[net.micro.mac] Manx 1.06H's System file

lloeb@spock.UUCP (Lawrence Loeb ) (06/07/86)

================
     In his message about the Manx Aztec C 1.06H upgrade,
 jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos @ Concurrent Computer Corporation,Orlando)
writes about his discovery of System 3.0 (the _deadly_ system) on his
upgrade disk and that:
 
>The moral of this story being... don't believe the Manx release documents
>for 1.06H.  It's system 3.0 on there.
  
      This message was cross-posted to BIX(tm) (Byte Information
Exchange) [more on that later..] and jgoodnow (the Manx author) made
the following response:
  
>macintosh/net.mac #217, from jgoodnow, 141 chars, Fri Jun  6 19:28:13 1986
>Comment to 216. 
>----------
>This has already been remedied, new units are being shipped with 3.1.1 and
>replacement disks are being sent to those who got the 3.0 system.
   
Thought that NetLand might want to see that the obvious has been corrected.
  
By the way, I have received some questions about the BIX(tm)-Usenet
gateway in effect. I'm it. The Usenet traffic is read by me; and
appropriate messages posted in the Macintosh conference of which I am
co-moderator. When a response to the net is indicated;(as in this case)
I post it. This is as opposed to the wonderful digests that Jeff Shulman
does regularly for Delphi/Usenet. Like a Mac program; I'm event driven
and spend most of my time in a polling loop....
 
Let me also extend an invitation to come visit on BIX. We have (like
Usenet) an interesting bunch of people on board as you may be aware
from the "Best of Bix" summaries that BYTE publishes. Instructions for
sign-on are usually found in BIX's BYTE ads. (How to get in through
TYMNET,etc.)
  
In any case, I will be available through any of the addresses below for
any questions or comments.
  
--Larry Loeb
Usenet: ..decvax!yale!spock!lloeb              BIX:lloeb
CIS:(72466,1465)                               Delphi:ELEL
# include <std.disclaimer>
[I am not now, nor have I ever been, an employee of McGraw-Hill,
Byte, or BIX. They apologize in advance for me, though]
_InitCookie
"Hacking's a disease. I'm the curator."
  
  

db@cbosgd.UUCP (Deceased Bird) (06/09/86)

I just got Aztec C 1.06H, with System 3.x.  I'm running on a 512K
Mac with OLD ROMs, MFS, etc.  I don't have a copy of Finder 5.2.

Does anyone know of any compatibility problems between the new System
file and older Finders?  Will the 1.06H SHELL, etc., work with an older
System file should I find it necessary to replace the 3.x System for
some reason?

The only problem I've encountered so far (1.5 days of use) is that
using the new 'mkdir' command will result in a bomb (remember: old ROMs,
MFS, etc.); I've gotten one or two other bombs and though I don't recall
what I did to trigger them, I think they were to be expected.

I'd hoped that the SHELL would be smart enough to figure out it was
running on old ROMs, etc., and either disallow dangerous operations
or replace them with safe simulations.  Perhaps this is too much to
hope for and I should be glad it works at all (which it certainly does).

Replies via e-mail, please; I'll summarize (i.e., concentrated) for
the net.

Dave Bursik/..cbosgd!db

jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (06/12/86)

>This has already been remedied, new units are being shipped with 3.1.1 and
>replacement disks are being sent to those who got the 3.0 system.

Actually, it turns out that there was yet another reason why Manx reshipped
1.06H... the shell on it wouldn't work on a 512K Mac!  For some reason,
if you tried to run any program that wasn't in your current directory (e.g.,
the compiler itself), the shell would "bomb" due to a DSBadLaunch error.
I just called Manx about an hour ago (after trying to get through to their
BBS, which is down), and "Barrie", their upgrade person, promised to send
out a fixed version today.
						-- jer

PS - this is not typical of Manx; their software generally works very well,
although their response to user questions has always been somewhat insular...
recently they have apparently hired more support people, and this has
improved somewhat.

Disclaimer:  I am probably very biased in favor of Manx, because I have
bought their compilers since before the beginning, and also met them in
person once, and decided they were basically nice folks... :-)
-- 
E. Roskos
"Winds allow other skylines to hold you."

lloeb@spock.UUCP (Lawrence Loeb ) (06/15/86)

===============
Recently,jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos @ Concurrent Computer Corporation,
 Orlando, Fl) writes that: 
>Actually, it turns out that there was yet another reason why Manx reshipped
>1.06H... the shell on it wouldn't work on a 512K Mac!  For some reason,
>if you tried to run any program that wasn't in your current directory (e.g.,
>the compiler itself), the shell would "bomb" due to a DSBadLaunch error.

  J. Goodnow saw the message when it was cross-posted to BIX(tm) and
  replied:
  ==========
macintosh/net.mac #224, from jgoodnow, 344 chars, Sun Jun 15 09:15:57 1986
Comment to 223. 
----------
Actually, the problem is in the ram-based HD20 driver. We were using an
alpha version that hasn't been released yet that fixes the problem. We are
looking into some way to work around the bug in the old 1.0 driver. The
alpha was 1.1a, but we didn't know that the a was for alpha and assumed
that was what everybody else was using. Oh well ....

  Another probing,insightful look into the high-power world of software
  development brought to you courtesy BIX(tm)
--Larry Loeb   uucp:..decvax!yale!spock!lloeb   BIX:lloeb
	       CIS(72466,1465)                  Delphi:ELEL
#include <std.disclaimer>
_InitCookie
	"Life's a beach, and then you fry"