HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hsu@cs.hut.fi (Heikki Suonsivu)
Subject: Re: 386BSD & AHA1542B & CDC94171-9 Disk problem
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
	<1992Jul20.011747.10954@ulrik.uio.no>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 08:05:50 GMT


In article <1992Jul20.011747.10954@ulrik.uio.no> toreh@bootes.sds.no (Tore Haraldsen) writes:
   >>	as0b: controller error 0x16 reading fsbn 0
   >>	scsi sense: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Same problem, old (large) adaptek board, ST277N.  The rom diagnostics give
errors, so I'm suspecting either my hardware or the controller.  What is
weird that before I tried 386BSD, I had been running Mach 2.5 and Mach 3.0
in the same machine, same configuration, and did not have problems with
them.  As my system is different, no-name singaporean clone (16MHz, quite
old, 287), it seems to have something to do with the Adaptek controller?

This is what happened with different configurations:

0.0: installed and loaded the files to the hard disk.  When I booted from
the hard disk, it worked until I tried to load the files from the floppies,
result was a panic.  nonfp and other versions I tried didn't work either. 

0.1 (mfm disks): floppy boots, but install says there is 386BSD already
installed and then when I say yes, and it starts the install procedure, I
get disklabel error messages "partition a larger than disk" and similar
messages.  Every time the install program is run, it corrupts the disk
label (partitions only, disk geometry of the label is ok).  Tried doing the
disk label from the fix floppy, and as long as I didn't do install, it
seemed to work, I could copy stuff to the hard disk and boot it from there,
but then the files in the hard disk were corrupted (some of them, not all).

If I look at the disklabel after running install, it says 3 partitions, but
lists only 2, with all the values as garbage.

If I run bad144, it dumps me lots of sector 0 mapped to sector 0, and then
complains about duplicates (sn 0).  How do I write a new, empty bad block
table?  The file corruption problems may be because the bad block table is
not correct.

I managed to destroy the disk label so that the install floppy didn't say
"386BSD already installed" but installation failed similarly, error
messages and corrupted disk label.

0.1 (scsi disks): The same problem Tore Haraldsen has got. 

The system has also been running Microport 386 unix and msdos with no
problems.

cpio would require find as its companion, copying boot disk to the hard
disk directory-by-directory is a bit weird?  Am I missing something?  I
guess the install program should do the work, if I could get it running.

-
Heikki Suonsivu, T{ysikuu 10 C 83/02210 Espoo/FINLAND,
hsu@{otax.tky.hut,cs.hut,clinet}.fi  +385-0-8031121
/G=Heikki/S=Suonsivu/O=hut/OU=cs/PRMD=Inet/ADMD=Fumail/C=FI,
mcsun!hutcs!hsu, riippu SN, Email preferable.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: greg@ecse.rpi.edu (Greg)
Subject: Re: 386bsd-0.1: primary bootstrap (wdbootblk.c) problem & fix.
Keywords: 386bsd boot bootstrap wdbootblk.c
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:00:14 GMT

terry@npd.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert) writes:

>In article <greg.712261295@hibp1.ecse.rpi.edu> greg@ecse.rpi.edu (Greg) writes:
[ stuff deleted ]
>however, the status register being polled after the delay is wd_status,
>and I still believe that a canonical fix would be looking at wd_altsts
>instead.

  When I first read about the other patch, I did try checking wd_alsts
rather than wd_status. Not knowing didley about the disk controller,
I'm not sure what the difference between these two registers are. 
But, being a shameless hacker, I tried it anyway. Alas, this was no 
help. It was at this point that I resorted to my ugly hack.
  It may be that the wrong register is checked. If so, then there is also
another problem. I'm sure someone more knowledgeble than I will shed some light on this situation soon.   

>	The confusion seems to have originated from the various paths in
>the boot and non-boot sections of the kernel which lead to files of the
>same name.  I would suggest that any future patches refrain from the use
>of relative paths to identify the file being patched.  In particular, it
>would be nice if they contained the full path from the root of the volume
>("/") rather than something like "./xxx/yyy/zzz.c", which assumes they are
>starting in the same directory that patch poster did.

  Point well taken. In the future I will use full paths, in order to
avoid confusion. This sounds like a policy that everyone should follow.

            -Greg               greg@megas.ecse.rpi.edu

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,alt.suit.att-bsdi
From: ddb@vpnet.chi.il.us (dennis box)
Subject: Re: New group alt.suit.att-bsdi
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:44:21 GMT


This group (alt.suit.att-bsdi) is supposed to winnow out megabytes 
of vituperous invective from the other groups.  MY worksite doesn't 
carry the alt.* hierarchy, but on the other hand, I can rant all I want 
here and its CLEAR that I speak for myself.  

So, has the letter writing campaign been organized yet?  To whom/where 
do we send such letters?

Its a new group, so I claim the privilege of tossing the first match: 

SUGGESTED ADVERTISING SLOGANS FOR AT&T:

	"Just sue it"

	"We don't innovate, we litigate"

	"Improving on our operating system.  Its just
	 not worth it"

	"Don't be one of the  Berkeley-eunichs"

	"AT&T unix. The right choice.  The ONLY choice"

 
The sad part is, I WANT to be sympathetic to AT&T.  I don't think they 
have been regulated fairly these last 15 years or so, but when they 
start suing BSDI and the MIT X-windows people I start wondering who
is next.  I read _The_C_Programming_Language_ by K&R a few years ago, 
do I owe them royalties if I write a program that is vaguely 
like anything in that book? It says right on the inside cover
"all rights reserved".  A corporate lawyer could get a lifetime of 
work out of phrases like that!


Dennis D. Box
"The difference between a carp and a lawyer is that one is a slimy, 
bottom feeding scum sucker and the other is a fish"
From: tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu (Mark Tinguely)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Questions/problems with 386BSD 0.1
Date: 29 Jul 92 13:56:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: plains.19416
Organization: North Dakota State University

In article <1992Jul29.042244.29277@umbc3.umbc.edu> cs481a07@umbc5.umbc.edu (cs481a07) writes:

>	I've been trying to get RNto compile on 386BSD 0.1. It dies on
>linking with a undefined _stty and _gtty. I've dug through everything I
>can think of and can't find a way around/fix for this. Has anyone gotten
>RN to work?

 in config.h define TERMIOS.

>problem 3: I noticed that anyone could run shutdown. the permissions were
>
>-rwsr-x--- owner root group operator. I changed the permissions to
>-r-x------ and anyone can still run it. (you get the shutdown: NOT super-user)

 it appears the change in the check for permissions in kern_execve.c returns
 a successful executable if any of the execute bits are on. Definately
 something to change.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.programmer,comp.unix.msdos,comp.os.os2.programmer,comp.dsp
From: billp@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Bill Pottenger)
Subject: Compiling for DOS using emx under OS/2; rint() and round()
Originator: billp@consult.ncsa.uiuc.edu
Organization: Nat'l Ctr for Supercomp App (NCSA) @ University of Illinois
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:46:14 GMT

Hello!
    We're cross-compiling Joe Campbell's CELP (code excited linear
prediction) dsp code for a DOS machine using emx under OS/2.  We're trying
to find a C code version of rint() and/or it's equivalent (eg. round())
because emx doesn't have either implemented.  In addition, are there any
emx users who can tell us how to 'tell' emx to cross-compile for a DOS
machine that doesn't have a coprocessor...  esentially although we need
a coprocessor for the analysis phase of the speech processing, we're going
to do the synthesis on machines which don't have coprocessors.

Sure appreciate any light which anyone can shed on these problems.
Thanks (and please reply via email),
Bill and John
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: niko@iastate.edu (Nikolaus E Schuessler)
Subject: Re: 386bsd security enhancements are needed before using INTERNET!
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:35:48 GMT


>>fact of the matter is that the precompiled password authentication codes
>>present absolutely no risk to national security.
>
>	The problem is the ability to distribute source.  One of the base
>intentions of 386BSD, from what I have seen, is to make everything freely

Aren't there keys that can be changed on a system by system basis? For
some algorithms it could take a fast computer a long time to crack the
codes even if it knew the algorithm...





-- 
Niko Schuessler               
Project Vincent Systems Manager              email: niko@iastate.edu
Iowa State University Computation Center     voice: (515) 294-1672
Ames IA 50010                                snail: 272 Durham
From: fmt@mbf.UUCP (Mike Trimberger)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Should I get the AT&T source?
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:46:02 GMT
Organization: MAI Systems Corp.

In article <1992Jul27.230708.17974@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> ben@rex.chb.uokhsc.edu (Benjamin Z. Goldsteen) writes:
>
>    The place where I work can get the AT&T souce for like $200 (.edu).
>However, I don't want to be limited by this.  Will I be prevented from
>writing in an OS in the future (theoretically?)  What if I don't sign a
>non-diclosure agreement, but "somehow" gain access to the sources?
>What are the implications of this?
>
>Thanks

It looks as if ATT has already started the paranoia and uncertanty that
they wanted - just by filing the lawsuit.  What about me?  The Co where
I work has an ATT 3.2 licence but I haven't worked on or even looked at
any of the code.  Can ATT look at the Co's where I worked and say that I
have been tainted by their proprietary code?  

PS: Gaining access to the ATT code with appropriate disclosure and licence
    is called _theft_.  No one would steal any of ATT's code, would they?
-- 
F. Michael Trimberger 					   MAI Systems Corp.
 fmt%mbf.uucp@ics.uci.edu 				   14192 Franklin Ave
or: {ucivax,uunet!ccicpg,sequent}!mbf!fmt   		   Tustin, Ca 92680
[system administrator in training - sink or swim method]   (714) 730-2934
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: soward@slow.inslab.uky.edu (John Soward)
Subject: Re: 386BSD: Anyone using gcc-2.x on 0.1?
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 17:27:44 GMT

Kaleb Keithley writes
-> While working my way around the system, I discovered that the version
-> of gcc shipped in 0.1 is 1.39, at least as reported by 'gcc -v'.
-> 
-> I'm highly interested in moving to the latest version of gcc-2.x,
-> (currently 2.2.2) because:
-> 
-> a) I'd like to take advantage of it's ability to emit 486 specific
->    code (instruction scheduling, primarily)
-> 
-> b) Its ability to emit PIC (Position Independent Code) seems to be
->    a pre-requisite for shared libraries.
-> 
-> Has anyone else "bootstrapped" up to 2.2.2 yet?  Has anyone who
-> has, rebuilt the kernel with it yet?  Does anyone have any reasons
-> why this might not be a good idea?
-> 
-> I'll be trying it anyway -- I've got nothing to loose, the worst thing
-> that could happen is I'd have to reload a few disks :-)
-> 

I tried to compile it (gcc2.2.2) but ran into a snag...then I found the  
binaries and patches on sonata.cc.purdue.edu...these seem to work...
I am currently trying to re-compile the Kernel with it...A few cahnges need to  
be made it looks like...I am currently stuck on src/i386/isa/npx.c:129
with: " impossible register constraint in `asm' " but I'm sure it's just some  
slight change from 1.39...

--
    ________________________________________________________________________
   /   'The midnight sun will burn you up" -The Cure, Piggy in the Mirror  /
  /      soward@ms.uky.edu | soward@slow.inslab.uky.edu (NeXT Mail)       /
 /_______________________________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: chmr@fstgds01.tu-graz.ac.at (Christoph Robitschko)
Subject: Bugs in init.c
Keywords: /sbin/init shutdown
Organization: Technical University of Graz, Austria
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 12:28:23 GMT


I have found some bugs in /sbin/init. They caused the following behaviour:
	- init didn't execute /etc/rc again if you brought your system to
	  singleuser and then back up.
	- it didn't correctly react on TSTP siglals (which are sent by halt
	  and reboot). So it killed the user processes, but tried to start
	  new getty processes immediately, killed the getty processes, but 
	  tried to start new getty processes, ...
	- a lost semicolon at the end of a while loop.

The following patch fixes these problems. I have also sent a BUGNFIX.FORM
to ljolitz (about a week ago).

							Have fun,
							Christoph


cd /usr/src/sbin/init
diff -p init.c.ori init.c

*** init.c.ori	Mon Jul 20 16:03:40 1992
--- init.c	Mon Jul 20 17:57:51 1992
*************** top:
*** 188,194 ****
  				execl("/bin/sh", "sh", "/etc/rc", Reboot, (char *)0);
  				_exit(127);
  			}
! 			while(wait(&status) != pid)
  
  			/* if we are about to be rebooted, then wait for it */
  			if (WIFSIGNALED(status) && WTERMSIG(status) == SIGKILL)
--- 188,195 ----
  				execl("/bin/sh", "sh", "/etc/rc", Reboot, (char *)0);
  				_exit(127);
  			}
! 			Reboot = 0;
! 			while(wait(&status) != pid);
  
  			/* if we are about to be rebooted, then wait for it */
  			if (WIFSIGNALED(status) && WTERMSIG(status) == SIGKILL)
*************** top:
*** 215,220 ****
--- 216,223 ----
  			_exit(127);
  		}
  		while(wait(&status) != pid);
+ 		while (drain)
+ 			pause();
  		goto top;
  	}
  
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christoph M. Robitschko  | "the only man who got his work done by Friday
chmr@edvz.tu-graz.ac.at  |             was Robinson Crusoe."
From: rjs@crs.cl.msu.edu (Robert J. Stanton)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: DOS  5.0 and 0.1 386BSD now booting
Keywords: 386BSD
Date: 30 Jul 92 18:56:47 GMT
Distribution: comp.unix.bsd
Organization: Michigan State University

Earlier I posted a message saying that I was unable
to get 386BSD  to boot  from the HD if I  first
installed DOS 5.0.

The only difference that I know of is that
I chose the same size of DOS partition, but
then installed DISKDUBL on the DOS partition.
Apparently DISKDUBL writes something onto
the HD outside of the DOS partition, because
afterwards, when I went to install 386BSD,
it reported that I had 84  Mg  free instead
of 85.

Now both OS's boot fine.  I am still having
problems with text blinking instead of being
highlighted.

On to the rest of the  install!

rjs@crs.cl.msu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: toreh@bootes.sds.no (Tore Haraldsen)
Subject: 386BSD - 8250 com ports
Organization: Statens Datasentral A/S, SDS, Norway
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:55:10 GMT

The com driver (i386/isa/com.c) supplied with 386BSD seems to have
support only for the "modern" chips, 16540 & 16550. The result is, it
locks up my com ports of the "old" kind, 8250. Anyone got a "better"
driver for the com ports?

If so, please mail it to me!

Thanx,

-- Tore Haraldsen
From: jtkohl@cs.Berkeley.EDU (John T Kohl)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: taunted by happy extract command
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:10:58 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: stinson.cs.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu's message of 21 Jul 1992 04:35:49 GMT

In article <14g475INNknj@agate.berkeley.edu> wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes:

> Seriously, it looks just fine. You'll
> find that if you get a SCSI tape instead of QIC-02 it will stream, and
> run circles around the other. SCSI really makes quite a difference.

This doesn't have to be the case;  an improved QIC-02 driver can make
the thing stream on (at least) faster x86 processors.  However, I don't
have an improved driver that I can give away :-(.
--
John Kohl <jtkohl@cs.berkeley.edu>
UC Berkeley CS grad student
Member of the League for Programming Freedom--details: league@prep.ai.mit.edu
(The above opinions are MINE.  Don't put my words in somebody else's mouth!)
From: to-pse@xfswob.han.de (Tobias Erichsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Highest com port speed
Date: 26 Jul 92 11:59:27 GMT
Organization: itek communication systems



> lidl@rodan.UU.NET (Kurt J. Lidl) writes:

> Actually, does anyone know of a cheap ISDN BRI card for the ISA bus?
> (Who needs terminal adapters, anyway? ;-}  )
> 
> 
> -Rob

Hi Rob,

here in Germany we got a company called TELES which sells a ISDN BRI
Card for only DM 500 (which is at this time $333).  This is the cheapest
price you can get anywhere. This card has no processor and includes only
two vlsi Siemens ISDN-chips.  The only problem is, the software right now
only supports the Common-Isdn-Api (which is only used in Germany I think)
and the D-Channel-Protocol-support is only for the German D-Channel Protocol
as specified in 1TR6 (I'm not sure could be 1TR3, too) which is a national
standard set by the German TELECOM.

I give you the German adress, tel & fax-number anyway:

TELES
Ernst-Reuter-Platz 3-5
1000 Berlin 10
Germany
tel: +49 (30) 31 10 05 22
fax: +49 (30) 312 80 45


I'm using this card right now, too.  They have drivers for IPX and for TCP/IP
and all the dos-stuff.  They are going to support the 1992/1993 European stan-
dard for the D-Channel Protocol.

If you got any questions... just mail me...

to-pse
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: michaelv@iastate.edu (Michael L. VanLoon)
Subject: Re: emacs type editor wanted
Keywords: emacs no_vi
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:29:22 GMT

In <1992Jul26.054027.28848@coe.montana.edu> osynw@warp.mhd.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes:

>In article <1992Jul25.223126.26886@NeoSoft.com> gclarkii@NeoSoft.com (Gary Clark II) writes:
>>I'm trying to find a emacs type editor that has already been ported to
>>the 0.1 version of 386BSD.  I can get GNU Emacs, but I'm trying to avoid
>>the size (I only have about 30 megs free...).  I really do hate vi though.

>I just ported (not really) uemacs 3.11a to 386BSD.  I grabbed the source
>I had for the DECstation, and I had to change two lines in one of the
>files to include <sys/ioctl_compat.h> just before <sys/ioctl.h>, and 
>things compiled w/out a hitch.

This is the second piece of software I've seen that needed this (the
other was an ircII client I was compiling).  Is there any good reason
why <sys/ioctl.h> shouldn't just include <sys/ioctl_compat.h> by default
for every compile?
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael L. VanLoon                                     "Ignorance is bliss..."
michaelv@iastate.edu      --       Computer Engineering, Iowa State University
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cdw3455@cs.rit.edu (Craig D Woodward)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386bsd0.1
Date: 23 Jul 92 00:52:59 GMT
Distribution: comp.unix.bsd
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY

ok, I'm a bit new to this, and cant use this info right off, but....

I recall a simplie persons instalation document for 0.0 that gave a
quick step by step instruction on how to transfer the bin.* files to
the main partition.  It involved rawrite and was quick and simple.  
Now that the files sizes have changed I'm not sure how to do this,
and I have been unable to find any instructions on it.  All I got from
the docs is that there appears to be a mcopy command that handles MSDOS
disks.  If I'm wrong can someone clue me in as to how to do this?
(I'm trying to learn a bit about BSD in general, and have access to a
 4.3 Reno system here, but cant do much until I get the fs over t0 the drive.)


 NOW FOR THE HARD PART:

	It appears that my SCSI controler is not supported.  I have
   to play with it a bit yet, but that may mean losing DOS entirely.
   (Not realy a great loss, but I would like to keep 20 Meg got it.)
   Anyone got a spare BSD compatable? :)  Or a patch method?  The odd
   part is that the controler is a SCSI/FDD controller, and the floppies
   work fine (dist.fs boots great, but reports no HD).

	Also, is there anyone out there whos gotten a WD8003WT to work?
   (My SCSI controler wont boot with the card installed under DOS.  That
    ring any bells for anyone?)
  
  386BSD crew (and supporters): Awesome job guys (and gals)!  I'll be 
  contributing as soon as I can (of course thats been since 0.0, but I'm
  a poor student... It'll get there).

							-Woody@nick.csh.rit.edu
--
"Like candied emotion, too much and sugar can turn to sand,
 you scream, but nobody touches your hand."	-DIO
-----
woody@nick.csh.rit.edu  cxw3455@ultb.isc.rit.edu  cdw3455@cs.rit.edu
From: sitongia@hao.hao.ucar.edu (HAO Computer System Managment Group)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386BSD: rawrite says "address mark not found"
Date: 24 Jul 92 02:22:48 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: High Altitude Observatory/NCAR, Boulder CO

In article <1992Jul23.210243.14062@ncar.ucar.edu> sitongia@ozzel.hao.ucar.edu (Leonard Sitongia) writes:
>I've been trying to build a Tiny 386BSD floppy from 386BSD 0.1 to use to
>qualify a PC to buy.
>
>and stops with the message "address mark not found".
>
>The floppy will not boot on any of serveral different 386's I've tried
>around here.
>
I want to add some more information.  I tried to boot it on the PC I'm
thinking no buying, and it does the same thing: floppy chatters, then the
system reboots.  Keeps doing this (someone else just posted the same
symptoms).  I tried booting from both the 5.25 and 3.5 drives (recabling to
the A drive).

The CPU is an Intel 486/DX, ETEQ chips, IDE disk, ISA bus.  I disabled both
the internal and external caches (both didn't try one or the other alone).
I dont know the manufacturer of the motherboard.

writeraw complains as above when writing to a 5.25, but not to a 3.5 drive.

THanks for your help.
--
--Leonard E. Sitongia           HAO System Manager                 
sitongia@ncar.ucar.edu          voice: (303)497-1509   fax: (303)497-1589
High Altitude Observatory       P.O. Box 3000 Boulder CO  80307
From: cdw3455@cs.rit.edu (Craig D Woodward)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: SCSI controler problems.
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:10:15 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY


Well, I've booted my system with the 0.1 dist.fs, and it all looks great.
Well, all but the hard drive that is.  The BIOS starts up (as always during
boot) but just when it should pop up the message the drive light goes on
and the drive clicks, but it is not recognised. 

Bill (or whoever wrote this bit):
    Cute bit about installing the system to the TV.  :)
								-Woody
--
"Like candy, emotion: too much and sugar can turn to sand,
 you scream, but nobody touches your hand."	-DIO
-----
woody@nick.csh.rit.edu  cxw3455@ultb.isc.rit.edu  cdw3455@cs.rit.edu
From: drg@bubba.ma30.bull.com (Daniel R Guilderson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: AT&T shoots self in the foot (was Re: AT&T sues BSDI)
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:19:54 GMT
	<54661@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: Bull World Wide Information Systems, Billerica MA USA

I would just like to comment on the public relations angle of this
move.  Suppose that AT&T wins the suit and BSDI is put out of
business.  AT&T will have spent thousands if not millions in legal
fees for what gains?  It will have pissed-off a large community of
people who were/are responsible for a great deal of the success of
***X.  Namely the academic and research communities.  All the while
Microsoft is bearing down on them with Windows NT.
Smart move AT&T (NOT!).