HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: vandel@di.epfl.ch (Jean-Marc Vandel)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: ufs boot partitions are certain death!
Date: 25 Jan 93 15:31:30 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
In-reply-to: blatter@amiga.physik.unizh.ch's message of 23 Jan 93 18:22:30 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.182230.3822@rzu-news.unizh.ch>
blatter@amiga.physik.unizh.ch (Martin A. Blatter) writes:

>   amiga.physik is probably the busiest Amix machine in the world. And

And litamiga.epfl.ch the second busiest ;-)

>   it has, you guessed it, an *ufs* boot partition. We've yet to see a
>   munged inode. The boot partition is probably being fsck'ed 4 times
>   a week (due to frequent reboots). Maybe we were just lucky, but I'd 
>   rather suspect that you had media problems or a broken version of
>   the ufs. Do you use Amix 2.1 with all patches applied?

Are you really sure to use ufs ? I installed Amix 2.1 asking for an ufs root
partition, but when I did a 'showrdb' I was very surprised to see :

#    Name               Start   Blocks   Size      Flags
								     
 1:  UNIX_Root            128   307200   150 MB    mb P0 C0 F0x554e4901
								     ^^
 2:  UNIX_Swap         307328    40960    20 MB    Mb P0 C0 F0x444f5301
 3:  UNIX_Boot         348288     4096     2 MB    MB P2 C2 F0x554e4900

Yes, that's an s5 partition ! There must be a bug in the install script :-(

Now, what's the easiest way to reformat this partition in ufs without having to
reinstall everything ? Is it worth the time spent ?
--


                                              Jean-Marc Vandel


-------------------------------------+---------------------------------
  Swiss Institute of Technology      |     E-mail : vandel@di.epfl.ch
  DI-LIT                             |     Home   : +41 21 634-1846
  INN 139			     |	   Work   : +41 21 693-2054
  CH-1015 Lausanne (Switzerland)     |     Fax	  : +41 21 693-4330
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: rhealey@kas.helios.mn.org (Rob Healey)
Subject: downloadable PS fonts on AmigaUNIX
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 20:22:11 GMT
Organization: Rob's home system, Hopkins, MN


	Has anybody set up the Type1 font capability of AmigaUNIX's
	postscript printing system, i.e. uploaded the font list
	from their printer, stored the list in
	/etc/lp/{printer-name}/residentfonts,made the /usr/share/lib/hostfontdir
	directory and then made a valid map file in that directory?
	i.e.
	Palatino-Bold /usr/local/fonts/Type1/PB______.pfa

	inside the /usr/share/lib/hostfontdir/map file.

	According the the USL 4.2 documentation on the Postscript subsystem
	you are supposed to be able to put ANY Type1 font in the list of
	supported fonts by listing the font name and a full path to it in
	the map file in hostfontdir. I'm wondering if anybody has tried this
	on AMigaUNIX, it appears /usr/lib/lp/postscript/download supports
	this capability but as I don't have the Type1 fonts or a printer to
	try them out on I'm curious about whether it actually WORKS on
	AmigaUNIX.

		-Rob
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: crash@ckctpa.UUCP (Frank "Crash" Edwards)
Subject: Re: Bru between Amix and Ados via QIC-150
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 02:13:45 GMT
Reply-To: crash%ckctpa@myrddin.sybus.com (Frank "Crash" Edwards)
Organization: Edwards & Edwards Consulting

greggs@izar.nersc.gov (Gregg D. Schoenberger) writes:
>	Anyone tried using bru via tape. I have no problem via floppy, but
>not much luck using the 3070 and a 2.04 machine with a GVP screaming
>tape ( Wangtek ). I checked the tape on amix after writing, it was
>ok. On the Ados machine, it seeks for a second and hangs the whole
>scsi bus ( I think, no disk or tape activity happens ) but the
>machine has not crashed. I did use a 30K stack.
>	Ideas anyone??

I used to use BRU to get files from Amix to/from ADOS via tape.  I own
a Viper 2150S and never had a problem with BRU (once I was able to
remember the various options, like -P and friends).

>Gregg D. Schoenberger              | email    - Schoenberger@nersc.gov

Sorry, it works for me.
-- 
Frank "Crash" Edwards          Edwards & Edwards Consulting
Fax:  813/786-6526             crash%ckctpa@myrddin.sybus.com, but please
Home: 813/786-3675             don't ask UUNET to route it -- it's sloooow.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey)
Subject: Re: Upgrading to X11R5??
Organization: DigiBoard Inc., Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:49:06 GMT

In article <Bradb.0od3@nesbbx.rain.COM>, Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**) writes:
|> What advantages would I see if I upgraded to X11R5 as opposed to staying
|> with the R4 stuff?
|>  
	X11R5 monochrome server is more efficiant, faster and less buggy that
	the X11R4 monochrome server. It is also less of a space pig and
	utilizes dynamic librarys alot better.

	The font and resource edit changes are nice but I suppose not
	critical. I find X11R5 with tvtwm works ALOT better and in alot
	less memory than X11R4+OL. The mono X11R5 server also handles
	overscan automagically, the R4 server requires you to explain to it
	that it needs overscan... B^(.

		-Rob
From: greggs@izar.nersc.gov (Gregg D. Schoenberger)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Bru between Amix and Ados via QIC-150
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:03:50 GMT
Organization: National Energy Research Supercomputer Center, LLNL


	Anyone tried using bru via tape. I have no problem via floppy, but
not much luck using the 3070 and a 2.04 machine with a GVP screaming
tape ( Wangtek ). I checked the tape on amix after writing, it was
ok. On the Ados machine, it seeks for a second and hangs the whole
scsi bus ( I think, no disk or tape activity happens ) but the
machine has not crashed. I did use a 30K stack.

	Ideas anyone??
-- 
Gregg D. Schoenberger              | email    - Schoenberger@nersc.gov
Sun Systems Administration         | phone    - (510) 422-9331
NERSC Distributed Computing Group  | mailstop - L-560 
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory      | USnail   - P.O. 808 \n Livermore, CA 94550
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey)
Subject: Re: X11 on Amiga 3000 running amigaUnix
Organization: DigiBoard Inc., Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:26:24 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.005359.23879@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, jhp3x@fulton.seas.Virginia.EDU (Jeffrey Howard Porter) writes:
|> I know that several people have asked this question before - but this
|> thread came up again in applications - 
|> 
|> Rumor (who listens to these anymore :-) has it that C= might release a
|> new version of AUX that support 040 and possible better X resolution
|> through AGA - now I have a 3000 (but hopefully I can get an AGA card
|> for it whenever those come out) ---- and I want to know if ANYONE has
|> heard ANYTHING... ??? Anyone?? 
|> 
	AGA still has the bitplane vs. chunky problem although at x4
	speed 16 color productivity might be bareable.

	X is best done via a chunky board. The UNIX kernel needs to be
	modified so drivers can be loaded on boot to handle different
	display adapters.

|> Also - will stuff written for SVR4 (i.e. Word Perfect for UNIX) work
|> on my A3000UX?? (Perhaps I should have included this in a separate
|> post - I apologize - but hey - I just hate to waste screen space...
|> 
	Of COURSE! AmigaUNIX is SVR4.0 API wise. Word Pregnant will NEVER
	port to AmigaUNIX unless someone else eats the cost of the port
	and we know C= will never do that. B^(. Any modern application that
	Runs on Solaris 2.1 or Intel SVR4 CAN run on AmigaUNIX but probably
	won't due to the size of the AmigaUNIX market. B^(. Lotus, databases
	and a whole lot of other stuff would work too. I heard there was
	a completed Oracle port for AmigaUNIX but it was never let out. B^(.
	I heard they spent an outrageous amount of money on the port too,
	too bad they didn't spend it on Word Pregnant instead...

		-Rob
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey)
Subject: Re: ufs boot partitions are certain death!
Organization: DigiBoard Inc., Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:30:38 GMT

In article <1k32hsINNmss@zikzak.apana.org.au>, zik@zikzak.apana.org.au (Michael Saleeba) writes:
|> rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey) writes:
|> >	ufs boot partitions are only poison on < 2.1, for 2.1 AmigaUNIX it is
|> >	the only way to go.
|> 
|> Interestingly, this was running Amiga UNIX 2.1. And somewhat less
|> interestingly IT JUST DID IT AGAIN! Under patch level 2a as well!
|> Argh! More random files disappearing, more fun with lost+found :-(
|> 
	Offhand I'd say the problem is somewhere in hardware or else the
	drive isn't jumped properly, i.e. no sync negotiation and such.

	I know of a dozen 2.1 sites that regularly beat the crap out of the
	ufs file system and all have ufs for the root partition. Most
	have heavy NFS use as well.

		-Rob
From: Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**)
Subject: Upgrading to X11R5??
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.27d beta (Jan 09 1993)
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:23:54 PST
Organization: NESBBX Bulletin Board System


What advantages would I see if I upgraded to X11R5 as opposed to staying
with the R4 stuff?
 
I mean I read what R5 gives you and (personally) it didn't seem to add
that many new features that I really need right now.
 
Is is faster?  Less bugs?  As always, any input would be appreciated.
 
(BTW, anybody using X11R5 with a DMI Resolver?  With Motif?)
 
Thanks again,
 
Brad.

-- 
Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey)
Subject: Re: Unix for my A4000?
Organization: DigiBoard Incorporated, Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:20:41 GMT

In article <VANDEL.93Jan21162101@disuns2.epfl.ch>, vandel@di.epfl.ch (Jean-Marc Vandel) writes:
|> In article <C16Iz8.4ry@gw.digibd.com> rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey) writes:
|> 
|> > Hmmm, you SURE it's 2.2? CATS recently announced the 2.1pl1a
|> > patch disk was available through them, maybe your pal confused
|> > this patch disk as 2.2? This is the same disk that was cut
|> > last spring if I remember properly.
|> 
|> Isn't 2.1p2a the latest patch disk available ?
|> 
	Ooops, 2.1p2a is what I meant. Slip of the fingers there; sorry...
	This disk has been out for several months so it's nothing new. All
	that's new is that CATS is now offering it instead of having to chase
	down a non existant UNIX person to send it to you. However, I'm
	not sure if Joe Schmoe can get the disk from CATS or if it's
	limited to developers only. Too bad it's got AT&T/USL/Novell/????
	code in it otherwise it could be posted on boards and archive
	sites.

		-Rob
From: Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: X11 Unusable under AMIX??
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:09:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: nesbbx.Bradb.0oxb
Organization: NESBBX Bulletin Board System
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.27d beta (Jan 09 1993)


In <1993Jan23.182711.3509@wellserv.atl.ga.us>, paul@wellserv.atl.ga.us (Paul Wells) writes:
> Or, you could use a .exrc which contains 'set notimeout' and the arrow keys
> will work consistently.  I forget the attribution to this solution; the man
> page for ex doesn't mention this option.
 
Wow, thanks for that tidbit.  Is there any performance penalty for doing
that?  [like having to wait longer for the ":" prompt after hiting esc?]
 
Brad.

-- 
Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey)
Subject: Re: Upgrading to X11R5??
Organization: DigiBoard Inc., Eden Prairie, MN
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:33:13 GMT

In article <rick.728052821@eros>, rick@imp.phys.ethz.ch (Riccardo Sibilia) writes:
|> Ok, I accidently sent the previous version of this article to someone per
|> e-mail, having pressed r instead of f in nn, so I apologize.
|> 
|> What I asked is if someone could ftp the X11R5 port to some amix site,
|> so that everybody can profit of it w/o having to recompile... I tried
|> to compile the dist. with the patches using the gcc-2.2.2 but did not
|> get the X-server to run, althrouth the rest was working ok. 
|> 
	I never compiled X11R5 under gcc 2.2.2, only the stock 1.4x. Try
	using that and see what happens.

		-Rob
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
From: paul@wellserv.atl.ga.us (Paul Wells)
Subject: Re: X11 Unusable under AMIX??
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:26:34 GMT
Organization: Wells Services Company Limited

In <Bradb.0oxb@nesbbx.rain.COM> Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**) writes:
>In <1993Jan23.182711.3509@wellserv.atl.ga.us>, paul@wellserv.atl.ga.us (Paul Wells) writes:
>> Or, you could use a .exrc which contains 'set notimeout' and the arrow keys
>> will work consistently.  I forget the attribution to this solution; the man
>> page for ex doesn't mention this option.
> 
>Wow, thanks for that tidbit.  Is there any performance penalty for doing
>that?  [like having to wait longer for the ":" prompt after hiting esc?]
> 
Yes, vi does not 'timeout', it waits for a subsequent character;
hence, any screen update that would be performed is delayed.
-- 
Paul Wells			paul@wellserv.atl.ga.us
From: vandel@di.epfl.ch (Jean-Marc Vandel)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: Unix for my A4000?
Date: 21 Jan 93 15:21:01 GMT
	<C16Iz8.4ry@gw.digibd.com>
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
In-reply-to: rhealey@rogue.digibd.com's message of 21 Jan 93 01:04:19 GMT

In article <C16Iz8.4ry@gw.digibd.com> rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey) writes:

> Hmmm, you SURE it's 2.2? CATS recently announced the 2.1pl1a
> patch disk was available through them, maybe your pal confused
> this patch disk as 2.2? This is the same disk that was cut
> last spring if I remember properly.

Isn't 2.1p2a the latest patch disk available ?
--


                                              Jean-Marc Vandel


-------------------------------------+---------------------------------
  Swiss Institute of Technology      |     E-mail : vandel@di.epfl.ch
  DI-LIT                             |     Home   : +41 21 634-1846
  INN 139			     |	   Work   : +41 21 693-2054
  CH-1015 Lausanne (Switzerland)     |     Fax	  : +41 21 693-4330
From: Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: Unix for my A4000?
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:07:39 GMT
Organization: NESBBX Bulletin Board System
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.27d beta (Jan 09 1993)


In <C1ACBy.3oz@gw.digibd.com>, rhealey@rogue.digibd.com (Rob Healey) writes:
>      Were's the official C= representitive that will explicitly state
>      this? This is still rumor mill if it comes from a dealer.
>      
>      C= itself doesn't have the in house talent to do an '040 UNIX port
 
Well, for what it's worth a local developer mentioned to me that an
upgraded version of Unix was in the works as well.  I hope so...
 
Oh, and in a (possibly) related development, C= no longer sells the 3
button mouse used in the A3000UX.  A sign?  I don't know, all I know is
that I wanted one. :-(
 
(And the mouse thing I heard from a C= marketing person who bothered to
call me back on their own time!)
 
Brad.

-- 
Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM
From: Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: Trashed root floppy?
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:12:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: nesbbx.Bradb.0oxl
Organization: NESBBX Bulletin Board System
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.27d beta (Jan 09 1993)


In <1993Jan23.230811.13426@news.acns.nwu.edu>, skrenta@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rich Skrenta) writes:
> The atdevs line in the proto file (/usr/amiga/src/cmd/ID/proto) is wrong.
> Point it at /usr/amiga/lib/atdevs instead of /usr/amiga/etc/atdevs.
> You should see atdevs in your /usr/amiga/lib.
 
Thanks!  I'll try that tonight.  [I'd name my first born after you but
she's already attached to her name ;-)]
 
Brad.

-- 
Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM
From: Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM (**)
Subject: Re: X11 Unusable under AMIX??
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
X-NewsSoftware: BBX-UMB 0.27d beta (Jan 09 1993)
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:08:16 PST
Organization: NESBBX Bulletin Board System


I just wanted to take a moment to thank everyone who responded with the
suggestion to use the "hjkl" keys to scroll around in vi.
 
My only experience with other Unix machines is an 88K system with several
CPUs and very few users - it seems to have enough power to keep up with
my scrolling.
 
Brad.  (PS I would have posted a follow-up to another article, but they
don't seem to be here anymore :-()

-- 
Bradb@nesbbx.rain.COM
Xref: sparky comp.unix.internals:2165 comp.unix.wizards:5647 comp.sys.sun.misc:6493
From: guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.wizards,comp.sys.sun.misc
Subject: Re: lwp (threads) in SunOS kernel
Keywords: lwp, threads, SunOS, kernel
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:00:07 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.internals
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara

>That is, in addition to the lightweight processes library (-llwp) provided for
>users, there *appears* to be support for *kernel* threads.  Perhaps this is in
>order to support multiple asynchronous I/O operations and the like.

That's precisely why it's there.

They basically stuck code derived from "-llwp" into the kernel.

>Is this all a fluke?

No.

>Is there support (eg.  a manual or commented header file) for using
>threads in the kernel?

No.  It was stuck in (4.1 was the first release with it) only to support
the async I/O calls; proceed at your own risk.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
From: subra@bynar.austin.ibm.com (Sivarama Subramanian)
Subject: Question about controlling processes
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:53:12 GMT
Reply-To: subra@bynar.austin.ibm.com (Sivarama Subramanian)
Organization: IBM Austin, TX

Hi folks,

                                          forks
               forks                   |-------->Process3
   Process1 --------------> Process2-----
                                       |-------->Procees4
                                          forks
I want to make Process2 controlling process and let Process4
      belong to a backgroung process group. When Process2 exits
      Process3 should get SIGHUP signal. I want to test this
      scenerio.

Can anyone give me some insights?


1). What is a controlling process?
         My understanding is that the controlling process is the one
         which establishes the connection to the controlling terminal.
         Is it correct and if so how to make a connection to
         controlling terminal?
2) How to make a set of processes belong to foregound and background
    processes?
From: brian@lpl.arizona.edu (Brian Ceccarelli 602/621-9615)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: System Call which Returns Executing Program Name?
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:02:19 GMT
Organization: Lunar & Planetary Laboratory, Tucson AZ.


I don't care what those people say about you guys!
You guys are GREAT!   Thanks to all of you for your help!


Sincerely,


Brian Ceccarelli
----------------
brian@gamma1.lpl.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.wizards,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: mueller@delta.cs.fsu.edu (Frank Mueller)
Subject: Re: lwp (threads) in SunOS kernel
Keywords: lwp, threads, SunOS, kernel
Organization: Florida State University Computer Science
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 17:54:47 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.155627.15411@cbnews.cb.att.com>, adh@cbnews.cb.att.com (andrew.d.hay) writes:
> jrm2k@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Jeff Michel) writes:
> "Is this all a fluke?  Is there support (eg. a manual or commented header
> "file) for using threads in the kernel?  What differences exist between the
> "threads at the kernel level and at the user level?  Is it safe to use kernel
> "threads in a device driver?
> 
> i was told [apropos my q. is lwp in the sunos5 compat lib] that *no*
> special kernel resources were added to support lwp; it's all in the
> standard c lib.

But there is a compile flag to configure a SunOS kernel which supports lwp's.
In fact, when you look at some of the OS sources, you will notice that the
kernel differs in some places if lwp's are supported.

There might even be threads at the kernel level. Consider this: Asynchronous I/O
via aread() and awrite() is only supported when lwp's are supported by the
kernel as well. This leads me to believe that lwp's are used to implement
asynchr. I/O. This doesn't surprise, in fact, that's what threads are for besides
other things. Now, maybe one could write kernel threads under SunOS 4.1 similar
to asynchr. I/O...

Of course, you can try to migrate to SunOS 5.x where threads are in the kernel.
If you can get the OS installed, that is.

Frank
mueller@cs.fsu.edu
From: faisal@westech (Faisal Chowdhury)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Memory allocation in kernel
Keywords: 386ix
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:39:31 GMT

I am trying to write a driver for a audio board for ISC unix SVR3.
I need a 64k DMAable buffer (must be addressable by a single segment
regiter.) for data transfer between the driver and the audio borad's
DTA/ATD controller.  I do not have reference manual for Kernel Support
Routines at this time. I will appreciate any suggestion. Please e-mail
or post (e-mail preferable) any suggestion.

Thanks in advance.

Faisal Chowdhury
(713)972-4631 (W)
faisal@was.waii.com
      or
faisal@sugar.NeoSoft.Com
--
Faisal
Western Atlas Software, Houston, TX
From: armitage@milton.u.washington.edu (Armitage)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Unix device drivers
Date: 29 Jan 93 04:43:25 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: milton.u.washington.edu
Keywords: device drivers

Well, I'll bet that this is an often-asked question, but...

Could someone please recommend a document on writing device drivers under
Unix, in particular filesystem implementations.  I would prefer an online
[read free ;)] doc, but I would also appreciate book recommendations.

Thanks.

-- 

                       [gcc]                                     [g++]
/*--------------------------            // ---------------------------
  Peter (Z-man) Zatloukal               //  Peter (Z-man) Zatloukal
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.wizards
From: md@sco.COM (Michael Davidson)
Subject: Re: reading a processes u-area
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:20:08 GMT


chare@unilabs.uucp (Chris Hare) writes:

>In an attempt to understand more about how the kernel operates, I am trying
>to write a version of crash.  As a result, I will in several different
>instances need access to a processes u-block.  I would prefer to try and do
>this without having to make use of system-specific system calls, although
>if this is going to be the only method, then I guess I will have to resort
>to it.

The precise mechanism by which you get access to the u-block for a
process is inevitably going to be *very* system specific regardless
of whether you use a system call if one happens to be available
(eg the RDUBLK subfunction of sysi86() on Intel SVr3 and SVr4 systems)
or if you just go poking around in /dev/kmem and /dev/swap.

To be honest a lot of the stuff that "crash" does is inherently
very system specific since it has knowledge of internal kernel
data structures that may be implemented differently (if, indeed, they
exist at all) on different systems.

One of the secrets of writing portable code is to recognise which
parts of the code are inherently non-portable and implement those
functions in a separate module with a clean interface do that they
can be re-implemented easily when you have to port to another system.
Just put the function for accessing the u-block in a separate module,
implement it with whatever support is available on your system and
quit worrying about it ....

(Unfortunately, even if you *do* port this code to another system
I hope you realise that there is a good chance that the u-block you
get back won't look much like the one on the first system ....)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.wizards,comp.sys.sun.misc