HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: 386bsd: 16550, color, vt100
Organization: Weber State University  (Ogden, UT)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 17:18:25 GMT

In article <veit.714391213@du9ds3> veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de writes:
>In <1992Aug20.222741.9968@ugle.unit.no> arnej@Lise.Unit.NO (Arne Henrik Juul) writes:
>[...]
>>The sequence:   ESC [ 3 ; <number> x
>>means: set the PC color mode to <number>, where <number> will be used
>>in this way:
>
>Warning: this is incompatible with vt100. A vt100 emits an identification
>string with ESC [ x, which may cause much problems.

A vt100 ignores ANSI sequences which are not vt100 commands.  I think you
are confusing which direction the escape sequence is going.

Also, unless you disable the 25th line or make it a status line, you are
going to have a hell of a time convincing some poor computer that the
thing you are talking to it from is a vt100.  Specifically, it will scroll
one line later than it whould.

Those with laptops especially, and the Epson Equity series in particular,
should note that there is a bug in the video BIOS that prevents scrolling
of a portion of the screen from tuning out "quite right".  You will have
to work around this problemon those boxes.

Also a true vt100 will fail under the "resize" command, which moves the
cursor to row 999, column 999, and expects the cursor to be placed in
the lower right-hand corner.  If the actual screen size makes a positioning
sequence out of bounds, a real vt100 does not move the cursor.

I would suggest some other emulation which fits the bill, the best I have
seen being the SCO color console, since it allows you to paint lines, etc.
in a particular color.  ISC's console only allows characters actually
drawn on the screen to be colored, which is somewhat bogus (BG color on
lines scrolled up the screen is set to black unless drwan over).

Then make sure that what ever you are talking to has a termcap or terminfo
uploaded.  If you do this, even a "Joe Cheese" terminal emulation will
work.

One big plus is that the SCO color console hase insert/delete line/char,
which will keep elVIs from behaving erratically (deletion of line causes
blank line on screen).

If you have your heart set on some DEC terminal, the VT102P has the ability
to support multiple simultaneous attributes, and supports the insert and
delete functions to make elVIs happy, so I would suggest that instead.


					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: mc@wam.umd.edu (Morgan Tay Chiu)
Subject: Difference btn home-made systems & name-brand systems?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 02:13:42 GMT

If I assemble a system myself, using the exact same name-brand COMPONENTS (such
as motherboard, HD, floppies, controller, etc.) that are used in big-name PC
makers like DELL and GATEWAY, would there be any difference on performance 
between those two systems?  

If there is, what are the causes to the difference?  The performance can be
said to be the speed and reliability of running programs, or just the Norton
Performance Index.

MC
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter)
Subject: Re: 386bsd doesn't recognize my (non-scsi) tape
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 21:58:41 GMT

paigen@tfs.com (David Paigen) writes:
>This is a standard wangtek, QIC-36 interface drive, and the standard
>wangtek QIC-36 interface.

This will work with 386BSD 0.1. (I have one of these hooked up to my machine).
Just rejumper it to use the values you are supposed to be using. Or recompile
the kernel to use the values you currently have it set for... it'll be alot
easier to rejumper the card though.

	fred
-- 
Disclaimer: everything I write is my *personal* opinion and does not represent
or reflect the opinion of the company which employs me.
From: cctony@sun1.mcsr.olemiss.edu (Tony Reynolds)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: OpenLook for 386BSD
Summary: Its mostly done!
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:32:38 GMT
Organization: Mississippi Center for Supercomputing Research

As of this very second, I am writing this post using olwm, ported
to 386BSD.  Now, I have been looking at previous posts concerning
"xv," and my only problem with releasing the port is the legality of
the distribution of this system.

If someone can tell me that its legal to give this port away,
its free.  OL is based on xview, which I found on export.lcs.mit.edu.

BTW, it took 3 days on my 486/33 to compile, and I'm not
*extremely* pleased with all the kludges I had to make to get it
to run..

But look at it this way: olwm ran the first time I started it,
and its still running.

-- 
Tony Reynolds            Have you hugged      cctony@sun1.mcsr.olemiss.edu
Cray Network Intern    your Washburn today?                  (601)232-7206
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: karl@NeoSoft.com (Karl Lehenbauer)
Subject: Naive "imake" questions
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 16:03:42 GMT

OK, lots of X programs come with Imakefiles and need imake to generate
a customized Makefile for the local machine.

Firing up imake as distributed in X386 for 386BSD, it complains about
not being about to find "Imake.tmpl".  I found that setting the env
var IMAKEINCLUDE to "-I/usr/lib/X11/config" would get it to create
makefiles OK, but not with quite the correct information to build
the target, like library paths are wrong.

Is there another place this is supposed to point to, to get to the right
stuff?  If not, is there a copy or link that needs to be done?  Otherwise,
what is the accepted way to set this up?

xantfarm and xpipeman, for example, would come up out of the box and run
perfectly but for this.
-- 
-- 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.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Restrictions on free UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 13:07:21 GMT

In article <PHR.92Aug17112028@soda.berkeley.edu> phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin) writes:
>The copyleft does not prevent development shops from using GCC.
>If they think it does, they haven't been paying attention, or they are
>letting their decisions be controlled by paranoid knee-jerk reactions
>instead of by intelligence.

In case you haven't noticed, the world is run by paranoid knee-jerk
reactions. I think that's dumb, too (and I'd be happy to use GCC if it
was available for the stone-age systems I support), but it's another
good reason to keep 386BSD really free.

>We saw the same situation with Unix, but it didn't work out so well.

Unix has never been free before, so you don't know what the results will
be. I like the fact that the FSF stuff is out there, but we need more
variety than just one model of freely-distributable software. Why are
you bitching? GNU OS is coming any day now and nobody will bother with
386BSD any more, right?
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: karl@NeoSoft.com (Karl Lehenbauer)
Subject: Re: selling 386BSD (was Re: 386BSD on CD-ROM?)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 19:19:09 GMT

A truly free system is one that can be sold as well as given away.

You want this thing to take over the world, right?  That includes letting
people fix it up, make special versions for specific purposes (cash
registers, realtime, etc.), and sell it.  It is not a coincidence that
the Jolitzes allow for others to sell 386BSD... otherwise it will be
relegated to being nothing more than a laboratory curiosity.

Secondly, free software isn't free.  It was a lot of work for us to
download 386BSD, twice now, and get it running.  Reading news, finding
bugs, fixing bugs, pulling down and applying bug fixes, maintaining
versions, updating, upgrading, and managing this thing costs money,
directly and indirectly.  Even if you value your time at some
very low amount of dollars per hour, you are spending thousands of
dollars to do it the way you're doing it.

Someone who has a lot of time and little money can take the time to
cut a complete 70-or-so floppy distribution including X from a friend's
copy.  In a corporate environment, or really for anyone making even
halfway decent money, cutting 70 floppies looks like something to be
avoided at all costs.

I have heard that John Lennon willed all of his work tapes and such to
the world, subject to the caveat that nobody should make money distributing
any of it, and I wonder how in the hell any of it will be distributed.

-- 
-- 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.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: terry@ithaca.Eng.Sandy.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert)
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Organization: Novell NPD -- Sandy, UT
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:29:46 GMT

In article <5146@airs.com> ian@airs.com (Ian Lance Taylor) writes:
>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.''

I'm a bit confused by this statement -- $100 for GNU Hurd's source code,
or $100 for ABXZ Computing's modified GNU source code?  Does this require
that ABXZ Computing run a GNU tape copying site for their users, or can they
give GNU's address on the card?  Do they *have* to have a card if the software
is modified?  Do they *have* allow access to their modifications source?  Do
they have to allow you to give away their software to their friends, or only
the GNU stuff?

It seems to me that the only potential market in any of this is in terms of
"value added" -- both the support *and* the software variety.  As Peter would
call them, "mundanes" are where a company is going to make it's money; the
free redistribution of copies of the disks seems to hurt this, and thus it
must be possible to add code to the disks and thus restrict distribution as
a result.

The "mundanes" want something that will work off a disk; this is why they
don't download/copy themselves.  After going through a lot of work to make
it "work off a disk", there is little of the original incentive for purchase
if one mundane can still copy from another (witness the "popcorn product"
nature of DOS).

>Apple seems to do fairly well with a freely redistributable operating system.

Apple is a horse of a different wheelbase.  Apple gives away software to
sell hardware.  You can't use the software unless you buy the hardware.
You'll note that the ROMs, that which makes a MAC a MAC, are definitely *not*
freely copiable.  This is analogous to giving away $1000 worth of options
that only work with a particular companies $12,000 car that costs $6,000
to manufacture (this is being lenient on Apples markup, give student prices
are often 1/2 retail, and they must still be turning a profit or the FTC
would be down their throats).

					Terry Lambert
					terry_lambert@gateway.novell.com
					terry@icarus.weber.edu

---
Disclaimer:  Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of
my present or previous employers.
From: tj2n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Tao Jiang)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: (386BSD) finger
Date: 22 Aug 92 21:31:07 GMT
Organization: Doctoral student, Statistics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I had a problem in using finger (or users etc.) command in X386.
Whenever I execute finger, it says that: No one logged on. But
this can not be true. If I use finger without x386 runing, I get
the correct response.

Can anyone give me some helps?

Thanks!
From: bill@prijat.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: ulimit()
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:40:16 GMT
Reply-To: bill@platypus.uofs.edu
Organization: University of Scranton, Scranton, PA

In article <1992Aug13.091855.28615@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>, walter@insu1.etec.uni-karlsruhe.de (Reiner Walter) writes:
|> I want to port the system call ulimit() from INTERACTIVE to BSD/386.
|> I couldn't find a similar system call for BSD/386.
|> Is ist possible to port this system call?

Why???
Most people stuck on SYSV spend most of their waking hours trying to 
find a way to do away with it.  What possible use could you have for 
something as limiting (or dare I say brain-dead) as ulimit??

bill

-- 

     Bill Gunshannon          |        If this statement wasn't here,
     bill@platypus.uofs.edu   |  This space would be left intentionally blank
     bill@tuatara.uofs.edu    |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Is it possible?
Date: 20 Aug 92 01:08:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: fcom.1992Aug20.010832.15119
Distribution: usa
Organization: Weber State University  (Ogden, UT)

In article <1992Aug19.204603.9024@news.acns.nwu.edu> jamie@speedy.acns.nwu.edu (James R. Groves) writes:
>I have a 42.9 meg st250R and I would love to be able to install completely
[ ... How can I unpack bin01 without having the necessary space to do so? ... ]

1)	Ftp it down file by file from some other machine where you have it
	unpacked already.

2)	NFS mount the same thing and cp -r it.


					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
Subject: 386 bsd posix?
From: eje@irenaeus.mlo.dec.com (Eric James Ewanco)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 19:40:48 GMT
Reply-To: ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


Does 386bsd meet POSIX specs?
--
/=============================================================================\
| Eric Ewanco - Software Engineer     For the rash and outrageous opinions ex-|
| Digital Equipment Corp, Maynard MA  pressed herein I alone am responsible;  |
| ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com          they do not belong to DIGITAL(TM).      |
\==============================- 2 Th 2:15 -==================================/
From: gab10@griffincd.amdahl.com (Gary A Browning)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 680x0 version of 386BSD?? [Was: Re: Mac version of 386BSD??]
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:15:30 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

It is not just drivers that need to be rewritten.  Have you though about
changes required for the different hardware interrupt stack frame,
interrupt masking structure, the MMU (BTW, the 68000 machines do not
usually have one of these.  This makes the porting task much harder, not
easier), system call invokation sequence, etc?

You should read the series of articles from Bill and Lynne in Dr Dobb's
Journal about the porting of 386BSD.  You are basically doing the same
task for the
680x0 architecture as he has for the 80[34]86.  After reading the
articles,
you may change your mind and decide to wait and start with BSD4.4 which
already has some support for various 680x0 machines.

-- 
Gary Browning        | Exhilaration is that feeling you get just after a
		     | great idea hits you, and just before you realize
                     | what is wrong with it.
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 16:06:48 GMT
	<PHR.92Aug16224207@soda.berkeley.edu> <WLEIPPE@taronga.com>
Organization: CSUA/UCB
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: peter@taronga.com's message of 17 Aug 92 10:54:59 GMT


    >    This sort of distribution is not practical for an operating system.

    >Why is it practical for compilers and not OS's?

    Because the compiler distribution is subsidised by the OS distribution. If
    the OS itself has no protection against unsupported copying, what is there
    to subsidise it?

Hardware distribution.

    And for clonable machines (Sparc, MIPS, x86) the O/S has to be a
    profit center in its own right.

The x86 proves this is totally wrong.  Nearly all x86 vendors just
ship ms-dog on their machines with almost no profit---they are in the
hardware business and are perfectly happy to send you a box with -no-
OS if you ask for it.  We already see from Cygnus that companies can
profit from distributing and supporting free software.  Obviously
enough people are willing to pay for support to keep such companies
in the black.  Conversely, if not enough people want the support,
the support must not be so important, and then there's not much excuse
for a proprietary OS.
From: randyc@ocf.berkeley.edu (Randy Yen-Pang Chou)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Motif on X386???
Date: 16 Aug 1992 06:40:19 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tornado.berkeley.edu

Anybody got motif working on X386 with 386bsd?  How's the performance?
How much memory do I need to compile it(not including the docs) ?


---Randy
From: gab10@griffincd.amdahl.com (Gary A Browning)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 680x0 version of 386BSD?? [Was: Re: Mac version of 386BSD??]
Date: 22 Aug 92 03:09:41 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Aug20.173817.21681@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>,
tom@afthree.as.arizona.edu (Thomas J. Trebisky) writes:

> gab10@griffincd.amdahl.com (Gary A Browning) writes:

> >(BTW, the 68000 machines do not usually have one of these.  This makes
> >the porting task much harder, not easier.)
> 
> I am not sure what you mean.  But I never claimed it was easy.  :-)
This was a joke but I forgot to put in ':-)'.  What I was implying is that
I know that you can put Unix on a 68000 without a MMU (Minix does this) but
it is a lot of additional work beyond the port that uses a MMU.  Also the
resulting system will usually lack protection between processes address spaces
and virtual memory support among other things.


> When the going gets tough, the tough get going!  Besides, there
> is no need to wait, the hp300 stuff in the Net2 code supports the
> HP 68020 and 68030 workstations, so I (We) have a lot more to go with than
> Jolitz did for the 386.

Hmmm.  I didn't realize that some 680x0 work had already been released in
Net-2.  Go get'up Tiger.

-- 
Gary Browning        | Exhilaration is that feeling you get just after a
		     | great idea hits you, and just before you realize
                     | what is wrong with it.
From: bvs@BitBlocks.com (Bakul Shah)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Motif on X386???
Date: 19 Aug 92 06:24:55 GMT
Organization: Bit Blocks, Inc.

hasty@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) writes:

>In article <1992Aug18.174802.9845@BitBlocks.com> bvs@BitBlocks.com (Bakul Shah) writes:
>>Make sure you are using the latest com.c driver (with select()
>>bug fixed).  But even then there is some problem with the mouse
>>code in X386 as the very first button press is not seen until
>>after you either release the button or move the mouse a bit.
>>
>>If you wish to track this problem down, check out file
>>$X11R5/mit/server/ddx/x386/x386Io.c.  Routine x386MseEvents()
>>seems to be the culprit.
>>
>Rich (rich@rice.edu) already fix this problem in the next upcoming release 
>of X386 1.2E 1.0.2 for 386bsd 0.1, please ask him for the fix. The problem
>in a nutshell is that X386Io.c is not setting the cflag. the fix was also
>previously posted by me.

I have already applied that patch but I still see the same symptom.
May be this only happens with a Microsoft compatible mouse.

>Additionally, there are problems with the X server not grabbing the keyboard,
>this problem has been also resolved.

>So just ask Rich when he is going to release X again. Hopefully, it will be
>soon. I just hate to see the same problems being reported over and over again
>even though there has been previous postings relating to the problem with
>suggested fixes.

I too hate repititions but I think this problem is different from
tty.c_cflag not being set in x386SetSpeed() in the #ifdef __386BSD__
leg.

-- Bakul Shah <bvs@bitblocks.com>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert Withrow)
Subject: Re: 386bsd install program :-)
Reply-To: witr@rwwa.com
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 14:19:18 GMT

In article <RAEBURN.92Aug19005834@cambridge.cygnus.com>,
 raeburn@cambridge.cygnus.com (Ken Raeburn) writes:
|     Sorry, installation on TV sets not allowed per CCIR, "Green Book"
|     15th Plenary Assembly, Geneva 1982 Vol. 9, Part I,
|     International Telecommunications Union.
| 
| Um... has anyone ever actually gotten these messages? :-)

No, but someone posted a patch that allows you to install on your
TV, but it requires a SECAM TV.  Perhaps someone has a disklabel
for NTSC sets?

---
 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: wayne@gbrmpa.gov.au (Wayne Amisano)
Subject: WD Ethernet Problems with 386BSD
Organization: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 05:43:35 GMT

Hi,
	We have successfully installed 386BSD on a 486DX/8/100, OPTI
chipset and we are having trouble configuring the WD 8003E card.

Bootup reports :-	we0 ethernet address <blah> at 0x280 irq9 on isa

We've set the card for IRQ 2, 280 and D800.

When trying to run 'ifconfig we0 x.y.z.w', the machine grinds to a halt
and the command isn't even completed, ie. no prompt returned.

Any help appreciated.

cul wayne!!

-- 
Wayne Amisano (VK4KT)     _-_|\\    E-Mail - wayne@gbrmpa.gov.au
Great Barrier Reef       /     \\   Phone  - +61 77 81 8861 (GMT+1000)
Marine Park Authority.   \_.-._/    Fax    - +61 77 72 6093
Our's to use Wisely!          v     Mail   - GPO Box 1379, Townsville QLD 4810
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: ae007@yfn.ysu.edu (Daniel Newcombe)
Subject: X386 and Motif Binaries
Organization: Youngstown State University/Youngstown Free-Net
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:18:15 GMT


Are the binaries for X386 and Motif availiable via anonymous FTP?
I don't have the hard drive space to compile them. Also, does X
require a kernel mod? If so, can this also be FTPed?  Thanks,
 -Dan
-- 
    -Dan Newcombe
Internet Address:  STDN@VM.MARIST.EDU
Youngstown Freenet: ae007@yfn.ysu.edu
GOAL: To put the world on 3.5" diskettes...  :)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware