HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Dell SVR4 (and Dell hardware)
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:39:23 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1992Aug24.220140.4277@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, rhf@decoy.uucp (25421-flood) writes:

| 3. The above considered, I think a well-built Intel box (i.e., with
| well-chosen subsystems) will run UNIX as reliably as SunOS will run it.
| Certainly a well-seasoned vintage like Interactive 5.3, less so the newer
| and less-robust V.4 versions.  But I still prefer V.4 for numerous reasons.

  In my experience V.4 implementations, not just Dell, are more reliable
than any V.3, at least in terms of staying up. There are glitches in one
or another, but I just don't spend time rebooting after panics, even
when I had Dell, Intel, and (vendor still has me under non-d) alpha and
beta versions running. To me the unforgivable sin is the panic (or with
some ISC versions the double panic).

  I know what you're saying, and since I have a Xenix system which
hasn't paniced in almost four years (public access unix, yet) I know
there's a lot to be said for tried and true, but in general I think the
V.4 kernel is just internally more robust.

  This discussion might want to move to wizards if it keeps going, I'm
just making a gentle disagreement about V.4, not trying to start a war.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: dvb@eis.com (David Van Beveren)
Subject: Re: What 'stune' parameters do you use for X386?
Organization: Emerald Isle Systems, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:39:31 GMT

dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat) writes:
: 
: But I've been running Microport SVR4.0.4 for a while now (3-4 months).
: And, lo and behold, I don't pop up here asking for help.  Guess what?  I've
: had no problems whatsoever, since getting a reasonable modem and switching
: to SAS.  I guess Microport SVR4 works too.  Did you ever think that some

(so, I guess you DID have problems at some point, which made you
switch async. drivers?)

: of us just don't feel the compulsion to go "nyah, nyah" all the time?
: 
: Of course, Microport does have this little pricing problem :-<  Sigh.

Nyah, Nyah!

: I expect that I will be moving to SVR4.2 from some other vendor.  Buying
: it new will probably been cheaper than Microport's upgrade.

Nyah, Nyah!

: 
: Which is a real shame, because they're a great bunch of guys.
: 

This (their being a 'great bunch of guys') is, of course, a prime
factor used in determining a products quality, right?


Party loyalty is alive and well. Sheesh.

-- 
David Van Beveren                          e-mail: dvb@eis.com
Consulting Engineer
EIS Ltd. Professional Software Services 
        "The opinions presented ARE those of Emerald Isle Systems!"
From: sprr@hippo.ru.ac.za (Mr R Rossouw)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: SCO make utility
Summary: Making a make utility
Keywords: SCO make gcc
Date: 27 Aug 92 09:21:09 GMT
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

Is it possible to make a make utility without having the Development kit
for SCO unix. I have the source code for the newest make but don't have
a make utiltity to create it. I also am trying to install the gcc
compiler but am having no succes without make.

I would appreciate any answers that can tell me what to do or point me
in a better direction for I have just started with Unix and might be a
asking a very stupid question!

Email me at riaan@rkw.rau.ac.za
Thanks

-- 
********************************************************************
Riaan Rossouw                             
P.O.Box X524                              email: riaan@rkw.rau.ac.za
Dept. Computer Science
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Avoiding the "8/16 Bit Problem"
Date: 26 Aug 92 14:57:10 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <18392@polstra.UUCP>, jdp@polstra.UUCP (John Polstra) writes:
| I'm trying to avoid any risk of the infamous "8 vs. 16-bit problem" by
| putting together a system that has only 16-bit cards.
| 
| [To those of you who don't know (not that I'm any expert on the subject),
| there is a potential problem in an ISA machine when you have both an
| 8-bit and a 16-bit card in the same 128K block of the address space.]
| 
| My question is, are the following cards 8-bit or 16-bit?
| 
|     Orchid ProDesigner IIs video controller
|     BusTek 542 SCSI controller (an Adaptec 1542 clone)

  The real 1542 is a 16 bit card, won't run in 8 bit sockets. The video
cards are hard to check, since many will run just fine in an 8 bit slot,
but slower. I guess you can run a display test with the card in an 8 bit
slot, and if it doesn't slow way down you know the other fingers are
there for show.

  I've never actually seen this problem, but it's probably a good idea
to avoid the possibility.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: staale@kvatro.no (Staale Deraas)
Subject: Signal problems in SCO to ISC port
Organization: Kvatro A/S, Trondheim, Norway
Date: 3 Sep 92 09:42:41


We are trying to port a program from SCO to ISC that uses signals. On assignment of signal
catching handlers, we order a blockmask to be used on signal delivery. Our observations
on ISC are as follows:
1) Blockmask supplied to sigaction systemcall is accepted.
2) A doublecheck reading blockmask after setting it (ref. 1) uncovers that the block bit
   for the specified signal is inverted according to specified blockmask.
3) We set up several signal catchers in this way.
4) On signal catching, the blockmask is different from all ordered blockmasks (ref. 1),
   but only for those block bits that we have ordered signal catchers for.

Is this an undocumented feature, or does there exist a patch to make SCO and ISC behave
in the same way?

Our current versions of ISC is 3.2.2. and SCO 3.2.2.
Please e-mail to deraas@kvatro.no
From: ppg@oasis.icl.co.uk (Philippe Goujard)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Lint and SCO 3.2.2
Date: 28 Aug 92 16:48:48 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: ICL, Bracknell, Berkshire, RG12 4SN, UK

I'm using SCO 3.2.2 and am relitively happy with the com,piler which 
understand ansi function declaration.
Unfortunately for a reason I dont understand lint doesnt like ansi declaration
which makes the code a little more difficult to debug.

Is there a way to tell lint to accept ansi declaration (though, I didnt see
anything in the man pages) or is it a work around that small but ennoying
problem?

Please answer by email since I think it's a very simple question. 
Thanks.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippe GOUJARD                              Email : ppg@oasis.icl.co.uk
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: dlucy@sandr.COM (Douglas Lucy)
Subject: Re: Ethernet Cards -- Questions
Organization: S&R Software, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:44:11 GMT
Summary: How to tune performance with 16 KB RAM

In article <1992Aug22.213857.5519@demesne.uucp> steph@demesne.uucp (Steph Marr) writes:
>   stevea@i88.isc.com (Steve Alexander) writes:
>
>   >The other advantage of the 8013 over the 8003 is that it has a 16K onboard 
>   >packet buffer, which lets you use 8K NFS reads, and larger TCP windows (I 
>   >use 24K around here).  It also lets you use full length TCP segments (1460 
>   >vs 1024), which when combined with the larger window makes things run a lot 
>   >faster.  On the 8K card, you only have 5 or 6 K of input packet buffers,
>   >which is not a lot when you're trying to keep up with a SparcStation or
>   >a 386/33.
>
>This is indeed the real win.  The more RAM there is on the card, the larger
>you can make the recieve window, and the more frames you can have outstanding
>on the card waiting for transmission.  As Steve points out, this can enable the
>card to receive multiple frames and the kernel can pull all of the available
>frames off the card during a single interrupt service.  Since there's a real
>amount of overhead to service each interrupt, getting more done per interrupt
>is a win (albeit not a huge one).  I've generally found 16KB to be the minimum
>magic number.

Are you talking about kernel parameters? Should I be configuring some
set of tunable parameters (this is SCO Unix 3.2.2) for better
peformance with my WD8013?

-- 
| Doug Lucy, Chief Geek | "It just doesn't matter" |  in /dev/null,   |
| S&R Software, Inc     |        -Bill Murray      |   no one can     |
| dlucy@sandr.COM       |                          | hear you scream  |
| Security Automation for Sensitive/Proprietary/Classified Infomation |
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Unix/Xwindows on a 486...Where/How much?
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:46:11 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <17ed9kINNonh@early-bird.think.com>, philip@think.com (Philip Mucci) writes:

| 	I am thinking of buying a 486, but only if it will run Unix and X
| windows. The other day I called an SCO dealer and they said that a fully
| configured software package (read: C compiler, Unix, and X - no NFS) for a
| single user would cost $1600.0 with student discount!! I might as well keep
| my amiga and buy unix for it. That's ridiculous. Could someone give me a
| rundown on what kind of Unix/X packages are available for the 486?

  I think you have two options:

Dell V.4, $995, totally complete and very reliable. Only installs off
tape.

Linux, non "real UNIX," totally free, changing rapidly, has gcc and
X11R5, lots of stuff ported already, lots more to do for fun.

Without damning any other vendors, I don't see much else in the way of
<$1000 software, after I drop the vendors who have delivered
unsupported, unreliable, or non-functional software to me or my personal
friends. Note, that is not every single vendor, if someone wants to
deliver software to my door I'll review it honestly and report here ;-)
I have enough parts left over after an upgrade last weekend to build a
4th 386 if I needed one. Right now the case is part of a bookcase and
the boards are stacked in a rack of "I'll never use this"  boards next
to the S-100 stuff.

-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
From: jrd@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: kermit alternatives
Date: 23 Aug 92 18:07:23 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <l9g6biINN44v@phad.hsc.usc.edu>, mcitron@phad.hsc.usc.edu (Mark Citron) writes:
> Can anyone suggest where I can find (pd preferably) a unix alternative to 
> kermit for moving files over a serial line from SCO Unix to DOS. Kermit seems
> slow and I assume X, Y, or Z modem would be faster. I just need the unix
> side in executable form.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark Citron
> 
> -- 
> Mark Citron
> mark@neurosci.usc.edu
> 
------------
	Performance depends strongly on a) which Kermits are being run, and
b) how they are configured. Best performance occurs with long packets and
sliding windows, as might be expected. On the SCO side I would recommend
C Kermit v5A which has both, and on the PC side MS-DOS Kermit. With those
the "efficiency" of the line is very high (provided your modem does not
get into the act by packet-izing and doing slow line turn arounds). A
number of commerical implementations of Kermit for DOS are less than stellar,
so try the master one noted above. CK 5A beta can be tested by grabbing
a copy from watsun.cc.columbia.edu, cd kermit/sw.
	Joe D.
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Anyone heard of the BocaBoard?
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:20:43 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1992Aug23.061838.16176@Unibase.SK.CA>, roe@Unibase.SK.CA (Roe Peterson) writes:

| Evan:  can you send me vendor info?  We'll order one instantly and
| I'll check it out.  Thanks.

Aw, postit. Lots of us are dealers, or owrk for them, or are married to
them, or whatever.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: setting UUCP g protocol parameters under ESIX SVR4.0.3
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 16:29:19 GMT

bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser) writes:

>Gee, Larry, we haven't heard much of this from you in a while.
> ... Making up for lost time, eh?  :-)

Well I'm tired of everyone bad mouthing Intel based UNIX when the
problem is in the specific end-user products. 


-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: Dell SVR4 (and Dell hardware)
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 16:23:46 GMT

rvdp@sow.econ.vu.nl (Ronald van der Pol) writes:

>-Try running Dell.  It runs and runs (right karl@ddsw1.msc.com).  My 
>-machine never crashes (unless I go poking in the kernel -- which I haven't
>-done in months).  It's not uncommon to have uptime here of 40-60 days -
>-and then the only reason the machine is rebooted is if the power goes
>-out (we don't have a UPS)..

>-My machine doesn't hang.  Maybe yours does, but mine doesn't.

>Dell SVR4 is probably the best Unix you can buy for a PC, but I think
>SunOS is a by far a more complete operating system.

I guess many folks get stuck running ESIX or some other garden variety
Unix and run into problems, then stereotype ALL Intel unixes as running
the same which isn't the case.
-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
From: karl@ttank.ttank.com (Karl Bunch)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Good Monitors for X windows
Date: 26 Aug 92 04:59:35 GMT
Organization: Think Tank Software, Norwalk, CA

I'm dreaming about getting a new monitor for my system.

I've got the old Multisync II (not the IIa) and am running Dell SVR4 2.2

I'm looking for recommendations on monitors with a good price/performance
(bang for buck) ratio.

