HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: joeg@gagme (joe grosch)
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Organization: GAGME - Public Access UNIX of Chicago, Illinois, USA, Earth
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 06:08:22 GMT

merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:

[...Stuf deleted to save bandwidth...]

: This isn't just AT&T vs. BSDI -- it's AT&T vs. the academic community which 
: produced most of the intellectual property which makes the 'AT&T UNIX' and 
: 'Berkeley UNIX' compatible operating systems so valuable today -- virtual
: memory management, interprocess communication, networking, fast filesystems,
: efficient compilers -- and all of the other things which weren't contained
: in the Bell Research 32V system turned over to UC Regents so many years ago.
: 

Good Point! AT&T incorporated all the above features into System V without
paying Berkeley for a source code license. It might be a good idea to get
Bostic, et.al to file a friend of the court brief on just these points.

I urge all those on the net who have copys of either Net2, BSDI, or 386BSD
to start making copys and distributing them as far and wide as possible.
AT&T has found that the genie is out of the bottle and they want to stuff
him back in. Lets make sure it's not possible.

--
Josef Grosch         | It's been a quiet week in Lake Wobegon, my home town...
joeg@gagme.chi.il.us |       New Yorker by birth, Minnesoten by choice 
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: gilgalad@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin)
Subject: Is there a 386BSD mailgroup?
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:19:22 GMT


Has anybody started a 386BSD mailgroup?  Also, it seems to me as though
it would be a good thing to creat a comp.unix.386bsd or
comp.unix.bsd.386.  Seems as though  a lot of the traffic on here is
386BSD only, as opposed to BSD general.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan)
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Organization: Resonex Inc., Sunnyvale CA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:38:58 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.132400.20475@resonex.com> michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan) writes:
>Well, NET2 and 386BSD (based on NET2) are currently freely distributable,
>according to the folks at UCBerkeley.

Of course, I should have also indicated that the Jolitz's have granted
permission to distribute 386BSD.  CSRG at UCB obviously has no say over
what restrictions are or are not placed on 386BSD, except for what
restrictions they place on NET2 in general.

-- 
Michael Bryan        michael@resonex.com                     |     ,_,
"Pretenders I meet are making a trail along the way.         |    /oo \
They say that they know how to show me a path to guide my    |    <>__|
way to truth..." --- David York, "The Quiet of a Candle"     |    |  U|
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: explorer@iastate.edu (Michael Graff)
Subject: Re: patched bootables on agate...
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:46:20 GMT

cgd@agate.berkeley.edu (Chris G. Demetriou) writes:

>they should fix the problem that some people have been having,
>where they can install fine, but then when they try to reboot,
>the system seems to have lost their disklabel...

I tried these disks, but I still can't install BSD 0.1 on my Zenith 
Z-386/25.

Machine info:
	150M ESDI drive, wd ethernet card irq 2/9, vga, com 1, com 2.
	386DX 25Mhz, no fpu.

Install info:
	install using the patched and non-patched dist.fs disks.  When
	installing, it seems to write to the hard drive fine.  If I
	hit ^C when it wants to reboot, I can mount the filesystem and
	everything seems to work.  However, it locks during reboot.
	The keyboard lights flash, and the floppy light stays on.  It
	requires a power cycle to make it come back to life.

Details:
	partition 1 is a 100M DOS partition.
	the rest should be BSD-386.  I plan on NFS mounting most everything
	from a DECstation.


Thanks,
--Michael
-- 
--
Michael Graff    Iowa State University Computation Center      Project Vincent
215 Durham                voice: (515) 294-4994           explorer@iastate.edu
Ames, IA  50010           fax:   (515) 294-1717           gg.mlg@isumvs.bitnet
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: jas5@cec1.wustl.edu (John Adam Szofran)
Subject: 40MB IDE goes rumble beep beep on 386bsd install
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:58:27 GMT

I have been trying to install 386bsd v0.1 for the past several days on the
following system:

     BSR 386sx, 16MHz, no '387
     Award BIOS v3.03
     4 MB RAM
     ST506 disk controller (I assume)
     Western Digital WD95044-A 40MB IDE disk
        (ns#17:nt#5:nc#977:se#512)

     I plan to devote the entire disk to 386bsd (no other choice).  During
the "High-Level formatting..." section of the automatic install procedure
the hard disk makes a rumble sound and then beeps twice (not the computer,
the hard disk actually beeps).  This sequence continues over and over again
until I have mercy on the disk and do a ^C.  install then prints a failure 
message and the contents of /.profile prints to the console ad infinitum.

