HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: preemptive multi-tasking
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:23:35 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <888H=m?q6@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>
>In article <1992Apr15.005912.22809@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) writes:
>
>   Time-sliced multi-tasking has NOTHING to do with preemption.
>   In fact there are several forms of time-sliced multi-tasking
>   (as opposed to Shortest Job First, or First In First Out
>   multi-tasking).  Here are the real facts:
>
>Hmmm.  I thought that it was generally agreed that there are two types
>of multitasking: cooperative and preemptive.  In cooperative
>multitasking one process, usually the foreground, gets the CPU and can
>hold it for as long as it chooses.  In a preemptive system, a process
>has no control (little control?  What do real time systems do?) over
>who gets scheduled.  When a process is waiting for the disk, or other
>device, it seems natural that another process would get the CPU,
>otherwise it will have to busy wait.  I think that just having the
>ability to schedule a process for a time slice then "preempt it" after
>its time is up qualifies as preemptive multitasking.
>

I had to trim the post I originally wanted to save space, but
I guess saving money causes confusion.  There ARE two types of
multi-tasking: one complete process at a time, and a part of a
process at a time (using time slices, or quantums).  The former
can be implemented as either First In First Out, or as Shortest
Job First.  The latter can be implemented as Round-robin,
Multi-level Queue, or Multi-level Feedback Queue.  Of course,
there may be variations on these.


>   Notice that without pre-emption, process 1 uses CPU time even
>   thought it is not using the CPU (it is waiting for the comm port).
>   Notice that with pre-emption, process 1 does not use CPU time since
>   it is in the waiting queue, not ready queue.  Also, process 2 runs
>   faster since it gets the CPU to itself!
>
>This is irrelvant.  The guy from Oracle was right.

It is not clear to me what you mean by irrelevant.
Blocking and pre-emption go together.
Blocking means that the CPU puts the running process in the waiting
queue when it accesses a device port.
Pre-emption means that the CPU places the running process in a ready
queue when a device is ready, and runs the first waiting process
(for that device).

In other words, multi-tasking requires that the OS have a process
scheduler to handle processes control.  Pre-emption (and therefore
blocking) are ways to make multi-tasking utilize the CPU more
efficiently.  This is why I included the example in my previous post,
to show how the CPU wastes time without pre-emption (and blocking) and
uses CPU time better with it.


>
>-Mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Levis		Reader of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Question List

Point: "Timothy Sipples for U.S. President!!!!"
Counter-point: "But if he is President, who will help us with OS/2?!" ;-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: quan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Tony Quan)
Subject: What's going on with Tseng drivers?
Originator: quan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 23:39:16 GMT


Anyone know what's going on with the OS/2 2.0 drivers for Tseng
video boards?  Does Tseng plan to release them anytime soon?

--Tony Quan
quan@cs.stanford.edu
From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Tape Backup
Date: 7 Apr 92 11:08:55 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

In article <6APR199212461148@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> smbrush@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Andy Brush @Sverdrup) writes:
>SY-TOS is a character-based backup program which seems to work with most 
>SCSI drives, and is OS/2 compatible.  It apparently supports EA's and Long 
>Names.  I was told by a mail-order vendor that it costs about $200, 
>separately.
>
The  SY-TOS  tape  backup  program  for  DOS is *not* compatible with OS/2.

SY-TOS  *Plus*  is  a  graphics  based  backup  program  and  is  also  not
compatible, I have just found this out the hard way (lost all my EA's!).

There  is  a SY-TOS Plus for OS/2 now available which supports the HPFS but
you  have  to  pay  for it all over again even if you have the DOS version,
and its not cheap!

Frankly  I'm  not  impressed  with  the EA system, the main reason I stayed
with  the  FAT  filesystem was for compatability reasons, but it seems that
IBM have made it incompatible!

-- 
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@rtf.bt.co.uk
From: ian@vnet.ibm.com (Ian Stirling)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 10:53:22 BST
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Help Requested
Reply-To: ian@vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM UK Laboratories Ltd, Hursley, England
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 3.0

In <rvds9INNmhv@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> Todd Howard writes:
>I'm looking for a good review (unbiased) that sums up os2/2.0's
>strengths and weaknesses (both promised, and if possible, delivered).
>Does anyone know if such an article exists, and if so where?
>
>Todd
>--
> "The statistics on death are in, and they're pretty convincing.  One out
>  of every one people die."   -Unknown
>
>Todd O. Howard (ohoward@matt.ksu.ksu.edu)
>
There is a package called PS2REF available on the IBM MKTTOOLS disk
which is available for external distribution.  It is a set of one sheet
postscript documents. If you have a local IBM contact get him/her to
get it for you.  I have them here and they seem factual rather than IBM
biased.

Cheers,
Ian Stirling                      Internet: ian@vnet.ibm.com
CICS/ESA Systems Facilities         Bitnet: ian at vnet
IBM UK Labs Ltd, Hursley, England IBMIPnet: ian@stirling.hursley.ibm.com

Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
From: gulcu@masg1.epfl.ch (Ceki Gulcu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Installation
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:24:13 GMT
Reply-To: lbdsun6.epfl.ch
Organization: EPFL, Physics Department

In article <"barnacle.e.764:09.03.92.16.29.04"@clarkson.edu>, gthome@ausvm1.VNET.IBM.COM writes:

|> >|> >A while back, I read an announcement from IBM saying that OS/2 2.0 could
|> >|> >be installed via network. Did anybody try this?
|> >|>
|> >|> I don't know the details, but the IBM Austin site has a two diskette
|> >|> network install for people here.
|> >
|> > Wow! This is great news. Do you have an idea how the two "magical" diskettes
|> > work?
|> >
|> 
|> I kind of know how it works.  Its a tool called SRVIFS.  The 2 diskettes are
|> basically the first two install diskettes from 2.0, with a some simple LAN
|> NETBIOS redirection code that makes a connection to a server during the boot
|> of the machine.  Once the install program is initiated, it can handle
|> running over the network.
|> 
|> As a matter of fact, the machine I'm typing on now was installed with this
|> two diskette method.
|> 
|> Gerry Thome
|> IBM - Austin

A Billy G. would say: "This is good and bad news". Our network is NFS (TCP/IP)
based. Thus, the NETBIOS redirection code would not work. Would it be possible
to boot from the standard diskettes mount the NFS drive and continue installation
from there? I am sure this is would be possible if the installation was based on 
a modifiable script.

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| GULCU Ceki                            |  "It is not only fine feathers     |
| e-mail: gulcu@lbdsun6.epfl.ch         |   that make fine birds."           |
| Swiss Federal Institute of Technology |   AESOP,  6th century BC.          |
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
From: max@underg.UUCP (Max Cray)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Sarcasm, Confusion, and my Timothy Sipples Post
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 22:08:01 EDT
Organization: Underground Computing Foundation

skanga@prism.poly.edu (Shiraz Kanga) writes:

> Hey al you IBMers out there I think Timothy Sipples deserves a free copy of O
> 2.0 ASAP. Firstly all his hard work must be rewarded and secondly he would
> be able to post first hand info rather than the "I heard about ..." stuff tha
> he is forced to do now.
I vote yes.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            -= Max Cray =-
 Net:     underg%max@uunet.uu.net                         Support
 UUCP:    ...!uunet!underg!max                            Free
 Data:    The Underground Computing Foundation BBS        Software
          401-847-2603 -=- 9600 baud (v.32)               (w/src)
 CI$:     76334,2203
From: mrice@ratmask.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Mark.Rice)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Tape Backup ?
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:28:46 GMT
Organization: NCR Corp

In article <1992Apr02.145231.19212@bmerh2.bnr.ca> mlord@bmers63.bnr.ca (Mark Lord) writes:
>In article <1APR199217014348@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> smbrush@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Andy Brush @Sverdrup) writes:
>>I'm looking for a cheap tape backup system for use with OS/2 version 2.0.  
>>So far, I found out that Colorado does not support OS/2, and that Irwin 
>>wants $99 for the PM software upgrade (for a $179 drive!).
>
>But the Irwin DOS software will run just fine in an OS/2 DOS window,
>so one doesn't really neet the PM upgrade.. the catches being that any
>open (active) files will not be backed up, and the EA's will not be backed up,
>but this still provides a very good backup system for the price.  

I am also looking for a tape backup.  If this about Irwin's DOS program 
being able to backup OS/2 from a DOS box, then can a Colorado system do
the same?  Can it do it from a Windows version?

I like that CMS Jumbo 250.  Is there no way?  I don't mind if the files must
not be in use during the backup.

-- 
-----
mark rice
mark.rice@ColumbiSC.NCR.COM
Not necessarily the views of NCR.
From: figueroa@SPUNKY.CS.NYU.EDU (Samuel A. Figueroa)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Best way to install on a FAT system
Date: 11 Apr 92 02:00:13 GMT
Organization: New York University

A week ago I received a copy of OS/2 EE 1.2.  I just sent in my upgrade form.
I was thinking I would just reformat my hard disk and partition it into one
HPFS partition.  But now I read that HPFS is not optimum on machines with
less than 6 MB.  (Is this true even when switching between 2 or 3 applica-
tions, but only running one of them at a time?  I tend to have a hard time
doing more than one thing at a time - it takes me a long time to cook my
meals.)  A couple days after I received OS/2 EE 1.2 I ordered 2 MB more of
memory to have a total of 5 MB in my machine.  (Come to think of it, that's
more than the amount of memory in the IBM 4341 mainframe the Data Processing
Dept. of Honduras' Ministry of Finances was using to handle the nation's
accounting, payroll, check-writing, etc. when I was employed there in 1988.)
So I guess I will have to stick to FAT.

Would it be better in my case to install OS/2 over my existing file system,
or would it be better to wipe out the hard disk, install OS/2, and then
reinstall my applications (particularly Ami Pro and 1-2-3 for Windows) and
restore my data files?  I don't know how well these things are explained
in the manuals.
------------
Sam Figueroa (figueroa@cs.nyu.edu)
This is not a .signature virus.
Do NOT copy me into your .signature file!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: pathak@mitre.org (Heeren Pathak)
Subject: Re: Video Vendors that DO support OS/2?
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.misc
Organization: Mitre Corporation
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 15:15:52 GMT

In article <#pzjcpl.rcain@netcom.com>, rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) wrote:
> 
> Wow.  These Trident folks, at least Stone, are really out front here. There
> was a call on my phone mail, completely unsolicited, from him last night.
> He was asking to get feedback on the new OS/2 drivers!  I hardly have the
> heart to tell him that in spite of being in the DAP, Expedite, owner of
> 1.3EE and crazy I can't seem to get GA to test them on.  If you're reading
> this Stone, thanks for the call and I'm sorry we couldn't connect today.
> 
> I would like to know what the secret is to get into the Trident BBS.  It
> was busy last night nearly incessantly until after 2:00 a.m. and all day.
> I did get in twice at 2400 but had a dead connection.  Anybody got the
> secret?  I'd like to get them up to .binaries so *someone* can enjoy them.
> 

I have the 800x600x16 seamless dirvers working under the GA.  I have also
tried the 1024x768x256 drivers.  OS/2 came up fine but I haven't been able
to run ANY windows programs.  I should have more time to play around this
weekend and will post more details later on.

--Heeren
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Release: First Impressions
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:17:03 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) writes:
>In article <rdippold.702930585@cancun> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>>One thing they're missing... (All you OS/2 utilities programmers).  I
>>really miss my file name completion.  I can get it under DOS, of
>>course, but not under an OS/2 window.  It's incredibly useful.  You
>>just type a partial file name ("TES") and then hit tab, and it cycles
>>through all the files that match that (TEST.ARJ, TEST.GIF, TESTER.EXE)
>>in that directory.

>Well, 4DOS does this (and works in DOS sessions under OS/2).  There's
>also a 4OS2 package out (to replace OS/2's CMD.EXE).  So all bases are
>covered.


Yes, thanks to all who mailed.  I just snagged 4OS2095 from
hobbes.nmsu.edu.  It should be a lifesaver.  I never realized before
just how annoying it was to have to type the whole filename, even with
8.3. 
-- 
Scotty, beam me up a double!
From: gt6493c@prism.gatech.EDU (gt6493c FLUHR,ERIC J)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS2 2.0 Upgrades
Date: 15 Apr 92 20:42:28 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <84043@bu.edu> rem@buitc.bu.edu (Robert Mee) writes:
>to existing owners of MS Windows 3.0 for $49. They 
>will only take credit card orders and you MUST send

So what if you don't have a credit card??    :-{
How long will the difference be between availability in stores and
arrival by mail?

Oh well,
-- 
Fluhr, Eric J.                           Georgia Institute of Technology
Awesome, Underrated, Developed in Ingolstadt:  Audi, the #1 imported
German car.  Better than a cold Becks, even.
From: atai@sdcc13.ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Geoworks in OS/2
Date: 12 Apr 92 02:57:17 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Apr10.120415.4456@rose.uucp> victor.ng@rose.uucp (victor ng) writes:
>
>Date Entered: 04-09-92 19:12
>Can GeoWorks programs run under OS/2?  Or do you have to run them under
>a DOS session?
>
>Vic
>---
>   OLX 2.1 TD   How do you make Windows faster?  Throw it harder!
>   RoseMail 1.70:



Can GEOS run under OS2?   Can IBM GEOS run Commodore GEOS software?
Can OS2 run on a Commodore 64?   Can Vic 20 run Xwindows....










Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Video Vendors that DO support OS/2?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 20:39:42 GMT

alanr@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Alan N Rovner) writes:
>I've been following the discussion regarding availability of OS/2 SVGA
>video drivers and so far am disapointed.  ATI, Diamond, Tseng and others
>basically have told the OS/2 user base to get lost.  All right then, are
>there any vendors that *do* offer OS/2 SGVA support now or in the near-term
>future?  I am about to buy a new video card and this will surely affect my
>buying decision.  I will support a company that supports OS/2, and vice versa.

ATI and Tseng are writing drivers.  ATI says soon, Tseng doesn't give
a date.  Trident already has them out, and Orchid says about a month.
-- 
You have an important role as a negative example.
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Is OS2/2.0-DOS faster than plain Dos??
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:20:59 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <1992Apr14.183059.26265@towers.rn.com> davidh@towers.rn.com (David Holland) writes:
>>>Is DOS in OS2 2.0 faster than plain Dos on the SAME machine? Or is it so
>>>arkward and slow that I would have to dual-bbot all the time?
>>It sure speeds along when you're accessing a file on a HPFS partition!
>>No, it seems to me that DOS runs just fine.  Of course, if you've got
>>a couple disk or cpu intensive tasks going on things slow down, but
>>not as much as with Windows or DesqView.
>Well, just an example, a very old copy of norton utilities SI reports
>approx 51.2 on a 486/33 as its computing index, however under
>OS/2 2.0 in a Dos window I managed only 18.x.
>I'd say the disk I/O is probably improved considerably (with HPFS that is)
>however computing thru-put is (obviously) lower.

No, one cannot jump to that conclusion.  Norton SI is obviously doing
something grossly trivial.  OS/2 2.0 may, in fact, sense this and
steal CPU away from that DOS session to devote it to other tasks.

One could try bumping up IDLE_SENSITIVITY to 100 and then running SI,
but even there I would have my doubts.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller)
Subject: Re: News from L.A. OS/2 Celebration and COMDEX announcement
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 23:03:15 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.225834.5596@cheshire.oxy.edu> rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller) writes:
>I just got back from the OS/2 rollout at the Westin Bonaventure in downtown
>L.A.

One more thing:

Not a tie to be seen.  Everyone who presented wore rugby shirts/sweaters
and trousers.

Cavianno even wore ski-boots out onto the stage.

-Dave
-- 
David Giller, Box 134 | Q: How many Oregonians does it take to screw in a light
Occidental College    | bulb?  A: Three.  One to replace the bulb, and two to
1600 Campus Road      | fend off all the Californians trying to share the
Los Angeles, CA 90041 | experience. ---------------------------rafetmad@oxy.edu
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 Device Drivers - Mastrianni Book
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:56:26 GMT
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:

>feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel) writes:
>: martin@minster.york.ac.uk writes:
>: 
>: >Some time back the book ``Writing OS/2 2.0 Device Drivers in C'', by
>: >Steven Mastrianni was discussed here. A release date of 6th April was given.
>: >Is this book now available? I just got our bookshop to enquire, and the
>: >publishers give the UK release date as AUGUST '92!!! This is *dreadful*!
>: 
>: >Are there any US booksellers that will ship books such as this overseas?
>: 
>: I got my copy about a week ago. VNR has an 800 number that orders can
>: be placed on.
>:

>800 what?

VNR Order desk: 1-800-926-2665. VNR pays shipping and gives you a 5%
discount from list.
-- 
David Feustel N9MYI, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805. (219)482-9631
George Bush believes in the "carrot and stick" approach to social problems:
       - give carrots to the rich and stick it to the poor -
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: free os/2?
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:13:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.n-tjcmq.rcain
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

steveha@microsoft.com (Steve Hastings) writes:
: 
: > I never did understand the problems that microsoft & IBM had in
: > working together.
: 

I was told the breaking point came over IBM's insistance on REXX as OS/2's
procedural language and Gates' insistance on what?  Basic of course.
Probably untrue but plausable given Gates' weak ego.
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael D Kretzer)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 "Buglet" Report
Originator: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 00:12:24 GMT

From article <1992Apr12.165717.12899@midway.uchicago.edu>, by sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples):
>>I don't notice any difference in mouse movement between DOS and OS/2.
>>I even tried Framework III & QuickBASIC and neither seemed jerky like
>>full screen Win-OS/2.  
> 
> The Framework III and QuickBASIC examples are not "jerky," but they do
> have exceptionally slow "mouse tracking" (meaning that you have to
> move the mouse an inordinate amount to get the pointer to move.  Is
> there a setting to adjust this (sometimes called the "ballistic"
> behavior) with the mouse driver?

Have you tried messing with the DOS settings?  I've found that for jerky
mouse settings in DOS programs, turning up IDLE_SENSITIVITY to 90-100
always eliminates any trace of jerkiness.

>>> (8)  FORMAT bug.  FORMAT /? does not generate help. 
>>/? is not listed as an option for help in the online documentation.  I
>>think that IBM's DOS box was not meant to fully replicate all DOS 5.0 functions
>>100% of the way.  They seem to prefer the WPS help method.
> 
> OK, working as designed, I guess.  :-)

At least that's how I see it :)

> Just to elaborate, when I say "snow" I mean strange blinking/lines
> when I move objects, move the mouse pointer, etc, on the Workplace
> Shell desktop.  This "snow" closely resembles the old "CGA snow"
> phenomenon, although it isn't as pronounced.

Absolutely NONE of this behavior on my Tseng ET4000 Plus compatible...
with SVGA ON, screen switches are fine and all my DOS SVGA programs run
flawlessly...

>>This might be due to hard disk partitions greater than 40 or 50MB.  I first
>>had one 80MB partition and two 50MB partitions of my 80MB & 100MB hard
>>drives.  I noticed noticed no 'slowness' with CHKDSK and the percentage
>>display would rip through rather quickly (note: they were all HPFS).  Then
>>when I reassigned the two 50MB partitions to one large 100MB partition
>>I noticed more slowness during CHKDSK (could it be unfragmenting perhaps?)
> 
> I think that could be the case.  Perhaps a reworking of the
> "percentage complete" counter would be in order.  It shouldn't look
> like it freezes (otherwise make the counter run more slowly).

Regardless, my drive light flashes on/off continuously, even when the
"percentage complete" counter stops momentarily...doesn't bother me at 
all as long as the drive keeps going :)