gawilson@watdragon.UUCP (Graham Wilson) (02/26/86)
I am seriously considering purchasing OS/9 for my CoCo II, but I would like some information. If anyone out there has answers for my questions, please mail them to gawilson@watdragon. Thanks. - With the basic OS/9 package, is a full-screen editor (like vi) included? - How complete is the C-compiler (anything left out)? - How close to Unix is OS/9? - I have one disk drive. Is that enough? Is there a substantial improvement with two disk drives? - Are there any nroff/troff-like packages available? Preferably they would take advantage of dot-addressable printers (to get a multitude of fonts and print sizes - I have a DMP-105). - What software is currently in demand (i.e. stuff which I could write to help pay for OS/9)? Thanks in advance. All pointers and tips are welcome. Graham Wilson gawilson@watdragon 280 Phillip Street, Building A3-133 Waterloo, Ontario. N7S 2W3
jag2@nvuxg.UUCP (J A Gardina) (03/04/86)
Graham Wilson asks; > >- With the basic OS/9 package, is a full-screen editor (like vi) included? >- How complete is the C-compiler (anything left out)? I don't yet have either of these (yet). I believe there is no screen editor included in Basic-O9 but am sure any good text editor will work. I am equally sure that something must be left out of the C compiler. >- How close to Unix is OS/9? Here is where I feel qualified to respond. Keep in mind that OS-9 only claims to be Unix-like. I think they did a fine job in respect to the fundamental philosophy of the operating system. Unified I/O, multitasking, multi-user etc. As far as the commands and there associated syntax, not very much similarity. The equivlalent of "ls -l" is "dir e" and "ps -af" is "procs". You might change the names of some commands to try to get close but you would have to re-write them to really duplicate them. There is a set of commands available that claims to be very similar. Maybe someone has them and will respond. >- I have one disk drive. Is that enough? Is there a substantial > improvement with two disk drives? I have two floppies and I'm already considering a hard disk. I may be spoiled at work but I never can have enough storage. Unless you want to be stuck juggling floppies for hours on end you need at least two drives. >- Are there any nroff/troff-like packages available? Preferably they would > take advantage of dot-addressable printers (to get a multitude of fonts > and print sizes - I have a DMP-105). There is a package that claims to be nroff compatible. Again if someone could respond. >- What software is currently in demand (i.e. stuff which I could write to > help pay for OS/9)? To start the endless list you could write a vt100 terminal emulator that does half the tasks that you'd expect any terminal emulator to do. A decent screen editor (as VI like as possible) and anything that runs on disk basic should be ported over to OS-9. I don't plan on ever using the basic dos unless I absolutely have to. I posted this since I pose some questions that I'd like to hear answers to. Joe Gardina Bell Communications Research Navesink, NJ ihnp4!nvuxg!jag2 (201)758-5486
ecs140w039@ucdavis.UUCP (Mark Nagel) (03/05/86)
/* In reference to the followup by Joe Gardina */ > > Graham Wilson asks; > > > > >- With the basic OS/9 package, is a full-screen editor (like vi) included? > >- How complete is the C-compiler (anything left out)? > > I don't yet have either of these (yet). I believe there is no screen editor > included in Basic-O9 but am sure any good text editor will work. > I am equally sure that something must be left out of the C compiler. > Correct. There is no full screen editor included in Basic09. However, there are many good full screen editors available. The best I have seen is XED along with the XPRINT text formatter by Microtech Consultants. The editor can be easily adapted to work on a variety of terminals by altering one of the accompanying XCODES modules. Also, contrary to the above, the Microware C compiler is very close to complete. It lacks a few items such as bit fields and some minor restrictions like macro definitions can only be on one line. Otherwise it supports a very good Unix compatible library and I have had little trouble porting (smaller) C programs over from Unix. [ . . . ] > > >- I have one disk drive. Is that enough? Is there a substantial > > improvement with two disk drives? > > I have two floppies and I'm already considering a hard disk. I may be > spoiled at work but I never can have enough storage. Unless you want to > be stuck juggling floppies for hours on end you need at least two drives. > You definitely need at least two floppies. I have an single DSQD drive and a single sided 40 track for compatibility. I know many people who have or are getting a hard drive. They make life much easier - especially in using features in the system like multitasking and keystroke buffering. Having only a single floppy though will cripple the system almost beyond use. > >- Are there any nroff/troff-like packages available? Preferably they would > > take advantage of dot-addressable printers (to get a multitude of fonts > > and print sizes - I have a DMP-105). > > There is a package that claims to be nroff compatible. Again if someone > could respond. > The XPRINT formatter I mentioned above is not exactly like nroff, however, the principle is the same. You get very fine control over your printer. It takes full advantage of the special features of any printer like proportional characters and underlining and especially character spacing. If you have a printer that can do microdot spacing, you can get VERY professional looking documents out. I used to hate the way right justification looked on my DMP-110 when it stuck whole spaces in between words. Now I love using XED/XPRINT to do all of my word processing. > >- What software is currently in demand (i.e. stuff which I could write to > > help pay for OS/9)? > > To start the endless list you could write a vt100 terminal emulator that > does half the tasks that you'd expect any terminal emulator to do. A decent > screen editor (as VI like as possible) and anything that runs on disk > basic should be ported over to OS-9. I don't plan on ever using the basic > dos unless I absolutely have to. > Also, applications software is much needed. There are plenty of toolkits and such to make everybody happy. <* Mark Nagel *> ...!{ucbvax,dual,lll-crg}!ucdavis!deneb!u557676751ea