HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: system@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (System Admin (Mike Peterson))
Subject: Re: NFS and root
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 12:35:16 GMT

In article <28510209@hpuamsa.neth.hp.com> franks@hpuamsa.neth.hp.com (Frank Slootweg CRC) writes:
>  If indeed your need for root access via NFS is for doing remote backup,
>then I suggest to use the remote backup facility of fbackup(1m) (or
>rdump(1m)).

That is wonderful but HP/Apollo Domain/OS systems don't have rdump, and
your man page for fbackup says not to use it for NFS mounted file systems
since 'root' can't get all the files (which is exactly the problem!!!)
and in any case 'root' couldn't restore the files even if they were
backed up somehow. 

This also prevents tar/cp/vi from working - it is ridiculous to have to
login to each one of our HP-UX workstations to edit a configuration file.

The simple solution is to make root access on NFS work.
-- 
What are the chances that any computer system will ever "work" properly?
... and Slim just left town. -*- Mike Peterson, SysAdmin, U/Toronto Chemistry
Xref: sparky comp.sys.hp:5255 gnu.misc.discuss:1869
From: wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: HP-UX public domain software (update #1)
Date: 15 Apr 92 18:50:19 GMT
Organization: W S Rupprecht Computer Consulting, Fremont CA

>I prefer the term "freely redistributable", but I'm not real picky.
>(I do prefer that people not call non-PD things PD, since that has
>potential legal ramifications if you let it go on long enough, and I
>don't like legal ramifications... :-)

People calling it PD are no doubt just looking for a short phrase that
can describe the software accurately enough to get their point across.

For the shortest term - why not just call it "free software."

-wolfgang


-- 
Wolfgang Rupprecht    wolfgang@wsrcc.com (or) wsrcc!wolfgang
Snail Mail:           39469 Gallaudet Drive, Fremont, CA 94538-4511
From: wk@cup.hp.com (Wayne Krone)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: scsi & HP
Date: 10 Apr 92 03:10:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: cupnews0.1992Apr10.031055.15810
Organization: HP-UX Kernel Lab, Cupertino

thad@btr.BTR.COM (Thaddeus P. Floryan) writes:

: Would you please describe (technically) what you meant by "powerfail recovery"?

When power is restored the system recovers and continues operation from
where it left off with no loss of data (subject to several constraints:
s800, power off < 15 min, etc.).  For a disk this requires that it use
glitchless transceivers and guarantee sector atomicity.

: Is that anything different from running one's system(s) on "smart" UPS or SPS
: systems which can inform the host(s) to initiate a clean shutdown as necessary?

Same goal, different implementation.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
From: datri@convex.com (Anthony A. Datri)
Subject: Re: X11 include files and libraries on HP-UX
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 23:39:24 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

>The reasonable answer would be: Use Imakefiles.  Then you only have to
>put the -I and -L switches in one place, the site.def file (or,
>presumably, HP would have put them in already in the hp.cf file).

Not everything uses an Imakefile, though.  Gnuplot is a good example of a
complex, recursive pre-provided makefile.

I've also seen imakes that produce a Makefile that's completely unusable.

-- 


======================================================8--<
From: renglish@cello.hpl.hp.com (Bob English)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: Paging/Swaping problems with HP9000/s720 under HP-UX 8.05
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:38:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: cello.1992Apr16.203829.1376
Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs

wjbaird@descartes.waterloo.edu (Warren Baird) writes:
> On small jobs (under about 10 megs), we get about the performance we
> expected, about twice as fast as our SparcStation 2, but on large jobs
> we get a HUGE performance degradation.  A job (about 40 Meg) that took
> 8 hours on the Sparc (and so should have taken about 4 hours on the HP)
> took about 36 hours to run on the HP!  Admittedly, our Sparc has 96 Meg
> of memory, so the job wouldn't have had to swap as much, but a factor
> of 9 still seems WAY too high.

It doesn't seem that high to me.  The job fits in memory on the Sparc
and doesn't on the 720.  This means that you're limited by the processor
on the Sparc and by the disk on the 720.  I'm a little surprised that
the Sparc is only 4 times faster than HP's disks :-).

Let's suppose that with 64MB of memory, the 720 could run the job in 4
hours.  That's 720 billion machines cycles.  You also spent 32 hours
waiting for virtual memory faults.  At 20ms per fault, that's 5.8Million
faults, so your application is faulting about once every 125,000 cycles.
That's actually a fair amount of processing time between faults for a
process that only has 1/3 of the memory it needs.

This is not to say that HP's virtual memory algorithms are perfect and
couldn't be improved, only that the numbers don't seem all that
surprising to me.  Do you have a Sun with only 16MB of memory that you
could do a comparison with?

> The other nasty thing that we've found is that HP-UX seems to be
> ignoring priorities.

This is indeed a problem, but it's deeper than you realize.  "Nice"
levels on HP machines control CPU priorities and nothing else.  If you
have a number crunching program in the background, it will be ready to
run during any idle period, which on the 720 means almost all of the
time.  As it runs, it causes heavy paging activity, tying up the disk
and keeping interactive processes from getting the memory resources they
need to run.

> Possibly some of these issues have been resolved in 8.07 or later.  If
> so, I hope someone will tell me, because if the operating system was
> behaving nicely, I think I could get to like this box...

Before you too hastily dismiss the 720, you might ask the lessor to loan
you some more memory.  If the only problem with the box is that you
don't have enough memory to do your work, and you would buy the extra
memory if you bought the box, you might as well test the full
configuration.

--bob--
Not an official spokesman for HP or Diet Pepsi (Uh-huh!)
From: Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP (Paula Lieberman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: QuickTime Cross-platform developers kits
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:31:25 GMT
Organization: Amiga Colony BBS

Sound like CDXL has it all over QuickTime.......... except that Commodore
hype is about 60 dB below Apple's bombast......


-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
From: kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: QuickTime Cross-platform developers kits
Date: 8 Apr 92 11:28:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: garfield.kdarling.702732497
Organization: North Carolina State University

John Bono writes:
> Sure we could import Quicktime onto the Amiga, but why?  [.....]
> IFF ANIM opt 5 is simply a better standard for animation.  Why should
> I present something on a format that isn't as good?

It's not a simple question of which is "as good".  It all depends on what
you want to present, and how, and with what else, and to what device(s).

Amiga ANIM playback is designed for double-buffered fullscreen display
via direct video ram access. This is perfect for recording animations
(within delta size limits) straight to tape, and for hiding artifacts
and most cpu/bus speed problems.

Quicktime must allow for situations such as (among others) when you wish
to display an animation in an overlapping/resizable window which can be 
sharing screen space with other windows (each of which might have an
animation going)... all of this shown via hardware-independent output.

I think there's a need for both kinds of playback schemes, where possible.
The only real question is whether or not to be QT compatible.

best - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu> <76703.4227@compuserve.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
From: iank@microsoft.com (Ian Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Microsoft Opportunities: Multimedia Development
Date: 07 Apr 92 05:24:56 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.

In article <768.29D56D89@afitamy.fidonet.org> rumford@afitamy.fidonet.org (Don Rumford) writes:
>*** Quoting Peter Da Silva to All dated 03-28-92 ***
>> 
>> > Microsoft, the world's leader in microcomputer software develop-
>> > ment, is committed to technical excellence.
>> 
>> Yeh, yeh, yeh... but will we get a Video Toaster to play on?

>Sure......they will give you a nice PC with a neat serial connection
>to a little machine that says Newtek Video Toaster on the front which
>everyone around you will deny that is really an Amiga or they will deny
>even knowing about it.

Gimme a break! Our multimedia group has a Video Toaster. They
know exactly what it is and will not tell you otherwise. There
are many Amiga enthusiasts here at MS and many of them are in
our multimedia unit. Microsoft may develop software for PCs and 
Macs, but we're not stupid. Next time you post something like
that you better use a smily face ot I'll put aside my chemical
flame thrower and use my new FLAMEMONGER driven fusion model!

Oh, the Toaster machine is a stand-alone Amiga (accelerator+big HD) no
DOS or Mac machine required.

>
>
>                                                         -Don-
>
>
>--  
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>AFIT Amiga Users BBS/UFGateway |Don Rumford - via FidoNet node 1:110/300
>    1:110/300 Dayton, Ohio     |UUCP: afitamy!rumford
>        (513)-879-9798         |ARPA: rumford@afitamy.fidonet.org
>Don R. Rumford       postmaster(afitamy.uucp)    sysop AFITAUG BBS 1:110/300
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
/* It's not a cruise... It's the Love Boat*/
/* Iank@microsoft.com                     */
/* I wan't my 32bit chip set              */
From: cathy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Catherine Godfrey - CATS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: AmigaVision Text Input
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:57:11 GMT
Reply-To: cathy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Catherine Godfrey - CATS)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Keywords: AmigaVision

In article <1992Mar31.013215.14409@sandbox.kenn.wa.us> jshearer@sandbox.kenn.wa.us (Jeff Shearer) writes:
>I've got a problem with AmigaVision that I'm trying to work around.  When you
>create an input field, it uses the Topaz 8 font.  (I remember reading
>something somewhere that said that this is the standard intuition input.)  I
>am wanting a way for the user to input text, but I want that text to be shown
>as a 15 point font (I'm using a hi-res interlace screen).  I have a relatively
>simple routine that works, but it's much slower.  
>   (* stuff deleted *)
>
>One of the objects on the screen is a text/variable that shows the variable,
>and uses a 15 point font.  But, there has to be a better way than reading raw
>keys and slapping the value on the end of a string, right?  Does anyone have a
>better way of handling this?

With the current version of AmigaVision, your algorithm is the best way to 
work around the Input-Text-size limitation.  For a variation on this same 
theme, you should check out the Keyboard.AVf example on the Tutorial disks.  
This example accepts keys from hit boxes instead of the keyboard, but then 
processes them in the same way.

We are currently developing a newer version of AmigaVision (there is no
anticipated release date yet).  This version will support Input Fields of 
any font and size (you will even be able to change the text color).

Cathy
              ============================================
              Cathy Godfrey   {rutgers,uunet}!cbmvax!cathy
              Authoring System Support Specialist        
              Commodore Applications and Technical Support 
              ============================================
From: cathy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Catherine Godfrey - CATS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: Is the AmigaVision 1.70Z upgrade worth it?
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:24:41 GMT
Reply-To: cathy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Catherine Godfrey - CATS)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Keywords: AmigaVision Upgrade

In article <1992Apr6.154734.435@beaver.cs.washington.edu> dylan@cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) writes:
>
>I've only dabbled with AV, and haven't been chomping on the bit enough
>to spend $35 on the 1.70Z upgrade, but I thought I'd ask anyone that 
>has the upgrade, is it worth it?  Does it come with an entirely new manual,
>or just a few new pages?  Is it "snappier"?  Are you happier?
>

I can't objectively say whether or not the upgrade is worth $35 to you, but 
I can say that there is an entirely new manual (not just a few new pages). 
Although this new manual has basically the same information as the old one, 
it does have corrections to the text and some additional information on the 
new AV features. 

To decide whether or not AV1.70 would be valuable to you, perhaps you should 
look over the list of new features and decide if you would find these features 
helpful during your AmigaVision authoring.

  - New Expression Editor Functions
      - Memory : returns how much memory is available in your system
      - Self   : returns the path of the currently running AVf file
      - Strappend : appends one string to the end of another
      - etc.
  - Improved SMUS Player
      - Better support for chords, dynamics and tempo in SMUS files
  - Chaining Function
      - Allows you to divide a large AVf file into smaller ones that can be
        swapped in and out of memory as needed
  - New Drivers
      - Carroll touch screen driver
      - joystick driver
      - Pioneer 8000, Panasonic OMDR and NEC PC-VCR drivers.

Cathy
              ============================================
              Cathy Godfrey   {rutgers,uunet}!cbmvax!cathy
              Authoring System Support Specialist        
              Commodore Applications and Technical Support 
              ============================================
From: Paula_Lieberman@amicol.UUCP (Paula Lieberman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: QuickTime Cross-platform developers kits
Date: 8 Apr 92 00:15:27 GMT
Organization: Amiga Colony BBS

I've -seen- QuickTime operating on a IIci.  BFD...... Why degrade Amiga
combined animation and sounds to it.....


-- Via DLG Pro v0.991
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
From: mcdonoug@dmpe.csiro.au (Graeme Mc Donough)
Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
Organization: CSIRO Div of Mineral and Process Engineering.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:46:33 GMT

I do beleve that you are what is commonly called a stirring
 WANKER  of a high non divulgeable proportion.

I take discust in mud-slining 
Especially from sombody who knows nothing that they are talking about...



##################################################################
#From: har@ux.acs.umn.edu (--SeebS--)
#Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.games,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.graphics,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
#Subject: Re: Considering switching to IBM
#Message-ID: <1992Apr8.220827.11651@ux.acs.umn.edu>
#Date: 8 Apr 92 22:08:27 GMT
#References: <1992Mar27.210100.13173@cs.mcgill.ca> <1992Apr3.204240.1975@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Apr4.170302.12128@cs.mcgill.ca>
#Organization: University of Minnesota
#Lines: 25

#In article <1992Apr4.170302.12128@cs.mcgill.ca> jerry@cs.mcgill.ca (Gerald (Jerry) KUCH) writes:
#>Ok, so let's run Bob's Software Inc.'s "DildoCAD" on the Amiga, and then we
#>should compare it to SuperDuperInternationalMegaBusterKillerCorp's 
#>"BlazingDeathFastCAD" on the 486.  Sounds like a reasonable way to compare
#>the raw performance of the systems they're running under...

#*giggle* DildoCAD? That explains how they invent those things... Always
#wondered...

#>And Windows still doesn't really have preemptive multitasking.  It's coming,
#>but it's not here yet.  Why don't we run Windows against BSD UNIX?  I'm sure
#>we could find cases where Windows would outperform it, but they still would
#>not convince anybody sane that it's somehow a "better OS".
#
#I dunno, man. I think Windows probably doesn't have as many security holes -
#why, I don't know a single person who has successfully gained root privs on
#a windows system! For that matter, I suspect it doesn't have as many obscure
#and mostly useless options to 'ls'.

#-s
#-- 
Peter Seebach, using my fiancee's acount. (Please use "SEEBS" in the subject
line, so we know who it's for.)  Polygamy: "There can be more than one."
"I love using MS-DOS - waiting for the machine gives me so much free time!"
har@ux.acs.umn.edu (Love Incarnate)



Graeme Mc Donough
mcdonoug@mineng.dmpe.csiro.au
From: rowebm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Brian Rowe)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: QuickTime Cross-platform developers kits
Date: 17 Apr 92 04:54:05 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

I will soon be living in NJ.  Sea Isle City.  If anyone knows of an Amiga user
group in that area, or of a BBS of any kind I would like to hear about it.
Retailers would also be helpful.  Thank you.
          -Brian Rowe
Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.multimedia:828 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:8929
From: peterk@cbmger.de.so.commodore.com (Dr Peter Kittel Germany)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: A500 CDTV upgrade (A690??): Where/When is it gonna arrive?
Date: 16 Apr 92 06:17:17 GMT
Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.de.so.commodore.com (Dr Peter Kittel Germany)
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Organization: Commodore Germany

In article <1992Apr15.141408.26494@samba.oit.unc.edu> Bob.Smith@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bob Smith) writes:

>Subject says it all.  No one at Commodore or any of its retailers
>seems to know!  

Why do you flame, when exactly this issue was covered *here* on the net
only a few days ago??? Please keep your eyes open before you protest.

Now for the facts: The A690 is gone, because we now have an Amiga 600
and as it doesn't fit to this computer, the numbering had to be
changed. Welcome the A570, the same device.

Arrival date here in Germany (don't know about USA): *Very* SOON.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to \\  Only my personal opinions...
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
				   or  peterk@public.sub.org
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
From: cstuckless@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Re: QuickTime Cross-platform developers kits
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 19:28:27 GMT

In article <kdarling.702732497@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu>, kdarling@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes:
[Stuff Deleted]

> Quicktime must allow for situations such as (among others) when you wish
> to display an animation in an overlapping/resizable window which can be 
> sharing screen space with other windows (each of which might have an
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> animation going)... all of this shown via hardware-independent output.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   QuickTime may allow for this, but the ability of the hardware right 
now makes it a moot point, at least in reference to the IIfx - I'd be 
*very* surprised if the Quadra could even have more than one window at 
a time within animation in each.
   
   But I think you'd agree that it's the concept of Quicktime that's 
important here. As it stands, I know of no Amiga utility that allows 
the combination of sound and animation as easily. But if Quicktime or 
a similar scheme was developed and it's performance was only as good 
as what I've seen Apple themselves demonstrate on a IIfx - then I'd 
just as soon do without it.

> I think there's a need for both kinds of playback schemes, where possible.
> The only real question is whether or not to be QT compatible.

  I agree. The standard IFF anim format and QuickTime are simply not 
comparable. I'd love to have both methods on my Amiga.

> best - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu> <76703.4227@compuserve.com>
-- 
Colin Stuckless          \  The bottleneck for every computer 
FutureVision Ltd          \  platform is the mind's ability to invent 
CStuckless@kean.ucs.mun.ca \  creative new applications for the system
From: dylan@cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Is the AmigaVision 1.70Z upgrade worth it?
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:47:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle


I've only dabbled with AV, and haven't been chomping on the bit enough
to spend $35 on the 1.70Z upgrade, but I thought I'd ask anyone that 
has the upgrade, is it worth it?  Does it come with an entirely new manual,
or just a few new pages?  Is it "snappier"?  Are you happier?

thanks,
dylan
      /L      dylan mcnamee		dylan@cs.washington.edu
     /  L    
   (o)   L   "Don't look at me...I didn't do it!"  K. T. Clown.
   C (o) /     
  /__   /     
    \__/
From: James_Hastings-Trew@telepro.UUCP (James Hastings-Trew)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: HELP!!
Distribution: world
Date: 12 Apr 92 09:18:21 CST
Organization: TelePro Technologies

Please, for the love of god, please stop cross-posting this IBM vs Amiga vs
OS 2 crap all over comp.sys.amiga.multimedia and comp.sys.amiga.graphics.
It has NOTHING to do with either topic.

Stop.

Please.

-- Via DLG Pro v0.991

Xref: sparky comp.sys.amiga.multimedia:825 comp.sys.amiga.hardware:8863
From: Bob.Smith@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bob Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: A500 CDTV upgrade (A690??): Where/When is it gonna arrive?
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:14:08 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

Subject says it all.  No one at Commodore or any of its retailers
seems to know!  The black hole in which Commodore seems to throw
all the important marketing/retailing information has really begun
to piss me off.  I'm seriously considering selling my Amigas and
buying PCs just to run a decent encyclopedia (Compton's Multimedia
Encyclo.) with the MPC add ons.  Commodore needs to get their shit 
together and offer upgrades to current Amiga owners.  Hell, I've
been waiting 6 months, and 6 months of un-soothed techo-lust is
hard to deal with.

bob smith

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: jbono@tension.UUCP (John Bono)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.multimedia
Subject: Re: QuickTime Cross-platform developers kits
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:22:19 EST
Organization: High Tension BBS

As a matter of fact, I demoed Quicktime on a Quadra, an FX, and an SI.  The
only thing about Quicktime(the name itself is a misnomer) that I liked was
that it included audio in with the digitized video.  I thought the framerate
was at best, abysmal, and it would be at least two or three years until Apple
has a platform which would be able to do a decent anim.  Sure we could import
Quicktime onto the Amiga, but why?  An A3000 is one or two steps away from
full-motion full-frame video as it is, and Slowtime can only do a 160*120
pixel animation.  I timed a HAM interlaced overscanned raytraced animation. 
There was a high amount of dithering in the animation, so at least 80% of the
screen could be considered "in motion," i.e., a pixel changed color. With that
anim I had 15.7 FPS.  Comparing this to the 12 fps Quicktime anim on the
quadra, which had to animation that was about one-half the size in terms of
memory(actually more like one third).  IFF ANIM opt 5 is simply a better
standard for animation.  Why should I present something on a format that isn't
as good?
 
John