HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cproto@marsh.cs.curtin.edu.au (Computer Protocol)
Subject: Re: compiling kernel hangs machine
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 10:46:31 GMT

kuku@acds.physik.rwth-aachen.de (Christoph Kukulies) writes:


>Could it be that the swap default space (5MB) is too small for compiling
>a kernel with a 4 MB machine. I tried a first kernel build this
>afternoon on a 386SX 4MB and when I came back after several hours the machine seemed to be dead - login from outside was not possible (telnet hung also).

>This happened during the compilation of tty.c .

>Is it possible to increase the swap space simply by swapping to a file (swapon)?

>--Chris
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>kuku@acds.physik.rwth-aachen.de
>*** Error code 1
> 
>Stop.

I had similar problems. Sometimes the make hangs and the only remedy is
a reboot. I managed to build a kernel with ddb. Using CTRL+ALT+ESC I
entered DDB. Unfortunately there is no man page or any other doc for
DDB. So I still don't know why the kernel sometimes dies. 0.0 with some
of the posted kernel patches seemed to be far more robust. I think about
going back to 0.0. I had only one problem with 0.0: after very large
makes (e.g. X11R5) the system started to trash and finally died.

Actually I had another problem - dump hung the system. I'm going to
try that tonight with 0.1.

regards - Tibor Sashegyi (cproto@abel.cs.curtin.edu.au)
From: sim@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Peng-Toh Sim)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386BSD: Dinky little socket(?) bug -- ^V as escape character?
Summary: POSIX IEXTEN
Date: 30 Jul 92 11:35:45 GMT
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley

In article <1992Jul30.081047.16575@news.tu-graz.ac.at> chmr@fstgds01.tu-graz.ac.at (Christoph Robitschko) writes:
>In article <1992Jul30.011650.5292@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> sim@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Peng-Toh Sim) writes:
>>In article <sand.712454840@milton> sand@milton.u.washington.edu (Derek Upham) writes:
>[complains that he has to press ^V twice to be interpreted in a screen session]
[bunch of stuff I wrote deleted.]
>>Can somebody who has access to the actual POSIX.1 document comment
>>on this please?
>>
>>PT
>>sim@cory.berkeley.edu
>>
>From "Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX) Part 1: System Application
>Program Interface (API) [C Language]" ("IEEE Std 1003.1 - 1990"), Chapter
>7.1.2.4:
>
># If IEXTEN is set,implementation-defined functions shall be recognized from the
># input data. It is implementation defined how IEXTEN being set interacts with
># ICANON, ISIG, IXON, or IXOFF. If IEXTEN is not set, then implementation-
># defined functions shall not be recognized, and the corresponding input
># characters shall be processed as described for ICANON, ISIG, IXON, or IXOFF.

Ha Ha, what an ambiguous standard!
To get the "correct" behaviour, we can fix 386bsd or screen etc. or both!!!
I think 386bsd should be fixed such that when ICANON is not set, IEXTEN
functions are ignored.  This still follows the above definition and yet 
will work well in practice because other POSIX programs that uses RAW mode
will "forget" to turn off IEXTEN anyway.

PT
sim@cory.berkeley.edu

>
>Typing errors are my own intellectual property 8->
>
>							Christoph
>-- 
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Christoph M. Robitschko  | "the only man who got his work done by Friday
>chmr@edvz.tu-graz.ac.at  |             was Robinson Crusoe."
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: meharp01@vlsi.louisville.edu (Michael Harpe)
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Organization: University of Louisville
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:15:08 GMT

Oh well, I hear that Windows NT will be an OK environment.  Have fun, guys!

Mike Harpe
University of Louisville
-- 
---------------------------------------
"I will not barf unless i'm sick"
                                   - A Chalkboard from "The Simpsons"

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: greg@ecse.rpi.edu (Greg)
Subject: 386bsd 0.1 - Advice on bootstrap debugging needed.
Keywords: 386bsd boot wdboot
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 20:07:13 GMT

I've already ask this once before, but since the response was nearly
non-existsent, I'll try again. 

I seem to have a problem booting that is timing dependant. My machine will
boot off wd0 about 95 % the time when in low speed mode. In high speed (33MHz)
it boots only about 20% of the time.

My equipment:
386-33 Advanced Integration Research motherboard (1 CHIPS & 2  ETEQ VLSIs)
Quantum 105lp IDE
Trident 8900 vga
Novell Ne2000 ethernet


I started to poke around in the boot stuff. I put a printf at the begining of
boot.c. I rebuilt wdboot and bootwd and then re-disklabeled. I verified that
boot.c was not reached when the boot failed. When it succeeded, I saw my
debugging message. I have tried to play with wdbootblk.c, but am getting   
nowhere. I tried to add code to write directly to the video memory so I can
see where the bootstrap fails. Years ago I dabbled in 8088 assemlbly language,
but I have forgotten most of what I knew. Of course, there have been substantial
changes to the instruction set since the 8088. It would be very helpful if 
someone could pass along the following things:  

		1) address of the bottom of video  RAM
		2) perhaps even a line of or two of code to write something
			to video RAM. (I'm sure I could do this myself once
			I figure out the assembler syntax, when I get some
			kind of docs, but I am impatient!)
		3) any other suggestions for bootstrap debugging techniques.

      Thanks, Greg                 greg@megas.ecse.rpi.edu

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: dealwisb@cognos.com (Brian de Alwis)
Subject: Re: Some questions, some fixes, some suggestions
Organization: Cognos Incorporated, Ottawa CANADA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:37:14 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.101018.9902@cs.few.eur.nl> pk@cs.eur.nl writes:
>In <1992Jul25.182354.14203@cognos.com> dealwisb@cognos.com (Brian de Alwis) writes:
>>	   The new-and-improved execve() no longer accepts '#!' magic
>>codes... This is best demonstrated by which(1), a csh command, when
>>running /bin/sh. I haven't even tried doing anything with this (yet).
>
>For those interested, a version of kern_execve.c based on v0.1 with the
>`#!' magic enabled is available via anon-FTP at ftp.cs.few.eur.nl in
>directory ~ftp/386BSD/unofficial.

Astonishingly enough, the #! magic works now... After I recompiled the
kernel. I'm not sure why/how, but I'm not complaining!

-- 
+++BdA  Brian de Alwis. Brain on loan to Cognos Inc, Ottawa, Ontario.
	dealwisb@cognos.com, or bsdealwi@napier.{waterloo.edu,uwaterloo.ca}
	"Nine out of ten men who tried camels said they preferred women"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: dennis@fnbc.com (Dennis Box )
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Reply-To: dennis@fnbc.com (Dennis Box )
Organization: First National Bank Of Chicago, Chicago IL, USA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 23:51:34 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.173415.11587@nebulus.ca> dennis@nebulus.ca (Dennis  
S. Breckenridge) writes:
[deleted]
>
> Boycott AT&T


I came in on this thread late.  Could some kind soul email me the
post that started the whole thing?

Thanks,

--
Dennis D. Box          	|   (312) 732-6329 	| "Its FUN to have fun,
My own opinions, not 	| dennis@fnbc.com      	| but you have to know 
my employers. Your 	| ddb@vpnet.chi.il.us	| how!"   -T. Geisel
reactions may vary. 	|  Kill Your Television.  
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: mjm@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Mike McBain)
Subject: Partitioning
Keywords: DOS BSD Disk Manager
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 07:04:07 GMT

I have been able to get tiny BSD up across my whole disk, but I'd
dearly like to have it co-exist with DOS. I don't have Disk Manager, 
but I do have Norton. I do not seem able to alter the partition type
in the way described in the documentation. Can anyone suggest a way
this can be done? If I knew the byte offsets and values for the second
MSDOS 5.0 partition, I could find them and change them so BSD can
see it. At the moment it just doesn't see the partitions. Perhaps
there is a way to do this with something on the fixit disk?

-- 
---
Mike McBain                                 David Syme Faculty of Business
mjm@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au                  Monash University - Caulfield
+61 3 573 2646                              Australia
From: bpalmer@BBN.COM (Brian Palmer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Where to buy BSD manuals?
Date: 31 Jul 92 19:23:13 GMT
Reply-To: bpalmer@BBN.COM (Brian Palmer)
Distribution: na
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

Where can I buy printed BSD manuals?  I've seen some that have a devil/demon
on the cover ... who prints them?  Mail order places are best.

Thanks,
Brian

PS BTW, these are for my home 386BSD system.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Subject: Re: adding data encryption
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:29:25 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard

In article <92213.095633KLAWITT@DMSWWU1A.UNI-MUENSTER.DE> Holger Klawitter, Informatik <KLAWITT@DMSWWU1A.UNI-MUENSTER.DE> writes:

   I miss the possibility to include a crypt command into 386bsd.
   Ok, ok I know its illegal to ship it outside the USA, but is
   there any europeen (or any other non -american) site out there
   where the crypt source can be taken from?
   (To avoid any flames: in europe we are also interested in .passwd
   files which to NOT contain the password in literal)

How about using a different one-way function, like MD5, which is (a)
strong (there are those who claim it's stronger than DES), and (b)
exportable?

The sources for an implementation of MD5 in C are in the body of
RFC1321.  It converts a bit string into a 16-byte binary message
digest; 

To use this for a crypt() replacement, crank the plaintext+salt through MD5,
take the 16 byte message digest, encode it using the same mod-64
encoding as crypt (to generate a 22 character string), prepend the
salt (hopefully longer than 2 characters :-) ), and use that as the
"crypted" string.











Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Organization: eklektix - Boulder, Colorado
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 00:45:36 GMT

pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo) writes:
><1992Jul23.173248@eklektix.com> rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>>...USL hasn't moved against Net 2, which sure looks like
>>tacit approval to me...so let's make sure it's everywhere.  My own opinion

>didn't i read here that USL *IS* going after Net 2!?

Only indirectly.  But my wording was poor in any case...

>I recall something to the effect that since BSDI is based on Net 2,
>AT&T is challenging BSDI's claim that an AT&T license is not necessary.

Yes, USL is challenging BSDI's claim.  (BSDI's claim, of course, is just
a reiteration of the claim UC Berkeley made in making the Net 2 code
available.)

But what I meant is that USL has not (as far as I know) made any attempt to
stop the distribution of Net 2.  Right now, this very instant, you can
reach out and touch any of several ftp sites to get a copy of Net 2.  It's
pretty weird--that they're not complaining about the source of the unre-
stricted distribution (CSRG) but they complain about someone else (BSDI)
redistributing it.  I don't claim I understand it; all I'm saying is that
it *appears* they don't want to restrict Net 2 _per_se_.
-- 
Dick Dunn    rcd@raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd    Boulder, Colorado
   ...A clear analysis of any situation is often mistaken for pessimism.
From: rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386BSD & AHA1542B & CDC94171-9 Disk problem
Date: 21 Jul 92 11:33:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: sgi.ninhuvo
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

tha@ulrik.uio.no writes:
+---------------
| wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes:
| >tha@ulrik.uio.no 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
| >
| >This looks like the problem Rob Warnock had with the Adaptec. Try running
| >the diagnostic program's that just exercise DMA without a disk. If it
| >randomly fails, that's it. Rob found that when he "dumbed down" the config
| >by adding wait states to memory, then the SCSI controller would fail.
| 
| I ran the DMA tests for several hours, with no failing.
+---------------

Then it's not the problem I was having. Sorry, then I don't know what it is.

+---------------
| I don't know what you mean by '"dumbed down" the config by adding wait
| states to memory'. There is no extra firmware in this 386. And no way to
| adjust wait states etc. The machine is a plain 25Mhz 386 with no fancy
| rom or setups except facilities for setting disk types, shadowing and
| CPU speed. All shadowing is off, CPU speed set to normal.
+---------------

Well, on my 486, the CMOS RAM setup allows to to set "memory timing" to
"slow" or "fast", and a bunch of other stuff. WHen I was trying to get
"0.0newer" to run, I set all the CMOS RAM setups to the slowest, "most
conservative" values, and created a problem for myself with the Adaptec... ;-}

But again, it sounds like your problem is different.


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510		rpw3@sgi.com
Silicon Graphics, Inc.		(415)390-1673
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.
Mountain View, CA  94043
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: bzs@ussr.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Organization: The World
	<1821@adagio.UUCP> <1992Jul24.064922.8448@newshost.anu.edu.au>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 21:35:38 GMT


From: clement@arp.anu.edu.au (CJ Canon)
>  I'd like to know why Ma hasn't gotten the claws pointed at the Jolitz' port.
>The reasoning behind this lack might show some of the logic (if any) of the 
>current suit.

No, you only need one precedent and then you can knock the others off
like flies, no need to drag arbitrary parties in to all fight back and
raise the legal bills and public awareness.


--
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
From: grog@adagio.UUCP (Greg Lehey)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!
Date: 25 Jul 92 11:40:25 GMT
Organization: LEMIS, Schellnhausen 2, W-6324 Feldatal, Germany

In article <23309@alice.att.com> andrew@alice.att.com (Andrew Hume) writes:
>	let me say up front that i work for at&t. i neither work for,
>nor have any influence on, USL. the opinions expressed below are my
>own and not at&t's.

Well, it's nice to see a dissenting opinion. Nothing makes a
discussion more uninteresting than everybody saying the same thing.
But obviously your opinions are coloured by your origins.

>	if you agree with me that the big issue is whether or not the NET-2
>release is free of any licensing concerns, what can be done about that?
>you can either try to influence the (technical) decision in court or
>try to induce USL to drop the suit.

The obvious thing is to dismiss the suit until:

1. USL specifies *exactly* what it is that, in their opinion, is
   derived from AT&T code.

2. USL serves notice to BSDI to stop using this code.

3. BSDI does not comply within a reasonable time.

The likelihood of (3) happening is low indeed. The fact is, I have no
reason to believe that USL's stated grounds are the real reason for
this lawsuit. They want to set a precedent - BSDI is small,
comparatively vulnerable, and the uncertainty about the legal position
will certainly cost them sales, not to mention the cost of litigation.
If this is not in accordance with the US legal system, then something
*desperately* needs to be done about that.

-- 
Greg Lehey                       | Tel: +49-6637-1488              
LEMIS                            | Fax: +49-6637-1489
Schellnhausen 2, W-6324 Feldatal, Germany
*** NOTE ***: Headers are mangled - reply to grog%lemis@Germany.EU.net
From: alanc@ocf.berkeley.edu (Alan Coopersmith)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Keywords: AT&T 'Death Star' rises over BSDI's horizon, others coming soon...
Date: 21 Jul 92 23:26:51 GMT
Organization: U.C. Bezerkeley Overloaded Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocf.berkeley.edu

In article <l6nibgINNje6@neuro.usc.edu> merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:
)On a final note, BSDI's own press release states that:
)
)  Although USL has not sued the University of California, we expect that
)  USL (or its parent, ATT) will threaten to review or withdraw research
)  grants made to any university or research institution using or
)  distributing software based on NET2 ...

Hopefully, if this happens, the Universities are willing to play hardball as
well, and move all their long distance services to other carriers and stop
buying all AT&T products (telephones & computers alike...)

[If AT&T is that worried about everyone having a license, why haven't they
gotten uunet/dec/etc. to pull the Net-2 sources out of the public archives?]

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Coopersmith			Internet: alanc@ocf.berkeley.edu
University of California, Berkeley	Bitnet:   alanc@UCBOCF.BITNET
From: jtkohl@cs.Berkeley.EDU (John T Kohl)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Date: 21 Jul 1992 17:20:45 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: stinson.cs.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: merlin@neuro.usc.edu's message of 21 Jul 1992 01:23:12 -0700

In article <l6nibgINNje6@neuro.usc.edu> merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:

> BSDI's motion to dismiss and subsequent press releases argue that AT&T has
> not made out an adequate case of copyright infringement -- and -- therefore
> cannot maintain their claim of false advertising or unfair competition 
> until they prove what BSDI would like to say is a simple copyright claim.  

Well, by my reading, BSDI's motion to dismiss is based on the paucity of
facts cited by AT&T in the complaint.  Specifically, the complaint does
not specifically identify a component (or components) of NET/2 which
allegedly infringe AT&T's intellectual property rights.  The motion to
dismiss cites civil code procedure, claiming in effect that the lack of
specificity of the complaint requires the dismissal.
--
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!)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: gclarkii@NeoSoft.com (Gary Clark II)
Subject: emacs type editor wanted
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 22:31:26 GMT
Summary: I HATE vi... 
Keywords: emacs no_vi

Hello,
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.

Gary Clark II  *N5VMF*
gclarkii@tghost.gbdata.com
gclarkii@sugar.neosoft.com



Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: knie2586@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Robert Joseph Knier)
Subject: booting 386BSD 0.1 w/partition
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 15:07:08 GMT

	I seem to be having problems when installing 386BSD with a partition
(per installation notes).  If I use the entire drive without partitions,
the system works fine however, after creating a 61Mb partition for 386BSD,
when I reboot, I get an error message pertaining to bad disklabel.  (I
already have the patches from agate).  Any work around?

						Thanks in Advance

						Bob Knier
						(knie2586@csd4.csd.uwm.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu (Jim Lick)
Subject: Re: AT&T vs. BSDI --> 4.3BSD-NET2 distribution requires AT&T license!!!
Keywords: AT&T 'Death Star' rises over BSDI's horizon [Tel. 1-800-800-4BSD]
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 05:34:41 GMT

In <1992Jul23.154309.530@spuddy.uucp> markl@spuddy.uucp (Mark Liversedge) writes:
>If BSDI lose we all lose. AT&T can F??K OFF if they want what I got back. 

Any net.lawyers want to fill us in about what sort of things AT&T can
demand of BSDI customers if they win the case?  Can they force them to all
pay licensing fees?  Destroy all BSDI materials?  Scary thoughts for
customers.  By the way, for those who haven't read the interrogatory,
USL is asking for a list of all customers, and any others who received
BSDI promotional materials.  Blech.

                            Jim Lick		       
Work: University of California	| Play: 1236 Camino Meleno
      Santa Barbara		|       Santa Barbara, CA 93111-1007
      Dept. of Mechanical Engr. |	(805) 964-2088 voice/msg
      2311 Engr II Building     |	(805) MUD-SPY1 data
      (805) 893-4113            |       jim@case.isla-vista.ca.us
      jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu	|       jim@cave.isla-vista.ca.us
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: rcd@raven.eklektix.com (Dick Dunn)
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Summary: What can we do most effectively?
Organization: eklektix - Boulder, Colorado
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:32:48 GMT

paigen@tfs.com (David Paigen) writes:

>I think someone should give BSDI a medal for doing their work...

Easy, there.  BSDI is doing what they must do to survive as a business. 
They *have* done their legal homework, and let's hope it's good enough.
But let's save the celebration for when the battle's over and they've won.

>...More to
>the point, we should start contributing to the "BSDI legal defense fund."

I don't think that's a very effective way to go.  If you want to contribute
to BSDI's efforts, buy their product.  I'm not saying that because the
legal issues are unimportant, but because a "legal defense fund" isn't the
way for a small group of people to have a significant effect against a
large corporation with lots of lawyers.  If you're really rich, or in some
position to make a substantial contribution to the legal battle, fine...
but that's doesn't apply to most of the readers of this group.  USL can
just throw money at the battle; it's hard for us to do that effectively.
Instead, think of ways we can use the abilities or the connections we do
have.

Most of us are just ordinary individuals with ordinary amounts of money.
I think a better way to help is to make the BSD-based software widely
available.  Encourage the use of *any* systems based on Net 2 (yes, gasp!,
I'm advocating both BSDI and 386BSD in the same breath), get them out all
over the world.  USL hasn't moved against Net 2, which sure looks like
tacit approval to me...so let's make sure it's everywhere.  My own opinion
is that the genie is already out of the bottle anyway, and not likely to
be put back in, but we might as well try to be as thorough as we can.
-- 
Dick Dunn    rcd@raven.eklektix.com   -or-   raven!rcd    Boulder, Colorado
   ...A clear analysis of any situation is often mistaken for pessimism.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: perv@flash.emf.mcgill.ca (Irwin Roger Gibson)
Subject: Altering boot diskette in DOS environment
Organization: Engineering Microcomputing Facility
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 21:35:39 GMT

      A few days ago I posted an article asking for help in making
the distribution diskette under DOS.  Okay, I know I can compile
a new kernel with BSD.  But what happens if BSD won't boot on your
machine?  I assume before 386BSD and Linux was up and running, some
work must have been done under DOS.

     There must be some way it can be done.  I tried the bootables
on agate, but no luck.  Does anyone have a bootable, which writes
to the screen at every point, from the very start, to the very end?
When I am forced to do a hard reset, my CMOS values are all scrambled.


    Whatever ideas you have would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Irwin Gibson
perv@flash.emf.mcgill.ca
perv@emf.lan.mcgill.ca


Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd