HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hpeyerl@novatel.cuc.ab.ca (Herb Peyerl)
Subject: Re: selling 386BSD (was Re: 386BSD on CD-ROM?)
Organization: "NovAtel Communications Ltd."
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 21:11:05 GMT

Daniel A Muntz (dmuntz@dip.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: The copyright notice included by cgd sets a bad precedent, especially if code
: containing new restrictions is integrated into the Jolitz' release.  We'll have
: to start rewriting 386bsd code to produce an unencumbered 386bsd release :-/

I was under the impression that the whole spirit of this whole
thing was to allow normal people full access to Unix code so they may
learn from it without having to work for a company that has a source
license agreement.  I personally have never had access to Unix source in
the past until now... I've learnt alot and have even contributed back in
a miniscule way...

When I spliced the 3c503 driver together, I did it for myself; as a learning
experience... I also wouldn't have written it if I didn't myself have a
3c503 card and want to network 386bsd... I feel I've gotten all the reward
out of the experience that I need... It seems that a number of people find
the driver useful and that's an added bonus.  If someone really wants to 
take that code and try to make money from it; then so be it... There's
enough 3c503 drivers for various systems already in the public domain that
it really doesn't matter... (Especially the driver made available by 
Russ Nelson and Bob Clements from which I took the register descriptions
almost verbatim...)

Why doesn't everyone just lump all the software they've contributed to 
386bsd under Bill and Lynne's Copyright??? (Do they want us to do this?
That's what I did from a lack of anything better to put on it.)

--
"I was early to finish | hpeyerl@novatel.cuc.ab.ca <Reply-To>   | I brew |
I was late to start, I | peyerlh@cuug.ab.ca                     | there- | 
might be an adult, but | #define JANITOR "Network Administrator"| fore I | 
I'm a minor at heart." |    JANITOR, NovAtel Communications Ltd.|   AM.  |
-- 
"I was early to finish | hpeyerl@novatel.cuc.ab.ca <Reply-To>   | I brew |
I was late to start, I | peyerlh@cuug.ab.ca                     | there- | 
might be an adult, but | #define JANITOR "Network Administrator"| fore I | 
I'm a minor at heart." |    JANITOR, NovAtel Communications Ltd.|   AM.  |
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: ESDI disk performance under 386BSD
Organization: Weber State University  (Ogden, UT)
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 06:44:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.170148.22228@dsuvax.dsu.edu> ghelmer@dsuvax.dsu.edu (Guy Helmer) writes:
[ ... my WD1007V-SE2 controller an my Wren VI seem real slow ... ]

There are 2 delay(100)'s in the disk driver to make it slower.  Dunno if this
is what's biting you.  I suspect you are missing the interleave.  With that
controller, make sure the low level format (not possible with 386BSD -- use
a DOS tool) is 1:1.


					Terry Lambert
					terry_lambert@gateway.novell.com
					terry@icarus.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       terry@icarus.weber.edu
 "I have an 8 user poetic license" - me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: glover@news.Colorado.EDU (Brian Glover)
Subject: Trouble with lpd daemon
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: cu
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 19:57:26 GMT

We keep having problems with the lpd daemon timing out on our systems, mostly suns and
decstations...When you try to print, sometimes the que comes back and tells you that
there are no lpd daemons present but it still spools the file...If I do a ps and grep 
for lpd, it is found but it is in an IW.  Basically, it keeps getting swapped out.  There's
plenty of swap space so I can't pin-point the problem...This seems to occur when someone
prints on a machine that hasn't spooled anything in a while...Any info on this would be 
greatly appreciated.
Keywords: 

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: pk@cs.few.eur.nl (Paul Kranenburg)
Subject: Re: WD Ethernet Card not found on warmboot
Reply-To: pk@cs.eur.nl
Organization: Erasmus University Rotterdam
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 12:29:45 GMT

In <1992Aug19.165319.14767@doug.cae.wisc.edu> dinda@cae.wisc.edu (Dinda Peter) writes:
>However, this is only that case when the machine is power-cycled.  On
>warmboot initiated via reboot or shutdown -r (or a panic) the WD    
>Ethernet card is not recognized.  The card is correctly configured
>as IRQ2, I/O adx 0x280, Mem base 0xD000 with EASYSET.EXE.  Any thoughts?

None of the initiations of a warm boot (shutdown, Ctrl-Alt-Del) care to
properly shutdown peripherals (I guess this would require a device "detach"
hook), so your ethernet device continues to process packets arriving on the
wire. Since the device driver is gone, interrupts are not serviced and it is
not unthinkable that the device locks up if such a situation exists for too
long a time. Also, the WE driver doesn't flip the reset bit in the card at
probe time, so it judges the adapter unuseable.

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: juengst@boss1.physik.uni-bonn.de (Henry G. Juengst)
Subject: /etc/ethers ?
Keywords: /etc/ethers
Organization: Universit"at Bonn, Informatikinstitut, R"omerstr 154, W-5300 Bonn 1
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:30:14 GMT

Does BSD use /etc/ethers ? Other OSs use it to make sure that no machine
does contact with an illegal IP address (if IP address and ethernet address
are not the same found in /etc/ethers).

Ok, ethernet addresses can be modified, but it's not so easy if you haven't
got the software to do it.

Henry

-- 
juengst@boss1.physik.uni-bonn.de [131.220.221.30]
juengst@saph2.physik.uni-bonn.de [131.220.221.12]
juengst@pib1.physik.uni-bonn.de  [131.220.221.2] (strange particle)

I'm only speaking for myself, but not for anybody else !
From: ian@airs.com (Ian Lance Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Date: 17 Aug 92 05:10:14 GMT

peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

[ who benefits because 386BSD is not under the GPL ]

>The people who aren't hackers and want to walk down to the store and buy
>a shrinkwrapped copy of "386BSD-Lite" with a technical support number and
>a bunch of application programs in shrinkwrap on the shelf next to it.

I know this issue gets chased around and around a lot, but, after all,
just because the Hurd is covered by the GPL does not mean it can not
be sold shrinkwrapped in a store.  The GPL just means that the
distributor has to put a piece of paper in the shrinkwrap saying
``send $100 for complete source code'' as well as another saying ``you
may give this software to your friends.''  Apple seems to do fairly
well with a freely redistributable operating system.

Also, just because the Hurd is covered by the GPL does not mean that
programs that run on it must be under the GPL as well.

I thought about these issues a lot when I decided to put my UUCP
package under the GPL, and I've never seen any argument that was at
all convincing as to why that was a bad idea.  I've seen convincing
arguments against putting library code under the GPL, but they do not
apply if you are using shared libraries on a GPL-based operating
system.

>Mundanes are people too.

In fact, they are the people who could make a shrink-wrapped Hurd a
success.  Hackers would never pay money for such a thing, but people
who are just interested in getting their work done certainly would (of
course, they would need good reasons to buy it other than ``it's
free'').
-- 
Ian Lance Taylor                ian@airs.com                uunet!airs!ian
First person to identify this quote wins a free e-mail message:
``I would prefer my life to contain more hours of pain, if that means
  that none of this pain is still to come.''
From: STDN%MARIST@VM.MARIST.EDU (Dan Newcombe)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Does MWRITE only work as root?
Date: 14 Aug 1992 09:23:13 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Under the advice of someone else on this list, I created
the fd0 devices  (sh MAKEDEV fda)  Now I can get
mwrite and mdir to work, but only from root? Is this normal?
When using it from another id, it still gives:
init: open: file or directory not found

  -Dan
stdn@vm.marist.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:27:11 GMT

The false (and pernicious) implication in statements like the following
truly annoys me.

In article <PHR.92Aug17003618@soda.berkeley.edu>,
 phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:

| Years ago, somebody I'll call X announced he was writing a big free
| software system and called for volunteers to donate code.  I
| contributed a program [...] Then when the big system was
| released, he made the whole thing proprietary to himself.

The implication is that somehow Paul's code has been ``taken'' from him.

Wrong.  Absent contractural obligations, code Paul wrote is still Paul's,
and he is free to distribute it anyway he wants.  The same is true of
the other N people who contributed to X.  If Paul and his friends
wanted to distribute the ``X'' system themselves there would be nothing
to stop them.