Also, is a 17" monitor just a waste?  Should I go "all the way" to a 
19" or 20"?  I'm not even certain what card I'll drive it with, maybe
one of the ATI Ultra* cards.

I'm aware of the following monitors:

  Mfg/Model		  Size   DotPitch   Resolution       Retail Price
  ~~~~~~~~~               ~~~~   ~~~~~~~~   ~~~~~~~~~~       ~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Goldstar 1620+          16"     .28mm     1024x768         $1,399.00
  NEC 5FG                 17"??   ???mm     ?????????        $1,699.00
  Packard Bell PB8517     17"     ???mm     1280x1024        $1,829.00 
  Samsung Syncmaster 5C   17"flat .28mm     1280x1024        $1,399.00
  Seiko CM-1760LR         17"     .25mm!    1280x1024        $1,599.00
  Magnavox 20CM64         20"     .31mm     1280x1024        $1,999.00
  Packard Bell PB8520     20"     ???mm     1280x1024        $2,759.00
  Seiko CM-2050           20"     .31mm -w- Orchid Pro II    $2,399.00


If you have any information regarding the above mentioned monitors or
other monitors I should consider, please e-mail me.  I'll post a
summary later.

Thanks in advance,
Karl
-- 
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
% Karl Bunch                        ||| UUCP: ..!uunet!cerritos.edu!ttank!karl
% Think Tank Software               ||| INTERNET: karl@ttank.com
% 42.5% of all quoted statistics are made up, of those 23.185% are right. :-)
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Dell SVR4 (and Dell hardware)
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:35:48 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <BtwFuD.5rB@gator.rn.com>, larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:

| Since SCSI support was included in the base SVR4 package as
| distributed from USL, it works quite well.  Several vendors
| have enhanced the SCSI support beyond the USL sources -- but
| to date, no one has added support for a CD-ROM filesystem.

  One of the few real shortcomings of V.4 (and another reason why SCO
runs on one of my machines at home). Maybe someone could port the stuff
from some mature o/s like linux.

  Okay, so yes I'm joking about mature, but not about porting the code.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: disk mirroring
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 03:17:15 GMT

In article <Btv9Fn.1FH@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>chip@chinacat.unicom.com (Chip Rosenthal) writes:

>>I'm quite excited by this move.  Everybody I've talked to about the
>>Chantal drivers has told me pretty much the same story:  (1) the
>>drivers work very nicely, and (2) the company was the worst, most

>At one time, they were working in improving the ISC 3.2 2.0
>SCSI drivers -- they claim "increasing speed by 100%" -- to the
>best of my knowledge, these drivers never shipped -- 

>Their SCO drivers were very, very fast --

I'll say they are.  I have a client running SCO Unix, and we
measured 2meg/sec using iozone on a 16 meg file!
-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|ge-dab|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill

Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: Timed in sysvr4
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 12:27:39 GMT

peter@zeus.dialix.oz.au (Peter Wemm) writes:

>This is called "Good Will" - it is one of the many reasons *why* many people
>like Dell.

>You dont see people like SCO or ESIX doing this sort of thing.

Actually, I believe SCO has done this with their software, which is available
via ftp from uunet (or at least it was)..

>It's in the SVR4 vendors' best interests to push as much "example" code
>ported for SVR4 out the door as they can, as it can improve the
>SVR4 market as a whole as SVR4 becomes more accepted.

>Before you cry "but it's not there yet!", remember that they have 
>other things to do... (like handle that demand for "support"...)

I installed the 2.2 tape maybe 2 weeks ago.   I didn't install framemaker
(I am low on disk space on root) or TeX.   I've been told that once I played
with framemaker I would want it -- and framemaker is quite costly.

2.2 has been running (and running) here.  I removed the extra drivers
bringing my kernel down to 1.5 megabytes -- and now sar shows memory usage
running from 1100-1900 pages free depending on the time of day.

I also (yesterday) bumped my serial ports on the WorldBlazers from 38400
to 56700 baud.  With the Digiboard CX drivers, 50 baud becomes 56700, 75
becomes 76kbaud, etc.  It looks rather strange to have the 50 baud in the
gettydefs (I have the modems locked at 56700)..  So far, no problems.  
Throughput still runs from 1400-2100 for TurboPEP -- but to the best of my
knowledge, none of the machines I connect with have their WB modems locked
at high DTE speeds and have the horsepower to support it.

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org (Christoph Badura)
Subject: Re: SVR4 tar
Organization: Guru Systems/Funware Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 19:50:24 GMT

In <Bt8qHw.9En@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>there was a bug in tar as distributed in the SVR4 source code -- and
>Dell was the only vendor to find and fix the bug before shipping --

Bull. There are (at least) two different tar formats in use. They
differ in how directories get flagged in the archive. The SVR4 source
used different formats in different versions.
-- 
				Christoph Badura  ---  bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org

ISO? Nicht immer, aber immer M-vfter.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: hoang1@litwin.com (Dave Jackson)
Subject: ioctl request SIOCGARP fail in SCO (ARP protocol)
Organization: Litwin Process Automation
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:24:54 GMT

Hi,
I'm writing a program to read the ARP cache.
But I have the problem when using SIOCGARP in SCO/ODT ver 2.0:
  
  .
  .
  .
  int soc;
  struct arpreq ar;
  .
  .
  .
  /*
  **  Execute the IOCTL to read the ARP cache, if the host is not
  **  currently in the cache, this ioctl will fail.
  */
  if ((i = ioctl( soc, SIOCGARP, &ar )) != 0)

  It's always failed and return:
    errno == ENXIO
    ioctl: No such device or address

But if I test in DEC5000/200 Ultrix 4.2 or SUN/sparc OS 4.1.1 is ok.

Do I miss anything in SCO env.

I will post or mail my source code if you request.

Thanks in advance,

Ted Hoang
Litwin Process Automation
Email:hoang1@dynsim1.litwin.com
From: hjanssen@cbnewse.cb.att.com (hank janssen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Sending files from UNIX pc to MSDOS. Possible.?? How??
Date: 26 Aug 92 21:27:06 GMT
Organization: AT&T


Are there PD utilities out there that allow the easy moving of MSDOS files
to ATT UNIX SYSV 4.0 (For the 486 pc) that reside on the same disk.

Or device drivers for unix/msdos that allow the floppy disks to be read
on both operating systems..???

Any help and or suggestions are greatly apreciated.

Regards,

Hank Janssen.
 
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------+------------------
The full moon shines bright. I gaze long at its beauty,	   |    Hank Janssen
I am overwhelmed. "Isn't it lovely," you say -		   | 	    (CPU)
         I'd forgotten you were there.			   |att!ihlpb!hjanssen
From: shite@sinkhole.unf.edu (Stephen Hite)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: SAS 2.0
Date: 23 Aug 92 18:03:55 GMT
Organization: University of North Florida, Jacksonville

In article <BtE05u.CEA@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>
>I think ESIX could win more sales if they bundled their OS with
>Merge, but then they would have to increase the price -- and they
>would be close to what Dell offers (in price)...
>
  Amen.  The going rate of ~$400 as an add-on is too high, IMHO.

Steve Hite
shite@sinkhole.unf.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish)
Subject: Re: 9track 1/2" tape drives
Summary: Pertec?
Organization: Mindcraft, Inc.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:04:55 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.013436.6127@tous.oau.org> rbt@tous.oau.org
(Robert B. Tate) writes:
>The Cipher F880 is not a scsi drive. It will need an adaptor of somesort
>to go between the Adaptec and the drive to make it work.

If it uses the Pertec interface that used to be pretty much
the norm on 9-track tape drives, one way to use the drive
would be to buy an interface kit (AT bus card, wiring,
software) from Overland Data in San Diego.  Call
1-800-PC9-TRAK for more information.

It's possible that Cipher can install a SCSI interface in
the drive.  I priced such a modification for a Kennedy
drive not long go, and it would have cost about twice as
much as the Overland Data setup.
--

    Chuck Karish          karish@mindcraft.com
    (415) 323-9000 x117   karish@forel.stanford.edu