HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: MXD118@psuvm.psu.edu (Spiro the Spiny Goldfish)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Will vp/ix ever support Windows in enhanced mode?
Date: 17 Apr 92 19:38:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: psuvm.92108.153832MXD118
 <1992Apr17.052004.5616@jagat.uucp>
Organization: Penn State ACA (American Churl Association)
X-Subliminal-Message: OS/2 2.0 is here.  Call 1-800-3IBMOS2 to order.
X-Curtains-For-Windows: OS/2 2.0 upgrade from Windows: $49
X-PEPSI-Slogan: My butt -- Gotta bite it!
X-Emasculated-Operating-System: UNIX

In article <1992Apr17.052004.5616@jagat.uucp>, rwhite@jagat.uucp (Robert White)
says:
>
>Yes, that is true.  However (if it must happen) there is no reason that
>a VP/ix type program (WIN/ix?) could not be written using the same facilities
>as VP/ix and windows source code (or a remarkable simulation) just the way
>OS/2 2.0 actually multitasks windows programs as OS/2 tasks with a "nice
>and through" library.

OS/2 2.0's Windows support is provided through a copy of Windows 3.x that
has been modified by IBM to be both a DPMI server and a client.  OS/2 2.0
also cannot run Windows in enhanced mode.
---
Michael E. Dahmus -- mxd118@psuvm.psu.edu, dahmus@cs.psu.edu, or GWPX90D *P*
UNIX:  The perfect operating system for people who don't have to pay for
       their computers.        <* OS/2 2.0 is here! *>
From: sheldon@kong.gsfc.nasa.gov (Roger Sheldon - AISS)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Will vp/ix ever support Windows in enhanced mode?
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:17:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: kong.1992Apr8.181747.13041
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center

I was thrilled to get Windows 3.0 running under vp/ix under ISC 3.0.
But then I was disappointed to find that Microsoft Word for Windows
cannot run in real mode (the Word docs didn't mention this restriction).

Is it, as I suspect, impossible to run Windows in enhanced mode 
under vp/ix?

Thanks for any advice,

Roger
From: jjj@mits.mdata.fi (Joni Jarvenkyla)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Interactive and the 486
Keywords: Interactive 486 DX SX EISA ISA
Date: 7 Apr 92 08:34:19 GMT
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland

I'd say: forget the ISA bus. It's RIDICULOUS. At least in a Unix system.


-- 
jjj@mits.mdata.fi   Mind         Heart         No      Me
jjj@niksula.hut.fi  Difference   Destruction   Death   You
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: jerry@connection.prospect.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: SVR4 Tape Backup
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 20:50:11 GMT

Hello.  I'm running MST SVR4.0.3, and would like to purchase a tape drive
for my system.  Does anyone know if SVR4's XL driver works with the cheap
Colorado floppy tape drives?  If so, what's the capacity?  Can the Jumbo 250
really store 250 MB, or is that only under DOS with special compression
software?  Thanks in advance for your help.
--
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
| Jerry J. Shekhel  | Molecular Simulations | Time just fades the pages      |
| Drummers do it... | Inc.  Waltham, MA USA | in my book of memories.        |
|    ... In rhythm! |     (617) 890-2888    |              -- Guns N' Roses  |
+-------------------+-----------------------+--------------------------------+
|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: gil@datasrv.chi.il.us (Gil Ben-Noon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Any Terminal monitor program?
Date: 12 Apr 92 01:23:41 GMT
Organization: DataServe LTD. Information and comm. services, Israel

Hello,
I'm looking for a monitor program that will allow me to see the exact
screen of a remote terminal (connected via modem to the UNIX host)
and see exactly what the user see on his end and what he type.
I'm using a SCO UNIX SysV3.2.2

Any help will be appriciated.

Gil Ben-Noon.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: gws@n8emr.uucp (Gary Sanders)
Subject: BIG disk
Organization: HAM BBS, 614-895-2553 (1200/2400/v.32/pep)
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 23:48:28 GMT


Has anyone used a big > 1gb disk on ISC 2.2. I know there is a 1gb
limitation, but can I use a larger disk but not user the upper
disk area.  I am working on getting the upgrade, but untill
I do would like to make use of the disk.



-- 
Gary W. Sanders n8emr!gws@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu, 72277,1325
N8EMR @ N8JVY (ip addr) 44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address coordinator]
HAM BBS 614-895-2553 (1200/2400/V.32/PEP) Voice: 614-895-2552 (eves/weekends)
From: Shawn.Hayes@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Shawn Hayes)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Problems debugging large files
Date: 8 Apr 92 20:42:56 GMT
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service


 I've been having problems debugging an X application on SCO Open Desktop.
Early in the development phase I could use sdb or Codeview to debug the
application without any problem.  Now the file has gotten to be over 
4 megabytes in size and both sdb and Codeview will not work.  Codeview
dies because the cvtcoff program(convert from coff to xenix format) dies 
with a coredump after writing out 2.7 megabytes.  Sdb fails with a series
of warnings:  Warn: [5b] (35): n_numaux(=2) > 1;
where the values 5b,35 and 2 are constantly changing.  

	I'm not sure if the problem is that the Microsoft compiler is
generating bad coff records or if the problem is that the debugging 
utilities can't handle the size of the file or perhaps the number of symbols.
Has anyone had luck debugging large programs (> 4 megabytes in size with
a large number of symbols) under SCO Unix.  If so, then what compiler/
debugger did you use?

Shawn Hayes

--
   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: dougm@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Doug Mcintyre)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: sVr4 hardware buyers guide FAQ
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:25:01 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet51], Minneapolis, MN.

Could somebody send me this thing? It never appeared here lately. This site
seems to ``drop'' a lot of articles sometimes.

UUCP: {tcnet, crash}!orbit!pnet51!dougm
ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!dougm@nosc.mil
INET: dougm@pnet51.orb.mn.org                                GENIE: D.MCINTYRE1
From: Lawrence_Chen@lhaven.UUmh.Ab.Ca (Lawrence Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Weitek and SCSI
Distribution: world
Date: 15 Apr 92 22:04:54 MDT
Organization: Lunatic Haven BBS

Two questions concerning ISC 3.0

Does it work with the Weitek 4167 in the ALR Business VEISA 486?  I know
2.2 didn't work with it, but I can't find anything in the release notes
that says this has been fixed.

Next what ISA SCSI controllers will work in an EISA machine with more than
16 Megs......and what are the pros and cons of each one.

-- Via DLG Pro v0.991

                                                 __
 Lunatic Haven BBS:    _        _  _     _  _   :        _     FAX
 +1 403 526 6957  :   :_: :   ::_::_ :\::  :_   :   :_: :_ :\: +1 403 526
6957
                  :__ : : :/:/ : \:_ : ::_ :_   :__ : : :_ : :
                           "Just a Crazy Engineer with an Amiga and an
HP48SX"  EMAIL: Lawrence_Chen@lhaven.uumh.ab.ca
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.mach,comp.unix.wizards,alt.folklore.computers
From: mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: SVr4 and clone hardware buyer's FAQ
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 19:09:57 GMT

In article <1992Apr06.195949.1790@Veritas.COM> rogerk@Veritas.COM (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>In article <1fypqp#9NqV2h1QTT9N0yR5bj3PpxlN=eric@snark.thyrsus.com> eric@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
>>I'm similarly ignoring SCO because their `Release 4' is a 3.2 sailing
>>under false colors.  Can you say deceptive advertising?  Can you say
>>bait-and-switch?  Can you say total marketroid-puke?  Farg 'em, and
>>ignore their OS until they come to their senses.
>
>Bullshit.
>
>It's not sailing under any false colors at all, since everyone knows it's not
>SVR4 (not that I personally believe SVR4 is anything so wonderful to be... I'm
>so thrilled to be at a site where we can't run NFS because SVR4 NFS will hang
>within an hour of normal use).  I don't think anyone's advertised it or offered
>it deceptively; I don't think you understand what bait-and-switch is; and I
>think they can call it "The Yellow Release" if they wish and it's no skin
>off anyone's nose.
>-- 

Roger is correct about bait-and-switch.  SCO is not offering some product for
sale then inducing you to buy some other when you come calling.  They are
selling you the product they are advertising.

However, it is deceptive advertising as the product they are selling is not
the product they appear to be advertising.  Making a watch under the brand
name SElKO (lower case L) is deceptive and if you buy it, you get a watch
although not a Seiko.

Everybody doesn't know it isn't SVR4.  One thing that this thread is
doing is calling it SCO 3.2 version 4.  WRONG...  it is SCO 3.2 release 4.
subtle difference.  USL's official name is UNIX (tm) System V Release 4
version x.x.  (I'm not sure about the capitalization).  Compare and constrast
this to System V version 4.0 Release x.x.

Quoting from an official DEC publication:
     SCO UNIX System V/386 V3.2 Release 4       (on cover)
     SCO UNIX System V/386 V3.2 Release 4       (top of page 7)
     RELEASE 4 [in bold]                        (top of page 8)
     SCO UNIX System V/386 V3.2 Release 4       (twice on page 9)

Toward the middle of page 7, we find
     SCO UNIX System V/386 is a fully licensed version of UNIX Software
     Laboratories, Inc.'s UNIX System V Release 3.2.

DEC at least tells us the nomenclature is misleading.  I've seen a number of
other references in trade mags which don't include the caveat.

USL should be raising a firestorm over this.

p.s. to Roger:
   you might want to yell at your unix vendor about the NFS hang.  We've got
   Olivetti SVR4 (a pretty stock USL release).  While we had some NFS problems
   with 1.0, 2.0 has had no NFS problems talking to Suns, DECStations
   and AViiONs.
-- 
Charles Mattair			      (preferred) mattair%synercom@hounix.org
Fast, Cheap, Good.  Choose Two. (anon)		   (or)	mattair@synercom.UUCP
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: D.Golds@cs.ucl.ac.uk (David Golds)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: PANIC: Can't switch to supervisor mode
Date: 10 Apr 92 10:49:07 GMT


Mathew Farwell (dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk) writes:

:In article <1992Apr3.175908.3425@engage.pko.dec.com> balson@3d.enet.dec.com jim
: Balson writes:
:In article <2454@ucl-cs.uucp>, D.Golds@cs.ucl.ac.uk (David Golds) writes...
:>>A friend of mine is suddenly having a problem with a clone 'MESH' ISA 486/33
:>>(of dubious quality) running standard (?) AT&T SVR4 from USL. I think the
:>>motherboard might be by ETEQ but that's a guess.
:>>
:>>The machine had been working fine for a couple of months, but recently it
:>>failed to boot UNIX and has failed to do so ever since. The kernel starts to
:>>load, they get a message abot the Tape driver being OK, then they get a
:>>message like:
:>>
:>>      PANIC: Can't switch to supervisor mode
:>>
:>>We put the hard disk with UNIX into another PC (a 386/40 of even more
:>>dubious quality) and it works fine there.
:>>
:>
:>       This sounds like the 486 can't put itself into protected mode to me.
:>I beleive, without having a specs in front of me, that initially the 386/486
:>will boot up in 'real' mode. Going into protected mode only after doing some
:>initial setup (GDT/IDT etc.) Sounds like it could be a problem going from
:>the initial real mode into protected mode.
:>
:>       If you have another mother board available, try swapping 486 chips
:>and see if the 486 chip from the 'bad' mother board can boot unix in another
:>working motherboard. if it can't, then you have it. If it can...then it's
:>something else, but at least you narrowed it down a bit. Make sure both mother
:>boards are of the same MHZ. I think it could cause problems sticking a 25 MHZ
:>chip in a 33 MHZ board. I think.
:
:You shouldn't start swapping chips on a motherboard (esp the CPU) unless
:you know *exactly* what you're doing.  If you don't know the answer to
:the above question (which I don't) then you shouldn't be mucking about
:with your motherboard like you're suggesting.
:
:Dylan.

Thanks for the replies - actually I didn't fancy the prospect of swapping
CPUs around (and we don't have another 486/33 around anyway). The machine is
really having a bad time of it now - it even has occasional problems running
MS Windows 3.0 (!) so it's going back to the mnaker for
investigation/repair. 

Thanks all.

David Golds.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: rfarris@rfengr.com (Rick Farris)
Subject: Re: ISA machines are cheap, not excellent, Unix machines
Organization: RF Engineering, Del Mar, California
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 18:41:20 GMT

rfarris@rfengr.com (Rick Farris) wrote:

>So what?  Why does that make the PA-RISC chips more
>expensive to produce?  We're just talking about baking
>cookies, here, aren't we?  

In article <113@raysnec.UUCP> shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Raymond
N. Shwake) replies:

> I suspect one prime factor in the price differential involves volume: The
> rather high cost of R&D associated with such chips and the high cost of
> plant associated with their manufacturer must be amortized across a smaller
> product volume than is the case with Intel's iAPX line. 

Ok.  My point was that SPARC and MIPS chipsets are available
from multiple vendors, and therefore should benefit from
inter-vendor competition. 

Do you agree, then, that if the RISC vendors get their act
together and ramp up production that they can cut the low
end of the 15 - 60 mips market out from under Intel?

--
Rick Farris  RF Engineering POB M Del Mar, CA 92014  voice (619) 259-6793
rfarris@rfengr.com     ...!ucsd!serene!rfarris      serenity bbs 259-7757

Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: Memory Cache and Unix
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 19:07:37 GMT

In article <BMFxBK.JtM@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
>do in the real world, I'm ready to believe in the theory.  I guess I'm more
>willing to believe that a CPU cache could do some good than I am about a
>(hardware) disk cache, anyway.
>

Woa,  Let me ASSURE you, a hardware or software (if it is embedded in
the filesystem support routines rather than toatally seperate ala much
of the DOS "software disk cache" programs) cache can give you REMARKABLE
improvements in speed.  It is also dependent on the worth of the cache
algorithm used, and HOW MUCH cache RAM you have for the disk.  When I
installed 512K of cache on the DPT card here I didn't notice much.  The
4MB daughter card made a BIG difference.  The DPT cache algorithm is a
"smart" one in that it will attempt to anticipate disk reads and such.

Obviously a filesystem blocks reads and writes to the disk in some
fashion.  If these "blocks" are cached in the filesystem support
routines and can be managed there this is more efficient up to the point
at which the blocking overhead exceeds disk access time.  In the case of
a hardware (controller) cache you will get similar benifits without
chewing up main memory.

Now, If your cache is managed BEHIND the filesystem block routines in
the CPU (ala many of the dos ones) you just piled the cache support
overhead back onto the main CPU in ADDITION to it's normal blocking
de-blocking functions.  This can still net some improvement though it is
highly dependent on the speed of the cpu to manage the cache vs the
speed of the Disk I/O subsystem.

One of the FIRST things I noted with SCO Unix was the improvement in
speed of the Disk stuff.  This is due to the Acer Fast FileSystem which
uses caching techniques within the I/O routines, keeping disk blocks
hanging around in memory in case they are needed again.

Unfortunately the Disk Speed was offset rather dramatically by the
slower unix kernel in 3.2 with all the accounting and C2 security stuff.

If you are basing this opinion on using SCSI disks the newer ones
generally also have a modest cache on them of 1 track as a minimum up to
as much as 32K and more.  Let's face it.  It takes X amount of time for
a R/W head to traverse to a specific track, synchronize with the bit
pattern there, and ride over the required sectors.  To be able to read
this same datum from a series of RAM cells somewhere is gonna be faster
NO MATTER what.  So generally what you end up with is an improvement in
speed that is dependent on your cache hit ratio.

>
>
>Lawrence & Clark, Inc		(617) 762-0707	(206) 323-2864
>Xenix/Unix support,etc 	 	 Boston		 Seattle
>
> 


-- 
Keith Smith          uunet!ksmith!keith            5719 Archer Rd.
Digital Designs      BBS 1-919-423-4216            Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201
Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...
Xref: sparky comp.unix.sysv386:8678 biz.sco.opendesktop:401 biz.sco.general:1823
From: losecco@undpdk.hep.nd.edu (John LoSecco)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,biz.sco.opendesktop,biz.sco.general
Subject: Re: What does SCO "2 user limit" mean with ODT?
Keywords: sco odt 2 user limit logins
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:29:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Apr15.142932.29616
Distribution: na
Organization: High Energy Physics  Notre Dame


	Thanks for the explanation.  But it can't be the whole story.
I have no inbound telnet sessions and no active getty's except on the
multiscreens.  I am logged in on multiscreen 2 and have an outbound telenet
session.  Here are my getty's:

09:14:59$ps -ef|fgrep etty
   root 20795     1  0 14:50:02  01       0:01 /etc/getty tty01 m
   root 19585     1  0  Apr 13   03       0:01 /etc/getty tty03 m
   root   377     1  0  Apr  3   04       0:01 /etc/getty tty04 m
   root   383     1  0  Apr  3   08       0:01 /etc/getty tty08 m
   root   379     1  0  Apr  3   05       0:01 /etc/getty tty05 m
   root   386     1  0  Apr  3   10       0:01 /etc/getty tty10 m
   root   381     1  0  Apr  3   06       0:01 /etc/getty tty06 m
   root   382     1  0  Apr  3   07       0:01 /etc/getty tty07 m
   root   385     1  0  Apr  3   09       0:01 /etc/getty tty09 m
   root   391     1  0  Apr  3   12       0:01 /etc/getty tty12 m
   root   389     1  0  Apr  3   11       0:01 /etc/getty tty11 m
losecco 21798 20496  1 09:18:51  p1       0:00 fgrep etty

This is what w tells me:
09:25:16$w
  9:25am  up 11 days, 20:01,  2 users,  load average: 4.51, 4.40, 4.08
User     Tty       Login@  Idle   JCPU   PCPU  What
losecco  tty02     1:37pm        95:59         xinit /bin/sh /u/losecco/.startx
losecco  ttyp2     2:15pm     7     44     44  telnet undhe9.hep.nd.edu

But the telnet session is OUTBOUND.  Funny thing is, while I can't get in
I can start other OUTBOUND telnet sessions.

Does an outbound telnet session count against the 2 user limit?

Very strange....  Is there a work around?  I need to have access to the
system via internet when I am not in the office.

-- 
John M. LoSecco			Phone:(219)239-6044          Fax:(219)239-5952
Physics Department		HEPnet/SPAN: UNDHEP::LOSECCO or 47344::LOSECCO
University of Notre Dame		Internet: losecco@undpdk.hep.nd.edu
Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 USA		Bitnet: losecco@undhep
From: davidsen@yeti.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Memory Cache and Unix
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:56:40 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <BM92yz.5n5@world.std.com>, apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:

|  Let's assume even a small 32K cache.  It seems extremely unlikely
|  (to me) that 32K worth of instructions are going to be executed
|  before some system call is made and Unix switches away from this
|  process to handle something else.
|  
|  Unless that "something else" is the shared text for the same program
|  that was running, isn't the cache now totally invalid and doesn't
|  it get refilled?

  Rick Farris has already handled the technical end of responding to
this, let me just hit the practical end. On a 486-33 I can disable the
256k main cache, or main and on chip cache. With main memory running
burst mode and interleave, using a LARGE make (realtime >1000 sec, cpu
>500 sec) I see about 20-25% increase in cpu time with external cache
off, about 90% increase with the on chip cache off. Even the little 8k
cache boosts performance by almost 2:1!

  I have seen similar results running loaded and unloaded, on 486-33 and
386-16 (64k cache), and with SCO Xenix, SCO UNIX, and Dell V.4. All the
theory in the world is fine, but in practive cache makes the system run
faster. That's not a dig against theory, but practice pays the bills.
-- 
	- bill davidsen (davidsen@crd.ge.com)
	GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
By analysis of usenet source, the hardest part of C to use is the comment
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,biz.sco.opendesktop,biz.sco.general
From: amdunn@mongrel.uucp (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Re: What does SCO "2 user limit" mean with ODT?
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 15:43:51 GMT
Keywords: sco odt 2 user limit logins


Question:  how does the 2-user limit apply to OTHER SVRx Desktop
           Eunices?  Like ESIX, and others...


I think SCO's version sucks... having a getty is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT
a user!   This means you can't do UUCP and Telnet on the same box at
all (since UUCICO wants to log in, but only occasionally -- the getty
has to be there all the time).

How do the others do it?


Andy
-- 
:-------------------------------------------------------------------------:
:  Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp)  ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn)   :
:  "AT&T thinks Usenet is an Underground organization" - are we really?   :
:-------------------------------------------------------------------------:
From: umcarls9@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Charles Carlson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: ISC Install disk problem
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:35:31 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

In <1992Apr9.160958.27180@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> ukrainec@nimios.eng.mcmaster.ca (Andrew Ukrainec) writes:

>Question 1: Has anyone had problems with ISC 3.0 Install disk?
>Question 2: What program (DOS diskcopy, cpdisk, dd ...) did you use
>            to back up the disk?

>I'm on my third disk.  The first had an unreadable block, and wouldn't copy.
>The second and third floppy replacements from the distributor, and they both
>have file system problems.  Any suggestions?

The install instructions (for 2.2)state you cannot use DOS's diskcopy to back up
the install disk, you must use dd.

Any other DOS program that can handle odd sector and track formats should
work as well.

Charles



-- 
/ Charles Carlson  umcarls9@ccu.Umanitoba.CA  
\ This .sig now available on a limited edition 2 record set, for 4 easy 
/ installments of $19.95 each. To order, please have your Visa or Mastercard
\ ready and phone: 1-800-555-1212, or send check or MO to 200-155 Carlton St.