     The install procedure puts the following partitions on the disk:
3 partitions:
#        size   offset    fstype   [fsize bsize   cpg]
  a:    72420        0    unused        0     0         # (Cyl.    0 - 851)
  b:    10000    72460    unused        0     0         # (Cyl.  852*- 970*)
  c:    82960        0    unused        0     0         # (Cyl.    0 - 975)

     I have also tried to manually install using the fixit.fs disk.  Here
is the disktab entry (one of the many) that I have tried:

wd95044a|Western Digital 40MB IDE: \
     :dt=ST506:ty=winchester:se#512:nt#5:ns#17:nc#977: \
     :pa#15895:oa#0:ba#4096:fa#512:ta=4.2BSD: \
     :pb#10030:ob#15895:tb=swap: \
     :pc#83045:oc#0: \
     :pd#83045:od#0: \   <-- As per Chris Demetriou
     :pe#15895:oe#25925:be:4096:fe#512:te=4.2BSD: \
     :pf#40800:of#41820:bf#4096:ff#512:tf=4.2BSD: \
     :pg#56695:og#25925:bg#4096:fg#512:tg=4.2BSD:

     Using the disktab above I can successfully do a 
"disklabel -w -r wd0 wd95044a".  I can also "newfs wd0a" and "newfs wd0b".  
However, if I try to newfs partitions e, f or g, I get the same rumble beep
beep from the hard disk.  (My intention is to use only a, b, and g.)  I have
tried both the original boot images and the newly modified ones created
by Chris Demetriou on 
   agate.berkeley.edu:/pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/unofficial/newbootables.cgd

Please respond by email (zof@wubcl.wustl.edu) if you have any suggestions.
Thank you.


--
J. Adam Szofran                    Internet: zof@wubcl.wustl.edu
Electrical Engineering Student        Phone: (314) 362-2135
From: paigen@tfs.com (David Paigen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Date: 22 Jul 92 22:15:15 GMT
Organization: TRW Financial Systems

wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes:

>In article <1821@adagio.UUCP> grog@adagio.UUCP (Greg Lehey) writes:
>>....
>>The real issue here is, of course, not the source. AT&T must know
>>about Bill Jolitz; according to the text here, he's guilty of the same
>>`crime'....

[deleted]

>Please refrain from using inflammatory words such as "crime" with respect to
>386BSD and the developers, as we are not involved in this matter.  We have 
>no relationship with BSDi or CSRG, nor do we condone the actions of any
>party involved in this dispute.

I think you have missed the point, Bill.  If BSDI is guilty of the 'crime'
of developing an OS from the NET 2 tape, so are you.  I do not condone
the classification of BSDI's actions as a crime, nor do I condone the
actions of AT&T.

I think someone should give BSDI a medal for doing their work.  More to
the point, we should start contributing to the "BSDI legal defense fund."

        ====|====|====|====|====|====|====|====|====|====|====|====|====
David Paigen		      TRW Financial Systems		paigen@tfs.com
      "Lay on, McDuff, and damn'd be he who first cries, 'hold, enough!'"
NSA: Bush IRA assasination CIA terrorism Hussain PLO pipe bomb kill maim KKK
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: peter@close.demon.co.uk (Peter Curran)
Subject: Re: 386BSD 0.1 kernel sources ?
Distribution: world
Organization: Close Consultants
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 16:32:24 +0000


In article <1992Jul29.192157.5426@nrao.edu> cflatter@nrao.edu writes:

> In article 20710@cs.hw.ac.uk, donaldh@cs.hw.ac.uk (Donald I. Hunter) writes:
> >To get the 386BSD kernel sources do I have to download the entire
> >source distribution ?  I don't have the space (nor will I ever have) to
> >take the whole distribution so I was wondering if someone would be kind
> >enough to provide just the Kernel sources for anonymous FTP.
>  
> The kernel sources are conveniently at the beginning or the src01 archive.
> If you just want the kernel pick up the first 12 or so parts of the archive
> and unpack them as follows:
> 
> cd /
> cat $foo/src01.* | uncompress | cpio -idalmuv
> 
> where $foo is the directory where you put the src01 files.
> 
>       Chris Flatters
>       cflatter@nrao.edu
I have a similar need, but I don't think this will work for me.  I have 
discovered that if the bin01 is extracted onto a disk <40MB (mine is 39
and a bit) then it will not all fit on.  The manuals are missing and 
stuff like termcap out of /usr/share/misc are missing.  Is there any way
that I can extract only the last few files only from the floppies?

