HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jr@inset.com (JR Oldroyd)
Subject: Re: Mach 3.0 on 386/486
Reply-To: "JR Oldroyd" <jr@onion.inset.com>
Organization: The Instruction Set, Waltham, MA, USA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:19:49 GMT

Recently, ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com wrote:
> 
> > In article <lychan.713673949@yak>, lychan@socs.uts.edu.au (91031322 l y chan) writes:
> > 
> > I'm looking for a version of Mach 3.0 that will run on Intel 386/486.
> > I would also like to know the hardware requirements for that.    
>
> ...
>
> Do NOT, repeat, do NOT buy Mach from Mt. Xinu!! One of my friends (I graduated
> from Carnegie Mellon and was taught by the current Mach leader) was on the Mach
> team and he said tha Mt. Xinu's version was several revs behind and not quality
> work.  Why pay lots of money when the CMU i386 version is complete and
> standalone (now at least).
> 

This is a grossly inappropriate recommendation, which I feel must be
countered.  I would say, DO, repeat DO, rush out and buy it from mt Xinu.

I have been using the mt Xinu product for something like 9 months, now.
I can say most categorically that it is certainly a quality product.  In
fact, I would go so far as to say that it is one of the BETTER quality
products that I have seen on the market for some time.

Consider... buying a commercial product, such as mt Xinu's, means:

	- You don't have to port raw stuff to your system - the
	  commercial product comes with easy-to-use installation
	  software.  (Takes 20-30 minutes to install; compare that
	  with doing the Mach net-RPC install.)

	- You don't have to port every single subsystem that you
	  need - the commercial product comes complete with:

		- Mach kernel
		- BSD environment
		- full networking support
		- full on-line documentation
		- X-windows server and full toolkit
		- GNU C compiler
		- many public-domain tools pre-compiled and tested

	  (Just consider the effort and time you'd need to do it all
	  yourself).

	  In fact, from mt Xinu, you get more than you do from CMU.
	  For example, mt Xinu had Color X support and full SCSI tape
	  support before CMU did, I believe.

	- You are getting a stable product.  The *latest* release is
	  frequently not the best - all new software takes time to
	  shake the bugs out.  mt Xinu only incorporate changes, after
	  they're proven.

	  On this front, I can say that I am very impressed that the
	  software they ship really does work, and it works the way
	  I expect it to.  I have found very few bugs.  Those that I
	  did encounter were fixed very quickly.

	- You are getting a supported product.  mt Xinu's support has
	  been excellent, as far as I'm concerned.  They offer on-line
	  updates and information.  They offer very quick turn around
	  of any problems you send them.

As far as I'm concerned, it is definately worth the money.

	-jr
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: rstevens@noao.edu (W. Richard Stevens)
Subject: parallel network driver - questions
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:37:49 GMT

Does anyone have any experience with the parallel network driver in
Mach 3.0 (kernel/i386at/if_par.[ch]) ? I'm considering porting it to
BSD/386 and was wondering what kind of performance I could expect?

I'm trying to figure out how to connect a laptop to an existing network,
other than with SLIP.  It seems the parallel-to-Ethernet people (Xircom)
refuse to let out the information on how to write a driver for their
hardware, so using the ubiquitous parallel port as a point-to-point link
seems the best way to go.  Are most 386 parallel ports bidirectional so
that they would support this usage?  Thanks,

	Rich Stevens  (rstevens@noao.edu)
From: lusk@barber.cs.unc.edu (John Lusk)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Mach 3.0 on DECstation 5000/120? 3100?
Summary: feasibility?
Date: 1 Sep 92 21:54:28 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


As part of an independent study in Mach, we'd like to install 3.0 on
some machine here in our department.  Local rumor has it that we won't
have much luck installing it on a DEC 5000/120, due to a problem with
a particular device (sorry, I can't remember details).  Can anyone
confirm or refute this?  (The same local rumor states that we would be
able to install it on a 5000/100, if only we had one.)

If the problem IS due to a particular device, how hard would it be to
cobble together a device driver for someone who's never done it
before?  (I know it's a silly question, but . . . .)

Thanks.

John.
-- 

(lusk@cs.unc.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: staylor@snidely.UUCP (Scott G. Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: SCSI tape hangs on close
Date: 1 Sep 92 04:58:04 GMT

I have just installed a Tandberg 3600 SCSI tape on my Mt Xinu
Mach 2.6 system.  Reading and writing work fine, except that
when the device (st0) is closed, it hangs the process forever.
I can usually break the hang by unloading the tape and reloading
it, but sometimes not even this works.  

The tape drive is the only device on my Adaptec 1542B controller
(this is an ESDI system).  The same controller and tape drive
work perfectly on my BSD386 0.1 system, so I would assume that
the controller/tape subsystem is not broken.

Any suggestions?

				-scott
---
Scott G. Akmentins-Taylor        InterNet: staylor@snidely.pmdr.wlv.ca.us
MRY Systems				   staylor@cerfnet.com
                                     UUCP: snidely!staylor@wlv.iipo.gtegsc.com

	----	"Jerumani par Latvijas valsts presidentu"    ----
From: beckerd@libra.cs.unc.edu (David Becker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: gmake
Summary: why not
Date: 2 Sep 92 19:16:10 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


Has anyone converted the mach3 makefiles from CMU syntax into gmake syntax?

Is ${MKIDIRS;.*;${INSTALLDIR}/&} supposed to be a pattern substition?

-- 
		``So you put 2 and 2 together and came up with 22?''
					``Yes!''
David Becker beckerd@cs.unc.edu			- Northern Exposure
From: dangel@bloch.informatik.uni-kl.de (Andreas Dangel (DA Milojicic))
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: applications running directly on mach 3
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:01:21 GMT
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany


Hi there,

we investigate the behaviour of applications running on MACH 3.0 in terms of
suitability for task migration. It's no problem to find programs for our
measurements running on unix server (4.3 BSD), but we need also applications
running directly on mach microkernel using the MACH 3 kernel interfaces.

Especially (simple) distributed programs, running on two or more hosts, are
appreciated. 

Thanks in advance for any help (c sources or hints where to get them).

Andreas Dangel , Universitaet Kaiserslautern, germany
Internet: dangel@informatik.uni-kl.de
From: chase@lowanda.isi.edu (Dale Chase)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Dell 486 & WD1009
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:50:51 GMT


Anyone have success getting Mach 3 up on a Dell 486 with the Western
Digital 1009 disk controller?  Any hints as to jumper settings or
config parameters would be extremely valuable.
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu (Ernest Prabhakar)
Subject: Mach 3.0 and Windows NT
Reply-To: ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu (Ernest Prabhakar)
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:45:28 GMT

[I'm probably going to regret this]
Could anyone clarify for me the relationship/similarity between Mach 3.0 and  
the micro-kernel portions of Windows NT.  That, I don't want to get into DOS  
vs. Unix compatibility.  I just want to know what low level features each  
'core' supports.  I've heard that lots of Mach developers went to Microsoft to  
build NT, and I've been told they have a lot in common, but I am curious as to  
details.

I know (or at least think) that Mach supports the following:
- user-level light weight processes (threads)
- a common IPC format using Mach ports, and MIG
- dynamically loadable kernel device drivers (or something like that)
- flexibly memory management

Are these facilities all available in NT?  In the same fashion?  Is there some  
sort of isomorphism?

I think this would be an interesting discussion to have on the Net, but if I  
get significant e-mail on this I will summarize.

Thanks for your time,
- Ernie P. 


--
Ernest N. Prabhakar                  Caltech High Energy Physics
Member, League for Programming Freedom (league@prep.ai.mit.edu)
CaJUN President        NeXTMail:ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu
"...and ourselves, your servants for Jesus sake." - II Cor 4:5b
#import <std/disclaimer.h>
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: montasmm@ntmtv.UUCP (Medi Montaseri)
Subject: How do I get a Mach talk video from OSF
Originator: montasmm@nmtvs299
Reply-To: montasmm@ntmtv.UUCP (Medi Montaseri)
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 00:49:34 GMT

Hello comp.os.mach

I just learned that OSF has some videotapes on talks
concerning Mach, and I 'd like to get a phone number or email.

Thank you
	Medi

-- 
Medi
E_mail: ntmtv!montasmm@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: BNR2SS, Mach, and The Lawsuit (was Re: GNU kids on the block?)
Date: 27 Aug 92 20:43:40 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <59917@mimsy.umd.edu> jds@cs.umd.edu (James da Silva) writes:
+
+Damn.  Looks like AT&T/USL has already won if a place with as deep pockets
+and as long a history/reputation in the university Unix community as CMU is

There you have it, deep pockets, filled by corporations, who will
look twice if the university battles one of the 'deep pockets'. UC
Berkeley has a little bit of 'standing' since it has the state
sponsorship (although that is dwindling too), where as a more
private organization may be much more atune to corporate donor
interrests.

But I thought Mach was developed by assistence provided by DARPA, and
hence not dependent on corporate dollars. Well, maybe that was the
initial work..
-- 

John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: slatteng@mtxinu.COM (Dave Slattengren)
Subject: Re: SCSI tape hangs on close
Reply-To: slatteng@mtxinu.COM (Dave Slattengren)
Organization: mt Xinu, Berkeley
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 00:17:58 GMT

> I have just installed a Tandberg 3600 SCSI tape on my Mt Xinu Mach 2.6
> system. ... when the device (st0) is closed, it hangs the process forever.

If the "hang" is uninterruptible (typing your interrupt character does not
unwedge the process), then there may be a problem between the SCSI tape rewind
code and your tape drive (we know it works with HP, DEC, Archive and Wangtek
tape drives, for example).

If it IS interruptible, then it's the wait for rewind to finish that is not
completing (the tape driver periodically polls the unit to see if it's "ready"
after giving a "rewind" command and before before issuing an "allow tape
unload" command so that the SCSI bus isn't tied up and unusable during tape
rewind).  You DID wait long enough for the tape to fully rewind, no?

We assume that there are no hangs if you use the no-rewind or unload-on-close
(/dev/nst0 or /dev/ust0) device, right?

					Dave Slattengren,
					mt Xinu
From: jds@cs.umd.edu (James da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: BNR2SS, Mach, and The Lawsuit (was Re: GNU kids on the block?)
Summary: let's stick together
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:50:52 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science

I've read a couple things here recently that I find disturbing.

 First, Johannes Helander <jvh@cs.hut.fi> writes in his announcement of the
 port of Mach3 to the pc532:
 >  ...
 > A version of the net2 based bnr2ss server has been done but it is 
 > not yet in a useful state.  (Unfortunately also the freeness of this
 > along with the rest of net2, most of which has been built and ported
 > to the pc532, has been cast in doubt by the Dark Forces).
 >  ...
 > Other useful sources and binaries, such as bnr2ss, libc, user
 > programs, etc. will be added as soon as they work well enough and
 > their uncontaminatedness has been verified.

(how are you going to "verify" the "uncontaminatedness" of bnr2ss?)

 Then roland@prep.ai.mit.edu (Roland McGrath) writes:
 > The GNU Project would like to find a volunteer to work on a
 > single-server for the Mach 3.0 microkernel based on Linux.
 >  ...
 > Since AT&T's lawsuit, we can no longer rely on using BNR2SS, the
 > single-server based on the Berkeley Networking 2 release.

This sort of thing is very sad to see.  This is _exactly_ what AT&T/USL
wants to see happen.  They are succeeding in scaring people away from Net2
*without having to prove anything in court*.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we should be supporting our colleagues at Berkeley
rather than running away from them!

I understand the desire to not put all one's eggs in a basket that might be
unfairly yanked away, but BNR2SS already exists; it should be used until
such time as USL prevails (if ever).

I _don't_ understand those that are taking the narrow view that only Net2
is at risk in this suit, like Roland and Johannes seem to be.  Note that
CMU didn't use a clean room to develop Mach either.  If you step back far
enough and squint through the eyes of a lawyer (or of the CEO of a
monopolistic company that has invested in that _other_ microkernel
technology), BSD and Mach3 have a lot in common: they were both developed
by starting with Unix and replacing subsystems piecemeal until there wasn't
anything of the original left.  If USL were to win on its broader claims,
Mach and many other things are very much at risk.

I say this not to scare people away from Mach too, for USL's broad claims
are just ridiculous, but rather to point out that we are all going to sink
or swim together.  I don't know, but I imagine, that the CMU people
understand this.

Jaime, tainted by 4.3net2 and Mach3, and proud of it.
............................................................................
: Stand on my shoulders, : jds@cs.umd.edu  :		      James da Silva
: not on my toes.	 : uunet!mimsy!jds : Systems Design & Analysis Group
From: jds@cs.umd.edu (James da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Re: BNR2SS, Mach, and The Lawsuit (was Re: GNU kids on the block?)
Date: 27 Aug 92 00:45:03 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science

Randall Dean rwd+@CS.CMU.EDU writes:
>While we are not about to stop anyone who already has a copy from using
>BNR2SS, we are no longer distributing it.  CMU is not willing to risk
>getting drawn into a lawsuit over this.  By stopping distribution as soon
>as the lawsuit with BSDI and CSRG went public, we can claim that we acted
>in good faith and never knowingly distributed AT&T code.

Damn.  Looks like AT&T/USL has already won if a place with as deep pockets
and as long a history/reputation in the university Unix community as CMU is
backing off rather than standing behind Berkeley.  I hope for your sakes
USL doesn't later decide Mach3 and any derived products are a threat to its
revenue stream.

Note that I can't really blame CMU: Maryland would almost certainly do the
same thing.  This whole system of legal extortion and intimidation sucks
rocks.

Thanks for the note, Randall.
Jaime
............................................................................
: Stand on my shoulders, : jds@cs.umd.edu  :		      James da Silva
: not on my toes.	 : uunet!mimsy!jds : Systems Design & Analysis Group
From: istewart@datlog.co.uk (Ian Stewartson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Mach Kernel Sizing Information
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:10:13 GMT
Organization: Data Logic Limited

Hi,

Is there any sizing information available on Mach 3.0 on x86 systems.  We're
interested both the memory utilitisation (I and D space) and the code size
in LOC.

Any information gratefully received - by e-mail preferably.

Thanks

Ian Stewartson
Data Logic Ltd, Queens House, Greenhill Way, Harrow, Middlesex, HA1 1YR, UK.
(Phone) +44 81 863 0383 (Telex) 888103 (Fax) +44 81 861 2010
(Network) istewart@datlog.co.uk or uknet!datlog!istewart
-- 
Regards,

Ian Stewartson
Data Logic Ltd, Queens House, Greenhill Way, Harrow, Middlesex, HA1 1YR, UK.
(Phone) +44 81 863 0383 (Telex) 888103 (Fax) +44 81 861 2010
(Network) istewart@datlog.co.uk or ukc!datlog!istewart
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: yk7m@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Young-Kuk Kim)
Subject: Ada compiler on Mach
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 20:04:55 GMT

 

Is there any Ada compiler running on Mach Operating System
(esp., i386/486 version)?

-- Young-kuk
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: Re: Mach 3.0 on 386/486
Summary: bogus flames against mt Xinu
Organization: eklektix - Boulder, Colorado
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 08:37:57 GMT

ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com writes:
>Mach i386 is freely available from it source; anonymous FTP to cs.cmu.edu and
>snarf it...[etc...installation instructions]...

Note that what you get is not an operating system!  It's a large chunk of
useful stuff, but ...

>Do NOT, repeat, do NOT buy Mach from Mt. Xinu!!...

Do NOT, repeat, do NOT listen to this bozo!!

mt Xinu is one of the oldest bastions of UNIX development in the commercial
world.  Not to say they've never slipped up, but they know what they're
doing.  Mach/386 is a good product.

>...One of my friends (I graduated
>from Carnegie Mellon and was taught by the current Mach leader) was on the Mach
>team and he said tha Mt. Xinu's version was several revs behind and not quality
>work...

Yeah, right..."my friend told me"...care to tell us who this illustrious
flamer was?  The "appeal to authority" argument fallacy is bad enough,
without the "authority" being anonymous.

Actually, I ran Mach/386 for a fair while (not running it currently, only
because I have 2 more operating systems than machines!) and found it to be
a quality system.  I used it for real development (i.e., a large piece of
software I was being paid to develop).  I also found the folks at mt Xinu
very helpful, easy to deal with, and professional.

I have to wonder if "several revs behind" means "not on the bleeding
edge"--waiting for code to settle down before using it.

>...Why pay lots of money when the CMU i386 version is complete and
>standalone (now at least).

First off, because it's not complete.  No fault of theirs, but thus far it
takes substantial AT&T-licensed code to make a complete system.

Second, because you might want support, and CMU isn't in the support biz.
That's why they arranged with mt Xinu to do the commercial version.

TANSTAAFL.
-- 
Dick Dunn    rcd@raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd    Boulder, Colorado
				Cats!
Xref: sparky comp.os.mach:1097 gnu.misc.discuss:2804 comp.org.eff.talk:5566
From: max@underg.UUCP (Max Cray)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach,gnu.misc.discuss,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: BNR2SS, Mach, and The Lawsuit (was Re: GNU kids on the block?)
Date: 29 Aug 92 18:45:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: underg.9070PB1w164w
Organization: Underground Computing Foundation

erich@microsoft.com (Eric Hanchrow) writes:

> After reading about CMU being intimidated by U$L, to the point where
> they won't distribute code that *might* be contaminated, I'm ready
> to switch long-distance companies (I'm assuming that U$L is mostly
> owned by AT&T).  I'd like to write a letter to someone or other
> at AT&T, explaining why I switched; my questions are: Do you
> know whom it might be effective for me to write to?  And do any
> of you have anything you'd like me to say in the letter?

I don/t know. Does anyone know how effective the boycott against ATT was
when ATT went against MIT when they claimed to have a patent on the back
and store technique?

 -= Max Cray =-
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: erich@microsoft.com (Eric Hanchrow)
Subject: Re: BNR2SS, Mach, and The Lawsuit (was Re: GNU kids on the block?)
Date: 29 Aug 92 02:53:06 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Summary: Help me bitch out AT&T

After reading about CMU being intimidated by U$L, to the point where
they won't distribute code that *might* be contaminated, I'm ready
to switch long-distance companies (I'm assuming that U$L is mostly
owned by AT&T).  I'd like to write a letter to someone or other
at AT&T, explaining why I switched; my questions are: Do you
know whom it might be effective for me to write to?  And do any
of you have anything you'd like me to say in the letter?

-- 
The above opinions are my own; I do not speak for Microsoft.
Eric Hanchrow		erich@microsoft.com 
(206)-936-8913		One Microsoft Way Redmond, WA 98052-6399
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- write for details.
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: dave@pluto.dss.com (Dave Monachello)
Subject: Archive site for mach newsgroup?
Organization: Datability, Carlstadt, NJ
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 18:12:51 GMT


Hi,
 Is there an archive site for mach newsgroup? I would also like to obtain any
info available about using/modifying the 3.0 version of the kernel for
a i386 platform.

	thanks,
		dave monachello
		dave@pluto.dss.com
From: kraas@gmd.de (Albrecht W. Kraas)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Editor's call for papers
Date: 31 Aug 92 20:19:50 GMT
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany


This is a forwarded message.

EDITOR'S CALL FOR PAPERS


I am planning a book on Mach dealing with current research projects
in various fields concerning the Mach operating system. For this
effort, I am still looking for competent authors to contribute mate-
rial.

Fields of interest include but certainly are not limited to:

	o Mach Basics
	o Mach 2.5 and 3.0 including OSF/1 and other operating
	o systems based on Mach
	o Emulation of other operating systems with appropriate
	o Mach-Servers
	o Specific Mach implementations
	o Multiprocessor issues
	o Mach in distributed environments
	o Applications based on the Mach OS

Further topics are:
	o Real Time extensions to Mach
	o Multimedia environments on top of Mach
	o Object-oriented systems with Mach

Submissions:

Authors should send an extended abstract (2000 to 3000 words) of
their papers to the email address above in plain ASCII. This abstract
should include the length in words of the original paper (without fig-
ures) and the email address of the author for a first contact. Since this
book is also planned as a text book on Mach (like Sape Mullender's
book on distributed systems), the material contributed should also
provide a minimum introduction into the field. All contributions will
be acknowledged.


Since this is a forwarded message (I cannot post articles on the
usenet), a friend of mine will forward the mail to me. Therefore please
include the keywords "mach book" in the subject line.


	Chris Zimmermann
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Subject: Re: i386 Mach availability
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 18:21:50 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard

In article <BtnHLp.35L.1@cs.cmu.edu> mrt+@CS.CMU.EDU (Mary Thompson) writes:

   From: mrt+@CS.CMU.EDU (Mary Thompson)
   Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
   Subject: Re: i386 Mach availability
   Date: 27 Aug 92 16:24:53 GMT
   Organization: Carnegie Mellon University

   CMU was distributing a BSS single server and user environment based on
   Bill Jolitz's relase of the BNR2 code. We have suspended this distribution
   since the announcement of the USL CSRG lawsuit. 

This is unfortunate.

I am aware that MIT, which has at least some of the BNR2 code
available in a world readable AFS cell, considered this issue, but
decided that the mere existance of a lawsuit of uncertain merit did
not "change the rules" enough to warrant restricting access to the
BNR2 code (although a ruling in a lawsuit would result in a change in
access to that code).

					- Bill