Of course, if there *are* contractural obligations, then Paul has little
excuse for being surprised by the outcome; contracts are volentary and
involve mutual consideration.

-- 
---
 Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA
 Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Date: 17 Aug 92 00:36:18
Organization: CSUA/UCB
	<PHR.92Aug15214245@soda.berkeley.edu> <MNDIKJ3@taronga.com>
	<5146@airs.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: ian@airs.com's message of 17 Aug 92 05:10:14 GMT


    I thought about these issues a lot when I decided to put my UUCP
    package under the GPL, and I've never seen any argument that was at
    all convincing as to why that was a bad idea.  I've seen convincing
    arguments against putting library code under the GPL, but they do not
    apply if you are using shared libraries on a GPL-based operating
    system.

Note also that if you write a piece of free software with the GPL and
decide later that you made a mistake, you can change your mind and
relax the conditions.  But if you don't copyleft and then realize you
wish there weren't all those proprietary systems being sold that were
adapted from your code, there is no way to get the toothpaste back in
the tube.

Years ago, somebody I'll call X announced he was writing a big free
software system and called for volunteers to donate code.  I
contributed a program, under a copyleft, while the rest of the system
was still under development.  He said he wanted his system to be
useful to the largest possible number of people and he convinced me to
drop the copyleft on the piece I wrote.  Then when the big system was
released, he made the whole thing proprietary to himself.  This story
is not directly relevant to 386bsd, but it's one reason I copyleft all
nontrivial free software I write these days.

X's system is widely used, by the way---all of you have heard of it.
I'm glad to see its popularity is finally fading.  I'm also glad my
contribution was extremely minor---I felt like I got away with a
fairly cheap lesson.
From: hm@hcshh.hcs.de (Hellmuth Michaelis)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: selling 386BSD (was Re: 386BSD on CD-ROM?)
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:21:45 GMT
Organization: HCS GmbH, Hamburg, Europe

In <1848@adagio.UUCP> grog@adagio.UUCP (Greg Lehey) writes:

>In article <1557@hcshh.hcs.de> hm@hcshh.hcs.de (Hellmuth Michaelis) writes:
>>In <1992Aug12.100430.3467@Urmel.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE> kuku@acds.physik.rwth-aachen.de (Christoph Kukulies) writes:
>>
>>i can understand chris. yesterday i saw an ad in the german "unix magazin",
>>where a company named "tuttle design" sells 386bsd 0.1 on tape for 399,- DM,
>>which is about 250 US$. they say in the ad, that a contribution to bill jolitz
>>is contained in this price....
>>
>Well, DM 399 sounds rather high, but don't forget that people have to
>make a living as well. As soon as you start advertising the stuff, you
>*have* to charge money just to make ends meet. The smallest ad in UNIX
>Magazin costs over DM 600; last time we put an ad in there, it led to
>about 3 orders. And we sell our tapes for DM 200 - when you add in the
>cost of the tape, we lost money on the deal. We came to the conclusion
>that we should stop advertising.

good, until now i thought, 386bsd is NOT something to earn money from ...
if the jolitz's intention was to do so, they could went the BSDI way, but
they didn't!

2nd, where is the need to advertize for something which one can get for
FREE everywhere ?
it's just for getting (too much) money from those poor souls without
usenet/internet access ....

>As you see, nobody's making much money. The charge is not for the
>software, just for the handling.

a tape costs 50,- dm or 25$ in single quantities, so you count 350,- dm
for not making money ???

>[...] If you want 386bsd from me, you can call us up
>and get it via uucp for nothing.

this was the intention of this all, wasn't it ??

>The FSF charges $200 for their tapes, by the way.

i know, and this is well invested money, same applies to 386bsd, if the 
jolitz's would carge some money for 386bsd, it would be well invested too !

hellmuth
-- 
hellmuth michaelis    HCS Hanseatischer Computerservice GmbH   hamburg, europe
hm@hcshh.hcs.de              tel: +49/40/55903-170         fax: +49/40/5591486
From: pejn@cc.uow.edu.au (Paul Nulsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Choice of SCSI tape drive for 386bsd
Summary: What SCSI tape drive should I use with 386bsd?
Keywords: SCSI, tape, 386bsd
Date: 19 Aug 92 08:36:35 GMT
Organization: University Of Wollongong


What type of SCSI tape drive would you recommend for use in a 386bsd system?
I would like to add a SCSI tape, but I know very little about the SCSI
interface. Are the interfaces to all SCSI tapes the same, so that one driver
can handle them all? If not, what types of tape unit are supported by the
current SCSI driver? For compatibility reasons I have a leaning towards an
Exabyte drive. Does anyone have an Exabyte SCSI drive working with a 386bsd
system?

Thank you
Paul Nulsen
pejn@wampyr.cc.uow.edu.au
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: shin@nc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Shin YOSHIMURA)
Subject: Re: ne1000 slow performance
Organization: UTnet Network Operation Center, The University of Tokyo, Japan.
X-Md4-Signature: e389fbf6ffbac5294601fc0910434ade
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:37:25 GMT

>>>>> On 12 Aug 92 05:03:32 JST, kuku@acds.physik.rwth-aachen.de (Christoph Kukulies) said:

kuku> ftp rate due to 386SX I'm using), the other is a ne1000 (klone) which
kuku> works well with telnet but very poor with ftp.

Original ne driver in 0.1 is too slow performance in some cases.  You
can try another ne1000/2000 driver.  Anonymous ftp is available from
ftp.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp:~ftp/pub/386bsd-0.1/unofficial/if_ne.shar.

--
$@5HB<!!?-(J
$@El5~Bg3X(J
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: selling 386BSD (was Re: 386BSD on CD-ROM?)
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 16:27:55 GMT

In article <1561@hcshh.hcs.de>, hm@hcshh.hcs.de (Hellmuth Michaelis) writes:
| but, what can be done to stop those money-makers from selling something which
| ought to be free, and give people who just want to USE it, the chance of
| getting/using/modifying/etc. it in whatever way they like ?

I'm glad you asked that in such words, since I think it focuses on the
issue under discussion.

Many of us believe that, as long as the code is legally ``unencumbered'',
it is both counterproductive and wrong to try to ``stop those money-makers''
from selling it.

It is counterproductive because:

  1) The fact someone is selling it doesn't stop others for acquireing
it for free (because it is legally unencumbered).  (Witness X)

  2) Those with a commercial interrest often (but not always) contribute
modifications and improvements back to the public.  (Witness X and Cygnus).

  3) By anticommercializing it you prevent certain classes of users from
accessing it (i.e., those users who need the additional services provided
by the commercial suppliers).

  4) Having wide (private and commercial) participation in someting like
BSD advances the state of the art.

I think it is wrong because ``unencumbered'' should mean just that.
Regulating access to BSD based on political considerations is morally
indefensible.

-- 
---
 Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA
 Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
From: allard@isi.edu (Dennis Allard)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: how to shutdown -todos?
Date: 18 Aug 92 23:17:26 GMT
Reply-To: allard@isi.edu (Dennis Allard)
Distribution: world
Organization: USC Information Sciences Institute
Keywords: shutdown, booting

I notice two shutdown programs.
/usr/distbin/shutdown and /sbin/shutdown.

The distbin/ one understands -todos, the sbin/ one does not.

Why two shutdown programs?  What's the difference?  Why doesn't
the sbin/ one understand -todos?

When I do /sbin/shutdown, it does a bunch of stuff and leaves me at
the # prompt.  Then, if I execute it again, it does some more stuff
and leaves me at login:.  Man shutdown does not really tell me enough
to understand this behaviour.  What's going on?

The last time I used distbin/shutdown -todos, it complained: "can't
make dos bootable".  Why not?

Dennis G. Allard
internet: allard@isi.edu
tel: 310-399-4740
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: karl@NeoSoft.com (Karl Lehenbauer)
Subject: Finer control over system startup behavior; two-disk boot floppy
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 15:56:53 GMT

It seems that SYSV, particularly SCO, has a lot more user-configurable 
control over how the system starts up, and something like this would be 
useful for 386BSD.

SCO UNIX, for example, has a file, /etc/default/boot, that defines which file 
to boot, whether or not to boot automatically, whether to prompt for a filename
to boot, whether to come up multiuser or not, whether to check filesystems,
what device is to be the console, and so forth.

Now BSD also has the if-file-exists mechanism for determining whether or
not to check the filesystems, and more could be done following that lead.

This /etc/default/boot would have to be opened by the second-stage boot
code, I'm pretty sure, so it'd have to be looked up with namei and such --
no filesystem available at that point, which is something of a pain.

The file, by the way, is formated in VAR=VALUE style.

Also there is inittab in System V, which is nice, tho' there isn't much
it can do that you can't do from /etc/rc.something, ttydefs, etc.

Opinions?
-- 
-- Email info@NeoSoft.com for info on getting interactive Internet access.
You will now awaken feeling relaxed and refreshed, remembering everything 
you've read except the details of the Omega contingency plan.
From: allard@isi.edu (Dennis Allard)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: how to shutdown -todos?
Date: 20 Aug 92 23:34:16 GMT
Reply-To: allard@isi.edu (Dennis Allard)
Distribution: world
Organization: USC Information Sciences Institute
Keywords: shutdown, booting

gab10@griffincd.amdahl.com (Gary A Browning) writes:
> I (allard@isi.edu) wrote:
> > I notice two shutdown programs.
> > ...
> Try "/sbin/shutdown -h now".  Its in that man page somewhere.

I just saw that agate.berkeley.edu has a FAQ entry for this, viz:
(faq is in agate.berkeley.edu:/pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/unofficial/)

2.43	The "shutdown -todos" command doesn't work.

	There are two flavors of this problem.  The first is if your path
	is set so that you are using the wrong "shutdown" command.

	The second is that it gives the message "can not make DOS partition
	bootable".  This will not work if your partition is larger than about
	30K (the point at which DOS will use a 16 bit FAT).  Apparently, it
	will only work with 8 bit FATs, so if it is possible, use a smaller
	DOS partition, or several smaller partitions instea of one large one.

Dennis
allard@isi.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Motif on X386???
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 12:31:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.175520.5936@gateway.novell.com> terry@ithaca.Eng.Sandy.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert) writes:
>For a similar toolkit, someone may wish to contact John Bradley (email at
>bradley@cis.upenn.edu), the author of 'xv'.  He has explicitly disallowed
>a great deal of use of the toolkit, so this may not be suitable except
>for personal use.

And if you want a better toolkit with much of the same looknfeel, try
Tk and TCL... with the usual Berkeley licences...
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
From: hackney@moxie.hou.tx.us (Greg Hackney)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386BSD won't boot off Compaq 386sx/16
Date: 20 Aug 92 01:06:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: moxie.1992Aug20.010635.16749
Organization: Home

rminnich@super.org (Ronald G Minnich) writes:
> [bsdi] has been tested by no less than COMPAQ itself. 

Where did you hear that from ?
From: sxs@cis.ksu.edu (Spencer Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Problems with SCSI tape 386BSD
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:29:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: draconis.sxs.714260429
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: draconis.cis.ksu.edu

karl@NeoSoft.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes:

>When trying to write to an Exabyte EXB-8500 I get the following:

>as1a: controller error 0x12 writing fsbn 0-19
>scsi sense: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...

the driver/or adapter is getting confused possibly by something
the exabyte is sending back. 
	
>Even with the tape as SCSI unit 1, it is not recognized in the boot probe.
>But on the first attempt to access it, it does probe it and announces
>an Exabyte 8500, etc.

Pace's device driver doesnt probe for the devices untill there
is an open call for them. Once it has it will remmber them. 

There is work on rewritting the SCSI decive driver, that should
help remove alot of the problems that people are having. Im getting
there but its taking a little work (theres some small differences
between mach and bsd).

So if anyone out there knows how to do phystov it might remove
a small hack in the new code (-:  vtophys isnt a problem (-:
 
Spencer
sxs@cis.ksu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd