HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Steve_Goyette@mindlink.bc.ca (Steve Goyette)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: ** HELP WITH SUN 2/50 **
Date: 16 Oct 92 08:17:18 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

Hi,

   I have 2 SUN 2/50 workstations (1 with a SCSI host adapter) and would
like to know if anybody can help me out with the following items:

     -  OS (I think it's rev 2.1) on a 1/4" MAG tape.  I have the OS but
     on 9 track tapes and don't really want to acquire a 9 track tape
     reader. (My room is full enough as it is!!)

     -  a VME back plane with more than 2 ports (ie 2 cards).

     -  Memory expansion card with more than 1 meg (to expand the 2/50 to
     more than 2 megs.)

     -  A SCSI cable with a DB50 (3 row) to a ribbon cable berg type
     connector or a SCSI centronics connector.

     -  Schematics or tech documentation on the 2/50 CPU board and/or 1 meg
     memory board.

  This is just a hobby system for me so any information that anyone might
have on these things would be GREATLY appreciated.



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve Goyette                    |       Email : Steve_Goyette@MindLink.BC.CA
Software Engineer                |       Phone : (604) 421-8864
Abstract Automation Limited      |       Fax   : (604) 421-7722
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: jgw1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Jan G. Wilms)
Subject: bar to /rfd0 (floppy drive)
Organization: Mississippi State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 12:08:59 GMT

Because I currently lack a tape drive to my standalone sparc station,
I am doing limited back-ups to my floppy using bar. bar does prompt
me to insert a new floppy when the current one is filled, but when I
try to do this same thing in a shell script the second floppy is
rejected with "bad format" when I try to do a listing or restore. The
same command DOES work when I do the bar archiving straight from the
command line (I use tcsh). In either case, the first floppy is always
ok. 

Please email any suggestions to wilms@cs.msstate.edu or jgw1@msstate.bitnet

Thanks,

G. Jan Wilms
Union University

Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: smasilam@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Senthilamudhan Masilamani)
Subject: recursive dir trees
Summary: I need a prog to recursively list the files and sizes in the input dir 
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:35:45 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Keywords: recursive

I need a prog to take a dir name as input and list all the files and respective
sizes in the specfied directory as well as recursively work on all the sub-
directories. A few scripts were posted a while back but they didnt 
work recursively. If anyone knows of such a program to create such a tree,
please let me know.
SM

Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:3935 comp.sys.sun.misc:4661 comp.unix.shell:4322
From: guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.unix.shell
Subject: Re: C-shell unlimit disables sendmail
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:57:48 GMT
Followup-To: comp.sys.sun.misc
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara

>[Note cross-posting. Followup to comp.unix.misc]

[Inappropriate Followup-To:, given that this is probably SunOS-specific,
and given that the readership of the other groups may be curious what
the answer was; followup to "comp.sys.sun.misc".]

>I suspect the culprit is stacksize, because if I raise it to 10m, mail
>won't get delivered. I believe what I observed is rather mysterious.
>Do you have any good explanations?

The SunOS "mmap()" call, if not given an address at which to map
something, will pick addresses starting below the stack limit, and going
down.  This is intended to keep the "mmap()"ped stuff from bumping into
the top of the heap for as long as possible.

If you set the stack limit large enough, there won't *be* any room below
the stack limit, so "mmap()" will fail.

The run-time linker uses "mmap()" to map in shared libraries, so if
"mmap()" doesn't work, neither do shared libraries.

Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that's the cause; there may still be
plenty of room even with a 10m stack limit.  Check whether "sendmail" is
using a frozen configuration file, and if it is, get rid of the frozen
configuration file and see if that fixes the problem; there may be some
problem if the stack limit is larger and changes the way the address
space is laid out from the way it was laid out when the configuration
file was frozen (although I don't know that "sendmail -bz" will save the
data/BSS for shared libraries in any case).
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: iqbal@pawnee.eel.ufl.edu (M.Iqbal)
Subject: xwd -> postscript 
Organization: University of Florida
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 21:16:18 GMT

Hi,

Does anybody knows how to convert X-window-dump file into 
postscript?

thanks

-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            
      						 >><<<     >>><<<<
Iqbal@sioux.eel.ufl.edu		 		 (o o)     (o) (o)
University of Florida				 [ | ]        | 
                                  		   -         ---

Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: liuwu@acuson.com (Wu Liu)
Subject: Re: How does ISA compare to EISA
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 02:13:21 GMT

>ed@maxed.amg.com (Ed Whittemore) writes:
>>Why it's twice as fast, of course. Fast SCSI-2 is by definition 10 MHz
>>for the 8 bit wide SCSI bus. Ordinary "slow" SCSI is 5 MHz. For
>>drives that will support fast SCSI-2, many of which have very high 
>>internal transfer rates, the fast SCSI-2 controllers like the 
>>Adaptec 174(x), BusTek 742A, and BusTek 747S are the only way to go.

larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>So performance with the 1542C is the same as with the Bustek ISA
>board?  

Bustek has two different versions of their 542 (ISA) board.  I think
the designations are 542B (SCSI-1) and 542S (SCSI-2); my documentation
is at home, so I can't check on it.
-- 
Wu Liu                          Software Engineer, User Interface Group
liuwu@acuson.COM                Acuson
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: ed@maxed.amg.com (Ed Whittemore)
Subject: Re: How does ISA compare to EISA
Organization: American Micro Group, Ft. Lee  NJ
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 15:26:12 GMT

In article <1992Oct10.021321.19347@acuson.com> liuwu@acuson.com (Wu Liu) writes:
>>ed@maxed.amg.com (Ed Whittemore) writes:
>>>Why it's twice as fast, of course. Fast SCSI-2 is by definition 10 MHz
>>>for the 8 bit wide SCSI bus. Ordinary "slow" SCSI is 5 MHz. For
>>>drives that will support fast SCSI-2, many of which have very high 
>>>internal transfer rates, the fast SCSI-2 controllers like the 
>>>Adaptec 174(x), BusTek 742A, and BusTek 747S are the only way to go.
>
>larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>>So performance with the 1542C is the same as with the Bustek ISA
>>board?  
>
>Bustek has two different versions of their 542 (ISA) board.  I think
>the designations are 542B (SCSI-1) and 542S (SCSI-2); my documentation
>is at home, so I can't check on it.
>-- 
>Wu Liu                          Software Engineer, User Interface Group
>liuwu@acuson.COM                Acuson

This is no longer true. The 542 series has been replaced with the
545 series for single ended. There is still a 542D for diferential.

The 545S series is SCSI-2F, actively terminated, supports 2.88 MB
floppy drives and has a reduced chip count.
-- 
Ed Whittemore   uunet!maxed!ed   ed@maxed.amg.com
American Micro Group, Inc.   201-944-3293
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit
From: tsw1@Isis.MsState.Edu (Thomas S Wilson)
Subject: Re: uPort SYSV/AT
Reply-To: wilson@ee.msstate.edu
Organization: I'm not very organized!
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:16:02 GMT

Well, its not free.... It cost about $600 I beleive when it first came out, 
but now you can get it cheap if you find someone who is selling it used. 
Microport declared chapter 11 after they made this product, then came out
of it, but they stopped making and officially supporting any release less
than 3.0. (SYSV/AT is release 2.4)


-- 
         
 |||    Scott Wilson              |||    "Paradise is exactly like where    |||
 . .    wilson@ee.msstate.edu     . .     you are right now, only much,     . .
  _     "office": (601)325-2220    _      MUCH better     -Laurie Anderson   _


Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: How does ISA compare to EISA
Organization: The Gator Conferencing System 219-289-3745 
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 11:36:00 GMT

ed@maxed.amg.com (Ed Whittemore) writes:

>Why it's twice as fast, of course. Fast SCSI-2 is by definition 10 MHz
>for the 8 bit wide SCSI bus. Ordinary "slow" SCSI is 5 MHz. For
>drives that will support fast SCSI-2, many of which have very high 
>internal transfer rates, the fast SCSI-2 controllers like the 
>Adaptec 174(x), BusTek 742A, and BusTek 747S are the only way to go.

>The 1542B is a 5 MHz SCSI bus board. The 1542C is supposed to be a fast
>SCSI board. It will also supposedly support denser translation
>geometries as well, to keep apparent cylinders under 1024 for those OS

So performance with the 1542C is the same as with the Bustek ISA
board?  

For one running SCSI I drives (mine are Fijutsu 2363S and I believe they
are SCSI 1) there will be no noticable difference between the 1542B and
the 1542C (or Bustek) since the limiting factor will be the drives which
only support SCSI 1 -- correct?

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit
From: s2848632@techunix.technion.ac.il (ITZHAK FRIEDMAN)
Subject: uPort SYSV/AT
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. of Technology
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:19:39 GMT
Summary: where can I find it?!

Hi,
I am looking for a FREE un*x for my 286 PC.
I heard that uPort SYSV/AT is a free un*x for 286 but I don't know where to
find it, its FAQ etc.
Please post me where I can ftp it or any other FREE un*x for 286.

Thanks in advance,
	Zachi.

Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: rhodesia@wixer.cactus.org (Felix S. Gallo)
Subject: Re: What makes an OS a UNIX??
Followup-To: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Organization: eptitude
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 05:37:09 GMT

chans@cs.curtin.edu.au (Sean Chan) writes:
>Gidday all,
>
>I am relatively new to PC-UNIX, and I would like to know what makes an
>OS a UNIX. I've heard that MINIX isn't real UNIX, in comparison to
>LINUX or 386BSD. What gives??

Linux and 386bsd are not real UNIX either.  Being a UNIX requires, right
off the bat, that you be an operating system written by AT&T or its 
subsidiaries.  

Linux and 386bsd are particularly nice clones of AT&T's copyrighted
and trademarked and FDA-approved product.  They have enough functionality
that they are immediately usable as drop-in replacements for AT&T's
product by users ranging in experience from novices to grandmasters.
As such, in keeping with the net's new etymological decision, they are
good Unixes. (*)

Minix has a few problems which limit it as an OS.  The one I hear the
most about is a 64k limit on process space (or is that address space?
I don't remember) -- which makes it useless for most middle-to-large
applications.  Real Unixes don't have whatever limit it is.

>
>Sean

(*) Note: by reading this article and sending the author a small
note, you may agree to pay the sum of 1/20th of a penny to the author
as a 'newsware user fee'.  The author hereby announces his intent to
call in his debts in 40,000 years.  This therefore constitutes a 
commercial, public use of the word 'Unix' to refer to a non-AT&T
product; if AT&T refrains from suing me for the period of 1 (one)
month, then I will regard their non-action as implicit agreement that
their rights to the word 'UNIX' do not cover the word 'Unix'.

Felix
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Felix Sebastian Gallo                              rhodesia@wixer.cactus.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Running X and Xremote on a PC clone, do you do it?  Dell comments
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 05:33:08 GMT
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI

In article <1992Oct6.053614.13370@nntpserver.chevron.com> hcrms@usmi03.midland.chevron.com (Mitchell S. Craig) writes:
>A Wangtek 5150-ES, SCSI 150 MB QIC, cost about $600 in January.

There's no such thing as a 150MB QIC tape drive.  A DC6250 is just a
longer version of the DC6150, so a 150MB QIC drive can read and write
250MB tapes without any modifications.  (Okay, I guess there might be
an ancient drive out there somewhere that *only* handles DC6150's.
But I'm almost positive that the Wangtek 5150 handles 250MB tapes just
fine.)

>Also, can someone please explain why Adaptec's 16-bit
>SCSI controller (the 1542B) is used with 386DX's whereas their 32-bit 
>controller (the 1742) is used with 486 - EISA machines
>(is this correct?). Both are full 32-bit machines, right?.

Nope.  You're confusing memory bus width with I/O bus width.  Any ISA
machine has a 16-bit I/O bus, regardless of the processor's memory bus
width.  And any 386DX or 486 machine has a 32-bit memory bus,
regardless of the I/O bus width.  Since the Adaptec 154x/174x
controllers plug into the I/O bus, not the memory bus, it's the I/O
bus width that matters.  You can use a 1542B in both 386DX and 486
ISA-bus machines, and you can use a 1742 in both 386DX and 486
EISA-bus machines.  I'm running a 1524B in my 486DX/33 ISA machine
right now, as a matter of fact.

>Is there some reason why a 32-bit SCSI controller 
>won't work with an ISA machine?

Yes.  ISA is a 16-bit bus; 32-bit SCSI controllers have a 32-bit bus
connection.  If you examine the connectors, you will discover that an
EISA board won't even physically fit into an ISA slot.

-- 
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "There are two ways to solve this problem:
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   | the hard way, and the easy way.  Let's start
                            | with the hard way."
                            |   - W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: Running X and Xremote on a PC clone, do you do it?  Dell comments
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:13:33 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1992Oct6.053614.13370@nntpserver.chevron.com>, hcrms@usmi03.midland.chevron.com (Mitchell S. Craig) writes:

| Also, can someone please explain why Adaptec's 16-bit
| SCSI controller (the 1542B) is used with 386DX's whereas their 32-bit 
| controller (the 1742) is used with 486 - EISA machines
| (is this correct?). Both are full 32-bit machines, right?.
| Is there some reason why a 32-bit SCSI controller 
| won't work with an ISA machine?

  The 1742 will not physically plug into a 16 bit bus (ISA). You can use
the 1742 with a 386 EISA machine, but who makes them anymore?
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: ed@maxed.amg.com (Ed Whittemore)
Subject: Re: EISA SCSI Host Adapter Survey
Organization: American Micro Group, Ft. Lee  NJ
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 15:40:13 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.162902.24500@gumby.dsd.trw.com> lainhart@odel.stg.TRW.COM (Mike Lainhart) writes:
>A few days ago I posted a request for some feedback about EISA SCSI
>host adapters because I was having a very frustrating experience with
>Adaptec customer support trying to get their 1742A working in my ALR
>Business VEISA.  Now I am begging for some information so I can make
>a better choice this time.  I have spent over 6 weeks suffering through
>this and I am no longer willing to be given an Adaptec board; there can't
>
...

>  VENDOR        MODEL     IN SERVICE   SATISFACTION    CUSTOMER
>                             TIME                       SUPPORT
>Adaptec         1540
>Adaptec         1740A
>Adaptec         1742A
>DPT            SmartCache
>American
> Megatrends       ?
>
>Please give the IN SERVICE TIME in months and rate SATISFACTION and
>CUSTOMER SUPPORT on a scale from 1 (dissatisfied) to 5 (best thing
>
...

>Any help will be greatly appreciated and you will feel better for
>having made a contribution.

You don't give enough info. for people to help you.

What is your OS and ver?

Do you know that your ALR supports bus master SCSI?

In fact, from a quality and functional standpoint all of the boards
you cite are OK.

What is your problem?

-- 
Ed Whittemore   uunet!maxed!ed   ed@maxed.amg.com
American Micro Group, Inc.   201-944-3293
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: shane@cs.sunysb.edu (Shane Bouslough)
Subject: Re: What makes an OS a UNIX??
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, State U of NY at Stony Brook
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:47:27 GMT

Felix S. Gallo (rhodesia@wixer.cactus.org) wrote:
: Real Unixes don't have whatever limit it is.

Real Unixes don't have limits. :-)

: Felix Sebastian Gallo                           rhodesia@wixer.cactus.org

-Shane

--
Shane Bouslough       | #include <stddisc.h>
shane@sbcs.sunysb.edu | #include <happy.rhodes>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: dhong@wam.umd.edu (Sze Yuen Hong)
Subject: Re: Looking for a Clock device
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:53:58 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.052118.28252@wam.umd.edu> dhong@wam.umd.edu (Sze Yuen Hong) writes:
>
>   
>Hi guys, I am posting this for a friend, he is looking for something like this:
>
>   I am looking for an UTC (GMT) device for my 386/486 machine
>   running ISC system V 3.2.
> 
>   The device should either automatically update my system clock or
>   should come with device driver.
> 
>   The accuracy of the clock should be within one second or better
>   than the clock that comes with the mother board.
>    
>   James
> 
> 
>If anyone has answers to this question, please email me at dhong@wam.umd.edu.
>
>Thanks,
>Sze Hong
> 
>
>

Hi, I have 1 response from this question, but I have accidentally
erase the mail he send me, can the person who sent that message
send it again, I am sorry for the trouble. Also, any other response
is welcome.