Of course, no termcap-no vi :-{

So, I ftp'd the termcap from the ~/filesystem/usr/share/misc directory
on my local friendly server (src.doc.ic.ac.uk).  vi then complains that
there is no ':up=:' defined for the terminal.  Anybody got any ideas?

Peter

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Curran                                   Mail: peter@close.demon.co.uk
Close Consultants          'Not necessarily the ravings of a completely sane
Dorking,UK                    person - but better than most politicians....'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: appel@xcf.Berkeley.EDU (Shannon D. Appel)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: second drive on 0.1
Date: 21 Jul 92 00:21:45
Organization: csua
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: randy@chinet.chi.il.us's message of 20 Jul 92 21:48:04 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.214804.809@chinet.chi.il.us> randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess) writes:
->Seems the distributed
->kernel is not configured for 2 drives.  So, after editing
->your SYSTEMNAME file, and running config, go into 
->/sys/compile/YOURSYSTEMNAME and edit ioconf.c and duplicate
->the wddriver line incrementing the unit number by one.
->Make, mv the kernel to / and nextime you boot, the screen
->will show your second drive.

Could someone make a kernel configured for two drives available on one of
the FTP sites?  I don't have the room for the source code to generate a
kernel to allow me to use a second drive until I get a second drive up.
A bit of a dilemma...

Shannon


Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: fwp@CC.MsState.Edu (Frank Peters)
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Keywords: AT&T 'Death Star' rises over BSDI's horizon [Tel. 1-800-800-4BSD
Organization: Computing Center, Mississippi State University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 23:35:15 GMT

In article <BryLr3.4BL@gumby.ocs.com> obi@gumby.ocs.com says:
: I've been following this thread with some interest. I have some questions
: to those in the know:
: 
: 1. (Ignorant.) What exactly IS NET/2 anyway?

Basically, the parts of BSD UNIX which are (or, I guess I should say, are
claimed to be) free of AT&T/USL code.

: 2. Does BSDI make only Intel ports of BSD?

Yes.  I have no idea whether they plan to branch out in the future.

: 3. Why is only this vendor targeted by USL? Why not Sun Microsystems or
:    any of the numerous other vendors who produce BSD-type systems?

Sun uses USL code and pays all of the necessary licensing fees to do
so.  The same is true of all of the other major vendors of UNIX based
systems.

Since NET2 is (supposed to be) free of AT&T/USL code BSDI doesn't pay
such fees to USL for the right to sell it.

BSDI is the first company to sell (rather than give away) a system
based upon NET2 sources.  That is, no doubt, one of the major reasons
that they were singled out for this suit.

: 4. Any thoughts on what the effect of a win/loss by USL will be on other
:    vendors?

This group and others have been full of such speculations (ranging from
the likely to the ridiculous).  I don't think that I have much to add
to it.
--
Frank Peters  -  UNIX Systems Programmer  -  Mississippi State University
Internet: fwp@CC.MsState.Edu  -  Phone: (601)325-7030  -  FAX: (601)325-8921
From: ucacmsu@ucl.ac.uk (Mr Stephen R Usher)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: I wonder, did AT&T backstab BSDI?
Keywords: AT&T speculation lawsuit BSDI
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:48:59 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium, London

In article <1992Jul28.153750.8395@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> knight@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Knight of the Living Dead) writes:
>
>As I recall when System 5 Revision 4.0 was released, it was described
>(to me, anyway) as an attempt to gain "BSD Compatibility".  I'm wondering
>if the reason why AT&T held out sueing BSDI this long is so they could
>claim copyright of BSD's code/style/look/feel/etc while it was still
>popular, and then smash all the competition.

The only problem with this idea is that SYSVr4 (NOT System 5, that was
another Unix way back) doesn't look like BSD, it still looks like SYSV to
the normal user, ie you have horrid syntax for the ps utility where you need
to use a hyphen in front of the arguments and the devices... yuck!

The only real thing I've seen which is BSD is the socket library (not
complete) and the BSD compatibility library which is not complete either.

>
[Stuff deleted]
>-- Eric Knight
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>These opinions are my own, and my employeer doesn't want me ruining his
>life anymore than I absolutely have to.
>                                            EBKnight@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve
--
Addresses:-
JANET:-		ucacmsu@uk.ac.ucl or	steve@uk.ac.ox.earth (preferable)
Internet:-	ucacmsu@ucl.ac.uk or	steve@earth.ox.ac.uk (preferable)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: zrgl0376@helpdesk.rus.uni-stuttgart.de (Cowboy aka Bjoern Lemke)
Subject: Re: SCSI tape drive not accessible
Organization: User Help Desk, Comp. Cent. (RUS), U of Stuttgart, FRG
Distribution: comp
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 08:05:07 GMT

In article <TMH.92Jul23041936@keks.first.gmd.de> tmh@keks.first.gmd.de (Thomas Hoberg) writes:
>I managed to get the "Tiny BSD" floppy accross the modem and got
>386BSD installed on my system (486/33, 16MB, ET4000/8514, AHA1542, 1GB
>Wren VII + 88MB Syquest SCSI drives, Tandberg TDC3800 QIC 525 SCSI
>Streamer). The SCSI disks are at targets 0+1, the tape drive is at
>target 4. On boot up, only the first disk is recognized. Trying to
>read off /dev/ras1a seems to attach the Syquest drive. Any attempt to
>read /dev/ras4a results in an error. cat </dev/ras4a returns "bad file
>descriptor", cpio -itvc </dev/ras4a returns "error 9". All other
>targets return "sense errors" with lots of status data (mostly zeros).
>Does 386 support only certain tape drives? The drive works fine with
>ISC UNIX, DOS (various programs) and OS/2 (modified GTAR).

I run into a similar problem. I used a Fujitsu 2624 Harddisk with the same
Streamer (Tandberg). Setting the tape drive to target 4, resulted in 
nonrecognizing the streamer. (My harddisk is set to target 0). But after
setting the tape device to target 1, the scsi controller got it and
i was able to read and write from the device (/dev/ras1a) including some
scsi error messages (sense 0 0 0 0 .. and so on). I am not a scsi guru
and I don't know if this method is proper, but for the moment it works.

Hope this helps.

	Bjoern 


-- 
Bjoern Lemke --*-- RUS --*-- University of Stuttgart --*-- Germany
Voice: 0711/4579533    \_,@         Mail: lemke@rus.uni-stuttgart.de
                        >>   Be insatiable! 
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: terry@npd.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert)
Subject: Re: Is there a 386BSD mailgroup?
Organization: Novell NPD -- Sandy, UT
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 17:43:54 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.051922.17311@zip.eecs.umich.edu> gilgalad@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes:
>
>Has anybody started a 386BSD mailgroup?  Also, it seems to me as though
>it would be a good thing to creat a comp.unix.386bsd or
>comp.unix.bsd.386.  Seems as though  a lot of the traffic on here is
>386BSD only, as opposed to BSD general.

Haven't you been following the lawsuit?  AT&T has, apparently, pulled UCB
into it for Net/2.  That would pretty much mean that 386BSD is the only
thing left we can discuss without being sued.

...Besides, where better than a group of enthusiastic, mostly Net/2
kernel hackers, to ask a BSD question?

					-- Terry
From: bill@kepler.ucsd.edu (Bill Reynolds)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Removing 386BSD from the hard disk (FAQ)
Date: 22 Jul 92 13:32:10
Organization: Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
NNTP-Posting-Host: kepler.ucsd.edu
In-reply-to: danson@lgc.com's message of Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:22:25 GMT



In article <1992Jul21.152225.2082@lgc.com> danson@lgc.com (Doug Anson) writes:

	Doug> After many hours rebuilding kernels, etc.. the time came
	Doug> for me to uninstall 386BSD so that I can continue with
	Doug> my work (arg!!).  Anyway, I just tried reinstalling DOS.
	Doug> I was able to produce a DOS partition (386BSD occupied
	Doug> my entire disk), format it and install the dos system
	Doug> onto it. When I then tried to reboot the machine off of
	Doug> the hdisk (thus DOS), my system can no longer boot off
	Doug> of the hdisk! It simply resets again and again after
	Doug> trying....

	Doug> Could it be that the some part of the 386BSD boot strap
	Doug> on the hdisk is still there? When I fdisked the hdisk in
	Doug> DOS everthing seemed to work fine.

This one is in the install notes, but it took me also about a day to
finally find it (thanks to Dwight Cass). I nominate this for entry
into the FAQ list.

From INSTALL.NOTES in the BSD distribution:

     To erase 386BSD from the dedicated disk, simply  refor-
mat  the  system. Some versions of MS-DOS require the master
boot record to be rewritten as well, using the MS-DOS "fdisk
/mbr" command.

     Other versions of MS-DOS require that the	boot  record
lose  its  validity before being rewritten by fdisk. This is
accomplished by cat'ing a file to the "raw" partition 'd' of
the  drive, "cat /386bsd >/dev/rwd0d", and then reformatting
under MS-DOS.  If you are using an old	version	of  MS-DOS,
you can use this technique to delete the 386BSD partition as
well. This technique usually works (not always, however). As
such,  we strongly recommend that you obtain the most up-to-
date version of MS-DOS (5.0 or better) and save yourself the
headache.


--
_______________________________________________________________________
Bill Reynolds        |  
bill@kepler.ucsd.edu |
From: phk@data.fls.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: 386BSD 0.1, disklabel problem isolated !
Date: 26 Jul 92 08:01:47 GMT
Organization: FLS Data A/S, Valby, Copenhagen, Denmark.

I have a Western Digital WDC 4200 "Piranha" disk, it's an IDE of 202 Mb.
The real physical layout is 1263 cyl, 8 heads, 41 sectors.  But to keep
MS/DOS happy the drive reports 967 cyl, 12 heads 35 sect.  If I set the
BIOS to the real values 1263,8,41 and create a 15 Mb DOS partition,
install 386BSD 0.1 from the dist.fs things are OK until I try to boot the
386BSD from the disk.

It seems from the debug that the disklabel IS found, but then the drive 
is probed and the cylinder count is clipped to 967, though the heads and the
sect counts is left untouched.

Since a lot of this translation stuff is going on, I think it is important
to get this handled right:

    1) Use BIOS-values and boot-block to find disklabel.

    2) Use values in disklabel, unless the drive tells us otherwise:

	if(drive.sect == label.sect && drive.head == label.head)
	    label.cyl = drive.cyl;

In my experience this will solve the most widespread problems with
ESDI/IDE drives:

    1) drives simply not matched by the BIOS, in this case the disklabel
       can containe the right values, supported by the drives own idea.

    2) drives crippled by manufactures to match a "VENDOR_X"-67 Mb drive,
       even though the drive is 84 Mb, the right cylinder count can be picked
       up from the drive.

    3) cases like mine where even the bloddy drive is exposed to the famous
       MS-DOS brain-damage...

As soon as I can I'll produce a patch for this.

Don't forget to enjoy other aspects of life, even though you have got your
own unix box at home now !  :-)
-- 
phk@data.fls.dk		  || If you can't join 'em -- beat 'em !
Poul-Henning Kamp	  ||			the Danish foreign minister
FLS DATA A/S		  ||
Phone: (+45) 36 18 12 35  ||
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:11:44 GMT

In article <nld48oc@sgi.sgi.com>, rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock) writes:
| p.s. Just what *are* we going to call these things that are "similar
| to but not derived from 'Unix' (trademark of AT&T and/or USL)", anyway?
| Just "BSD", maybe?

Here is my chance for everlasting fame..... ;-)

Is submit, for your humble inspection,   ````IXNU'''' !

As in ``like unIX but Not Unix(tm)'', or
      ``similar to unIX(tu), but NUer''.

Will it sell?

-- 
---
 Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA
 Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: jbh@aii.com
Subject: Re: 386bsd 0.1 - Advice on bootstrap debugging needed.
Keywords: 386bsd boot wdboot
Organization: Automation Intelligence
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 13:25:19 GMT

In article <greg.711922033@hibp1.ecse.rpi.edu> greg@ecse.rpi.edu (Greg) writes:
>I've already ask this once before, but since the response was nearly
>non-existsent, I'll try again. 
>
>I seem to have a problem booting that is timing dependant. My machine will
>boot off wd0 about 95 % the time when in low speed mode. In high speed (33MHz)
>it boots only about 20% of the time.
>
Greg,
  I think you'll find if you pick up either the latest bootwd (patched) or
grabbed the diff's or uuencode we posted to this group, your problems will
go away. This fix was for a problem where you couln't boot off the H.D. at
all, but the bug that was corrected was that the boot code was NOT actually
reading the H.D. status register when waiting for drive ready status. This
would explain your problem as well.

Regards,
Jim

======================================================================
Jim Huber   jbh@aii.com or ...!tarpit!jbh Voice (407) 661-7017
Automation Intelligence,Inc.
850 Trafalgar Court
Suite 200
Maitland, FL 32751
======================================================================