and toward an SS implementation.

Both OSF and C-MU are currently working on Mach microkernel
development, but they continually swap fixes and every so often they
do a big merge.  Their joint goal is to provide a single version of
the microkernel, but right now too many people are working on it at
too many locations with too many specific project goals in mind.
That's why you see a lot of MK version numbers out there.  

I hope this helps clear things up.  If I've misrepresented the state
of any Mach 3.0 based projects out there, please feel free to correct
me.

	yr obdnt svnt,
	mjl
--
--
Michael J. Leibensperger      "Rats and roaches live by competition under the
Locus Computing/Boston		 laws of supply and demand; it is the privilege
25 Mall Road; Burlington MA	     of human beings to live under the laws of
01803 (617)229-4980 mjl@locus.com       justice and mercy."  -- Wendell Berry
Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- write league@prep.ai.mit.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: uphya001@odie.uni-bielefeld.de (Lars Koeller)
Subject: Shared libraries in MACH2.6/3.0 ?
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 08:28:47 GMT
Organization: University of Bielefeld (Germany), Physik


Hello guys!

I think shared libraries for MACH is one of the most important things to
improve the system. My X11R5 binary tree has nearly 100MB !!!!, with shared
libs it should be only 40-50MB! Is there anybody who can help me?
Thank you very much
				Lars

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lars Koeller			    E-Mail: uphya001@odie.uni-bielefeld.de
Universitaet Bielefeld (Germany)	    uphya001@unibi.hrz.uni-bielefeld.de
Fakultaet fuer Physik / D0-231	    Phone:  +49 521-106-5375
Universitaetsstr. 25		    Fax:    +49 521-106-5244
4800 Bielefeld 1		    Telex:  932 362

Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: ian_stewart@pyrian.com (Ian H. Stewart)
Subject: UNIX Server
Organization: PYRIAN - Software Group, San Francisco Calif, 415-664-1170
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 05:29:03 GMT

CMU says that they won't send you the UNIX server without an AT&T source
license. Why? Do the UNIX server have AT&T code in it?
I am using a relatively good clone, but am having trouble getting
any server information.

Ian

-- 
Ian H. Stewart                            |  voice/fax 415-664-1170
Pyrian Software Group                     |  CIS  71101,1260
Always looking for new SW to market       |  Net  Ian_Stewart@pyrian.com
NeXT,Mac,PC & Sun                         | Isn't LiFE more like RiSK?
From: dherity@cs.tcd.ie (Herity D.)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: Mach and OSF/1
Keywords: Mach OSF/1 operating systems
Date: 18 Nov 92 13:11:51 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Trinity College Dublin

dbehr@dos-lan.cs.up.ac.za (Danie Behr) writes:

>Can anyone help me with the differences/similarities between OSF/1 and Mach 
>please.

Me too. OSF/1 is a branch off from Mach. AT this stage, I'm quite bewildered
by the different MK numbers from two different sources. Can anyone point me
at the pedigrees of the various versions of ASF/1 and Mach ?
-- 
================================================================================
| Dominic Herity,  dherity@.cs.tcd.ie,                      | Something clever |
| Computer Science Dept, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland.| coming soon to a |
| Tel : +353-1-6772941 ext 1720 Fax : +353-1-6772204        |signature near you|
From: honey@citi.umich.edu (Peter Honeyman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: comm needs cc -traditional
Date: 20 Nov 1992 21:07:16 GMT
Organization: Center for Information Technology Integration, Univ of Michigan
Distribution: world
Reply-To: honey@citi.umich.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: doom.citi.umich.edu

comm as distributed with mach 2.5 should be recompiled with
the -traditional flag.  o.w., comm -23 foo bar dumps core.

        peter
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: mrt+@CS.CMU.EDU (Mary Thompson)
Subject: Re: need site name for Mach 3.0 i386 X archive (and XFree86 rgb?)
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:40:02 GMT

The  XFree86 binaries for Mach are available via Sup from CMU. If you were
setup to sup your orginal Machi386 relese from x29.mach.cs.cmu.edu you should
be able to pick up the new bin.X11R5 collection now. Bob had disabled supping
while he was in the process of updating the collection and for a tansition
period so that folks would not update unexpectedly. But it looks like everyone
has now been reenabled.  You have the following collection choices

bin.X11R5        bin.X11R5+inc    bin.X11R5+man
bin.X11R5+fonts  bin.X11R5+lib    bin.X11R5base

bin.X11R5 is everything. The other ones are subsets.

If you have any problems or questions about suping Mach binaries or sources
from CMU please send mail to mach@cs.cmu.edu, not to Bob or me.

				Mary Thompson
				Project Mach Distribution Manager

-------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 10:35-EDT
From: Robert.Baron@ERNST.MACH.CS.CMU.EDU
To: machi386@CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: XFree86

Yes indeed, you can get your very own XFree86 binaries SUP'ed to your
very own workstation NOW!  I have changed the bin.X11R5 collections to
pick up the new binaries; previously, they were the 1.2E 1.0.2 versions.

I saw no need to leave the old 1.2E binaries around and did not have
the space anyway.  So as not to clobber people who picked up the old
binaries and might not want to switch immediately, I disabled all
those people who had previously SUP'ed X11R5 from SUP'ing the new
stuff.
From: bj158@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Louis J. Nagy)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: 9-Track tapes, Where can I unload them?
Date: 20 Nov 1992 04:15:21 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu





        I have many 9-Track tapes that I would like to get rid of.  I
        have mostly the 2400ft variety but also have some smaller
        ones.  No offer will be refused, well almost no offer, so
        if you could use some or if you have any ideas on who could,
        will you please e-mail me.

        Thanks,

        Lou