Thanks,
Sze Hong

Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.os.os2.misc
From: richmond@sml.cs.psu.edu (Matt Richmond)
Subject: Video card recommendations needed for X and OS/2.
Keywords: Video Card 
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:33:42 GMT

Hello all.  I am in need of advice on video cards.  I have been reading
up on them for 2 months now, and I'm still very confused.  I currently
own a Diamond Stealth, which is great for MS Windows, but basically
bites for everything else.  So my vendor is allowing me to trade it in
for something else.  I had originally planned on the Speedstar 24, which
being ET4000 based, I thought would be perfect.  WRONG!  XFree86 does
not support it, nor the 24X.  
What I'm basically looking for is something that will work with XFree86,
OS/2 2.0 and up, and Dell Unix.  I plan on trying all of these OS's in
the near future, and I want to be able to run XWindows.  The Stealth
does work in OS/2, but only at normal VGA, which is unacceptable.
The Stealth, nor any S3 based card will not work with XFree86, and I'm
not sure about Dell.
From what I've been able to pick up from these various newsgroups,
an ET4000 based card would be my best bet.  I think ET4000 is from
TSeng laboratories, right?  
The key factor I'm looking for is compatibility.  And from what I've
seen, gaining speed thru co-processing sacrifices compatibility.

Any suggestions?  Please either e-mail or post.  Thanks much!

--Matt Richmond
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.os.os2.misc
From: dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat)
Subject: Re: Video card recommendations needed for X and OS/2.
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 01:23:04 GMT
Keywords: Video Card 

In article <Bvrys7.KuK@cs.psu.edu> richmond@sml.cs.psu.edu (Matt Richmond) writes:
> Hello all.  I am in need of advice on video cards.  I have been reading
> up on them for 2 months now, and I'm still very confused.  I currently
> own a Diamond Stealth, which is great for MS Windows, but basically
> bites for everything else.  So my vendor is allowing me to trade it in
> for something else.  I had originally planned on the Speedstar 24, which
> being ET4000 based, I thought would be perfect.  WRONG!  XFree86 does
> not support it, nor the 24X.  
> What I'm basically looking for is something that will work with XFree86,
> OS/2 2.0 and up, and Dell Unix.  I plan on trying all of these OS's in
> the near future, and I want to be able to run XWindows.  The Stealth
> does work in OS/2, but only at normal VGA, which is unacceptable.
> The Stealth, nor any S3 based card will not work with XFree86, and I'm
> not sure about Dell.
> From what I've been able to pick up from these various newsgroups,
> an ET4000 based card would be my best bet.  I think ET4000 is from
> TSeng laboratories, right?  
> The key factor I'm looking for is compatibility.  And from what I've
> seen, gaining speed thru co-processing sacrifices compatibility.
> 
> Any suggestions?  Please either e-mail or post.  Thanks much!
> 
> --Matt Richmond


In general, I have been recommending the Orchid ProDesigner IIs.  It is
quite fast, as ISA bus SVGA cards go.  Don't let anyone sell you a
Trident card.  The Trident board we used in testing the new drivers was
less than half the overall performance of my PD IIs.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
David Wexelblat             | dwex@mtgzfs3.att.com  | Somebody get me a
AT&T Bell Laboratories      | ...!att!mtgzfs3!dwex  |   cheeseburger!
200 Laurel Ave - 4B-421     |                       |      
Middletown, NJ  07748       | (908) 957-5871        | --Steve Miller Band
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.linux,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.os.os2.misc
From: richmond@sml.cs.psu.edu (Matt Richmond)
Subject: Thanks to all (was Re: Video card recommendations needed for X and OS/2.
Keywords: Video Card 
Organization: Surely you jest
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 21:21:17 GMT

I'd like to thank everyone who responded to my video card query.  I've
decided to go with the ATI Graphics Ultra w/ no mouse.  This card 
seems to have both speed and compatibility.  Maybe someday Diamond
will learn that there is more to PCs than MS Windows.  Thanks again

--Matt Richmond
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: Binaries/objects question
Organization: The Gator Conferencing System 219-289-3745 
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:29:13 GMT

csthomas@gizmonic.UUCP (shane thomas) writes:

>binary and object files compiled on one verison of an Intel-based UNIX
>operate/link correctly on another? For example, SCO libraries on
>Dell's SvR4 UNIX.

SCO's binaries execute just fine under SVR4, however - try 
running SVR4 binaries under SCO :)

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry