HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: unix for 386
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:10:36 GMT
Organization: Global Village 1

malenovi@plains.NoDak.edu (Nikola Malenovic) writes:

[about booting Linux]
>*NOT* if you have microchannel bus.. sigh... :( :(

Then buy the books about the MCA harddisk controlers and write a driver. <grin>

Isn't it nice to buy proprietary hardware, even if it's better hardware?

Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: tony@ais.org (Tony Poole)
Subject: Linking netstat output to a user
Followup-To: comp.unix.questions 
Summary: Question: Netstat
Keywords: IP,telnet,MUD 
Organization: University of Michigan Computing Club (UMCC)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:27:23 GMT


Is there any way to link an outgoing IP address connection obtained by 
netstat to a particular user?

For instance:

Active Internet connections
     
Proto Recv-Q Send-Q  Local Address          Foreign Address        (state)
tcp        0      0  141.211.206.17.1711    128.2.10.105.25        SYN_SENT
tcp        0      1  141.211.206.17.1710    128.59.40.130.3641  ESTABLISHED
tcp        0      0  141.211.206.17.1707    141.212.2.73.119    ESTABLISHED
tcp        0      0  141.211.206.17.1701    35.8.8.108.1887     ESTABLISHED
tcp        0      0  141.211.206.17.23      35.8.2.54.14853     ESTABLISHED
tcp        0      0  141.211.206.17.1021    141.211.206.16.513  ESTABLISHED
tcp        0      0  141.211.206.17.1687    137.208.91.6.4000   ESTABLISHED


Would it be possible to tell which user is connecting to port 4000
of 137.208.91.6 in the last line, particularly if you know the user is
connecting via telnet?


Thanks,

Tony

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Poole                       tony@umcc.ais.org * tony@irie.ais.org 
Traverse City, MI USA          tony@cherry1.trv.mi.us * tony@cherry1.UUCP
From: peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD?
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:21:03 GMT
Organization: Global Village 1

sfkaplan@unix.amherst.edu (Scott Kaplan) writes:

>Sure, you could put a nice face on it, but why?

WHY *NOT*? Why shouldn't you have a system which you can use for BOTH your day
to day work (with a nice and cozy GUI) AND programming (with all the tools in
reach).

>It could be UNIX underneath, but the average
>user would never know...why waste the power?

Which power? Who cares what power is wasted? I mean, imagine all those PC
beasties, today a lot of them have a 486@25,33 or 50 MHz. More than 90% of
these machines run DOS... How about that for wasted power?

>Leave UNIX to the people who find the need for the power it offers.  Other
>OS's for common computing are getting better all the time and will do the job
>they were designed for.

Yep, that's what BYTE said with their infamous "Is UNIX dead?" article, isn't
it? They get better and better and better and in the end, there is no need to
use UNIX anymore.

>Trying to make UNIX into the universal OS for every-
>thing would be an attempt to make it into something it was never meant to be.

No, the system (it's more than just an OS) is perfectly capable of being nice
to an unknowledgable user. Look at what NeXT did. UNIX doesn't need to be
changed, only the ugliness should be covered. You don't need to know anything
about electronics to operate a video recorder, do you? The ugly electronics
are covered with a nice cover. If you like electronics, remove the cover.
However, it's easier for you to remove the cover than it is for most people to
get a cover.

>And if you do want to use the power of UNIX, dig in a learn...If you have a
>task that requires its power, you really shouldn't be put out by the amount
>you have to learn to get it to work for you.  You should be admiring how much
>it can do and wondering how you can make it do more.

That is, if you already know about UNIX. What if I grew up with, say OS/2 and
I've never seen or used UNIX. Do I change to UNIX? Of course not! Every change
is an obstacle and people don't like obstacles. It's much easier to stay where
you are. And why should people change? I mean, you say yourself that other
operating systems get better and better. Well, NT is said to be largely POSIX
compliant. Many UNIX utilities will be ported, so what advantages has UNIX left
then? Look at OS/2, if you don't believe, many GNU utilities have already been
ported...

Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: gaumondp@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Gaumond Pierre)
Subject: Re: Help with generating random numbers
Organization: Universite de Montreal
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:10:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.041243.5542@desire.wright.edu> nseth@desire.wright.edu writes:
>I need help with generating random numbers. If I use the normail C routines
>on UNIX for generating random numbers (random, rand, etc.) everytime the
>program is executed, the sequence of random numers remains the same. 
>
>How can I fix this so that each time I execute that program, the initial (and
>thus the following sequence of) random numbers is different? On Turbo C the
>subroutine randomize() takes care of this. Is there such a routine available on
>UNIX/ULTRIX?
>
>Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot.

	Usually rand function has an initializer function (srand
	on my system).

	use time(2) as the seed for srand (strip most significant
	bits).

	For example:
		time(&seed);
		seed = seed % 100000;
		srand(seed);

	If you have a time function giving millisecond or mocro seconds. It
	will be better. Usually, my code is suppicient.

>Nitin Seth
>nseth@cs.wright.edu
>


-- 
Pierre Gaumond.        gaumondp@ERE.UMontreal.CA
Services Informatiques, Universite de Montreal. 
C.P. 6128, Succursale "A", Montreal,            
Quebec, Canada.   H3C 3J7                       
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: papresco@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Prescod)
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD? (long)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 12:01:20 GMT

>How much is NT projected to cost?

NT will be priced to SELL.  It depends on the competition at the time.  Right
now Bill Gates is sweating about OS/2, so it will probably be in the$200-$300
range.

>>No support, no handholding.
>
>Support and handholding comes free on the net.  I'm seeing a number of
>places in trade magazines that offer support for Linux and BSD:
>installation, troubleshooting, consulting, and so on.  So you get the
>OS for free and pay a small fee for support.  Competitive, at least.

Huh?  What net?  I've never heard of the net?  I just want to get a computer
to run my carpentry business on, and this guy tells  me to get a modem
and a TCP/IP connection?  Huh?  Whadda ya mean?

And where am I supposed to GET this free OS with no access to the net in
the first place?  And how much is this "small fee" for support?  $300?
$400? $500?  and how long is it for?

Users get a "nice warm feeling" from BUYING things in a store.  

I dont' know how many times I've told people, "Yes, Telix/Telemate/4dos/pkzip
is shareware, but it's actually GOOD." and they look at me with an "Who are
you kidding" look.  If nobody makes a profit from it, nobody has to improve
it.  Worse, if nobody's survival depends on it, it never has to be upgraded.
From: sconlon@vms.eurokom.ie (Seamus Conlon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Printing within Uniplex spreadsheet
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:26:48 CET
Organization: EuroKom Conferencing Service


I have been asked by a novice Unix user to post a quesiton about Uniplex
to you Unix experts.

The question concerns the Uniplex spreadsheet.  The requirement is to
print from within a macro.  Apparently this does not work and when
a key tape is used, the print works during the recording of the macro
but not when it is being executed.

All sounds a bit strange to me but anyone got a solution?

Please e-mail (sconlon@vms.eurokom.ie).

Tks.
From: rahardj@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Budi Rahardjo)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD?
Date: 10 Nov 92 02:26:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: ccu.BxHAsM.FIM
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser) writes:

>rahardj@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Budi Rahardjo) writes:

>>>in a similar way. Tell me, how do I do that with UNIX?
>>Well just buy a pre-configured Unix machine. 

>That'll cost extra because it takes a few hours to do that.

Nope. Looak at UnixWorld (and other magazine) they sell 486s with

...
>You know how people learn using computers. But for some it's 'logical' and
>therefore easy and for others it's black magic and difficult. A good system
>should support people with all levels of knowledge. The Mac is a bad example,
>it only supports 'stupid' users. 

I have different opinion. If somebody ask me what kind of computer to buy
I always ask what they want to do with it and how 'deep' they want to get
involve with the computer. Most of the time I suggested them to buy a Mac,
because it's a better computer for them (most of them just want to use it
for word processing or simple spreadsheet). The Mac will survive.
(Note: I wouldn't buy a Mac, I am a power cmdline user :-)

...
>>The problem with F3 approach is that F3 in one package is different with
>>other package. F1 may be help in one program, but it's Exit in WordPerfect.

>F1 is a de facto standard key under MS-DOS. I've used many programs and 90%
>has help (if any) under the F1 key.

Well, F1 in Word Perfect is different and most of the people I know here
use Word Perfect.

>>Try CRISP.

>I might, if I get it to compile...

No, I mean the newer (comercial) version. I heard it's much better.
I have used the old version and was impressed.

...
>>Ever run .EXE file compiled for 386 on 8086 ?

>You mean that BSD/386 is to System V.4 what the 386 is to the 8086??? Or the
>other way around??? It's obvious that a 386 executable does not run on a 8086,
>but it really isn't that obvious that BSD/386 executables don't run under
>Sys V.4. UNIX is UNIX right? And a 8086 is not a 386 right?

Ofcourse executables for BSD/386 would be different from Sys V.4 .
They are different versions (one is BSD one is sys V). Just like running
Windows 3.1 programs under Windows 2. 

Look, if Joe User doesn't want to learn a little, then stay away from UNIX
and buy a Mac instead. He'll be happier. I mean why would he need a UNIX
if all he wants to do is type a letter.

-- budi
PS: I heard Sun is going to announce "something" tomorrow ?
    What is it going to be ?

-- 
Budi Rahardjo <Budi_Rahardjo@UManitoba.Ca>
Unix Support - Computer Services - University of Manitoba
From: maschepe@thama1.apgea.army.mil (Michael A. Schepers)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Elm 2.4 PL 8 Problems
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:16:33 GMT

Hi,

     I just downloaded a copy of the latest version of ELM.  This is
     version 2.4 with several patches included.  I have been able to
     successfully install this version up to patch level 6 without and
     real problems.  However, when I try to implement PL 7 and 8, I get
     errors.  The binaries compile successfully, but the "elm" binary
     gets an error when I execute it.

          Reading in /u/ir/maschepe/mailbox, message: 203
          newmbox - length of mbox. != spool mailbox length!!

          Write to temp file failed, exiting leaving mailbox intact!

     Elm 2.4 PL8 works fine with an empty mail folder at startup, but
     will bomb if your default mailbox contains more than a few
     messages.

     Currently I am using MMDF as my Mail Transport Agent on a Pyramid
     running OSx5.1a.  If anyone has any suggestions, I welcome your
     input.


-- 
Michael Schepers               
Potomac Research, Inc.        
maschepe@thama1.apgea.army.mil

Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: chupchup@ferkel.ucsb.edu (Robert Earl)
Subject: Re: Running "dd" from .profile
Keywords: dd .profile
Organization: (EVIL!)
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 09:38:00 GMT

sscrivan@nyx.cs.du.edu (steve scrivano) writes:

| Can anyone tell me how to write a script that could be placed in the user's
| .profile file that would check which /dev/tty port I am logged into and pass
| that variable to a "dd" command line that is placed in the .profile file which
| would then execute upon login.  Example .profile entries:

| script to check for login terminal variable
| dd if=file of=/dev/ttyvariable

what about

	dd if=file of=`tty`

or the ever-popular:

	cat file

-- 
robert earl          |
rearl@ucsd.edu       | "I got a bottle of tequila, baby, who needs friends?"
rearl@piggy.ucsb.edu |   --Johnette Napolitano, Concrete Blonde
From: peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD? (long)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 11:59:01 GMT
Organization: Global Village 1

shobhana@shakti.ncst.ernet.in (Shobhana) writes:

>Because after using the system for more than 10 days you will get
>positively irritated with these messages. In a couple of weeks after
>I started using DOS, I was quite annoyed with having to answer stupid
>questions like "Are you sure?" when I did "del *.*"---and I had never
>used unix before then.

That's because you can't turn them off, which is bad. But anyway, these
messages *can* be usefull for certain people.

>alias help man
>Trivial for Unix. In any case, man is a user program and *not* an
>OS feature.

It is a system feature. And if I buy a UNIX tape in a store, then how am I
going to install that alias command? Remember, we're talking about users here.

>>Real operating systems, from a user's point of view, come with a gui.
>Ugh---gimme an emacs any day ;-)
>Anyway, you have Motif, OpenLook etc. Pick your choice.

That's a problem too, there is no standard. It would be nice to have a standard
GUI.

>I am getting bored of this! Are you completely ignorant of the immense
>number of (public domain) editors extant on the net?

Remember, the two words 'the net' has no meaning for Joe and Jane User.

>>Real operating systems will work in 8MB of Ram.
>Linux runs in 2MB.
Not with X and a GUI.

>SunOS runs in 2MB (I think! Anyone know the exact #s? Anyway, 8MB is
>*comfortable*)
>Most other Unixes should also be comfortable with 8M.

With X and a GUI?

>>Real operating systems can be bought in stores.
>Or ftp'ed ;-)

You bet! <grin>

>All in all your gripe against Unix seems to be based on assumptions
>about unix which have no basis in reality. I also find this continual
>moaning about ``Unix is so hard to use'' sick. I mean, if you can take
>the time to learn how to, say, drive a car you can take the time to
>learn Unix. And as in driving (and for that matter everything else), 
>practice makes perfect.

Great, but the point was that UNIX is not going to have a large market share
if it doesn't meet the needs of normal users. At this moment it just can't,
except maybe NeXT (but I can't judge, never seen such a beast) and possibly
a few others. But either they are proprietary and/or too expensive to be
a real competition for NT and/or OS/2 v2.0.

>I heard this long ago, but I've forgotten who wrote this: "I learnt
>the Macintosh OS in one day and spent the rest of the days paying
>for that ease of use."

Others love it. I don't, but I know others who would really like the ease of
use of the Mac on their DOS box.

Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: sidler@smurf.ssc.gov (Mike Sidler)
Subject: Needle in a hay stack - nslookup
Keywords: nslookup, domains
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:58:16 GMT

Given just a hostname, I'm trying to find its Internet address. I know that
I could do this manually by getting a list of all the domainnames in North America
and one by one grep nslookup for the hostname. (Haven't been able to get a list
of domainnames yet).  However, I'm hoping there is a much easier way of doing this.
I'm trying to get the Internet address so I can email this person. But I don't have
his phone number or address, only the name of his machine!

Any help would be appreciated!!
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Sidler        
Superconducting Super Collider 
2550 Beckleymeade Ave. MS 4004
Dallas, TX  75237-3946       

sidler@zek.ssc.gov
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: as400064@orion.yorku.ca
Subject: HELP: tech terms reference
Organization: York University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 13:36:24 GMT

In article <1992Oct26.230256.28317@mdd.comm.mot.com>, bradley@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Bradley) writes:
> 
> Novice question: I want to flush a stream socket after
> a send call. Can do? Email answers please.
> 
>  Michael Bradley
>
From: rscott@cwis.unomaha.edu (Richard Scott - Metro CC)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Compiling elm on aviion
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:31:23 GMT

Here at Metro we are having some trouble compiling elm on our DG/Aviion
machine.  It seems as though the make command is not working.  Is anyone out
there running elm on Aviion?  Please contact me if you are so we can discuss
some of these problems.  It would be greatly appreciated.  I do not subscribe
to this list so please respond directly.

Regards

Richard Scott
Metropolitan Community College, Omaha
rscott@metro.mccneb.edu

Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: papresco@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Prescod)
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD? (long)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:18:56 GMT

In article <Bx5y22.D9A@flatlin.ka.sub.org> bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org (Christoph Badura) writes:
>In <Bx39s8.FF6@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> papresco@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Prescod) writes:
>file named "myfile" exists in the same directory?  I mean reliably and
>without user intervention.

Myfile and myfile are the same file!!!  It's like having a file in your
directory with a write attribute and another without, with the same name.
No operating system will let you do that!  Consider CASE an attribute.  It
doesn't affect how the OS deals with the file, it is just there for the
user's interest.  It gets stripped as soon as you try to compare to files,
or write one file on top of the other.  MyFile would replace myfile in the
files system.

>>Real operating systems, from a users point of view, come with a "help"
>>command.
>
>DOS hasn't had that for ten years.

Whose talking about DOS?  You think DOS is a real operating system?  I don't.


>>Real operating systems, from a user's point of view, come with a gui.
>
>DOS didn't for ten years.

Again, who is talking about DOS?  DOS is not unixes competition.   DOS could
never replace Unix.

>>Real operating systems install themselves from floppy.
>
>So does UNIX.

SOME unixes.

>>Real operating systems have hyptertext help built in.
>
>Tell me more.  In what way does DOS provide hypertext help?

Try OS/2, Windows, System 7, Nextstep.

>>Real operating systems are less then $200.00.
>
>Coherent costs $99.

Who wants to go back to text mode?

>>Real operating systems will work in 8MB of Ram.
>
>I personally know of a couple of 386sx/2MB RAM/40 MB HD that support 4
>users doing accounting and program development under Xenix. Last I
>heard they were satisfied with the performance and didn't plan to
>upgrade.

Big deal.  Would YOU want to run Xenix on a 386sx in text mode?  Most
people wouldn't.  Most people want an operating system that could,
conceivably run a graphical version of WordPerfect or Word...again,
for less then $200.00, available from a store, that runs in less then
8 MB of RAM.

>>Real operating systems can be bought in stores.
>
>So can be UNIX.

Some unixes.  And not the ones that are graphical and cheap.

>>Real operating systems come with at least a few months of free support.
>
>Tell me more.  Whom can I call up and get intelligent answers for DOS
>for free?

Whose talking about DOS?  OS/2 comes with 6 months,  I think Windows
comes with a year or more.


Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
From: jochan@nyx.cs.du.edu (C. Chan)
Subject: Shell program - help!
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 15:01:36 GMT


Hi,
	I am writing a shell program called "rcompress" which uses "compress" to compress recursively  specified directories. It accepts all the options of "compress" and '-d perform uncompress' '-l dissplay the pathname of each file'.
	I want to know how the program distinguishs the option [-b #] in "compress" from the directory name to be compressed.
	e.g rcompress -d -b 10 dir_name

email: h9116771@hkuxa.hku.hk

email prefered!
From: ralf@ark.abg.sub.org (Ralf Stephan)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD (long)
Date: 05 Nov 92 09:30
Organization: Not Very Ltd.

axi0349@ultb.isc.rit.edu (A.X. Ivasyuk) writes:
> >Real operating systems will work in 8MB of Ram.
> 
> Linux does even with X running.  My 8MB box barely swaps.  I'm pretty sure
> the same goes for 386BSD.  Again, don't ask me about Coherent.

Works even with 2 MB, although you should upgrade if you want to link 1100kb
of object files or run empire on it...

--ralf
--
******************************************************************************
No matter how much the passengers eat, the weight of the plane stays the same.
From: peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD? 
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 22:11:18 GMT
Organization: Global Village 1

rahardj@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Budi Rahardjo) writes:

>Then buy UnixWorld magazine, look at the ads.

>If Joe User prefers a comercial program why not go with SCO or NeXTstep.

You can find that answer in the same magazines. A small hint: $$$$.

Greetings,
Peter Busser
From: peter@essex.ac.uk
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: grep
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:41:49 GMT
Reply-To: peter@essex.ac.uk ()
Organization: University of Essex, Colchester, UK

A quick question I was asked this morning. "Why is grep so called?"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,alt.folklore.computers
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Whence Unix? (was Re: IS UNIX DEAD?)
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:10:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.155838.12398@bilver.uucp> bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) writes:

>In article <1992Nov2.123843.2787@global.hacktic.nl> peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser) writes:
>
>>UNIX was designed by hackers for hackers (or by programmers for programmers,
>>whichever you like best). But it is flexible, programmable, etc. so it could be
>>made to a real end-user system. And why not?
>
>I thought Unix was written by Bell as a word-processing system
>to enable them write their the phone company manuals. 

I heard that, but I also heard that Thompson's *primary* goal was to
find a machine for playing Space War.  What's the story?

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.wizards