larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) (12/19/89)
Well - nstar is now back up and running under 386/ix. It really was easier than I thought - expire everything in both the news and akcs message bases (this took several hours alone - btw, b-news expire using -e 0 doesn't expire everything - but this is the wrong conference for that), backup the drives using tar, install 386/ix, re-configure drivers for hostess card and streamer, tweak kernel, rebuild kernel, reboot OS, initialize second drive, make file system, start restoring the tapes of the Xenix backup to the second physical drive under ISC (this took a long time - each tape is filled to around 50 megabytes - and the restore (using tar xvfA /dev/tape) took around 6 hours per tape), move the files to the correct directories and permissions then let her rip! I forgot how fast the ISC file system is over that of SCO. Hot stuff indeed.. I also forgot to adjust ULIMIT both in the /etc/default/login AND in the kernel - thus my tar restore of the tapes bombed in the middle on a 4+ megabyte message base hash index file and had to be re-started. I also forgot to adjust /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow and /etc/default/login to disable the requirement for passwords for all logins like for my BBS callers. Yes folks, Unix System V is different than Xenix! I must admit that the calls I've made to Bryan at ISC went well. Bryan has answered my support calls with good solid information, and admits if he has to check into something more. Excellent support, indeed. I did learn of the X7 update coming out that updates the mailer (sendmail). Interactive Unix made it through multiple power drops, and the file systems (3 of them on two physical drives) automatically recovered when the system rebooted. This has happened twice over the last couple of days. Sendmail is not handling mail to bbs users (addressed to akcs.larry@nstar) correctly. When I was running smail - the mail was tossed using the transport file which isn't available with sendmail. I need to get sendmail setup to handle messages addressed to akcs.larry@nstar to place the message in /user/akcs/.users/larry/mbox which seems very possible - maybe in sendmail.cf? If I can't get this running, I'll either need to install smail under 386/ix or replace akcs. AKCS is one of the best BBS packages I have ever seen - and it's link into usenet is neat - and fast. The threading is great, when you go into a specific conference, messages are combined by topic instead of by message number this way for example all the messages relating to "SCO with RLL drives" are combined into one large item. Not only is this easier to read, but doesn't require a single directory entry for each and every message, thus saving inodes which means that your drive's inode allocation will not need to be changed. Karl has done an excellent job with AKCS. The reason I even suggested removing AKCS is that since installing it 3 months ago, I only have maybe 6 users - which I could just as easily given shell access to. Most callers are use to calling PCBored and TBBS machines, and even though AKCS is very friendly and logically makes sense, they expect the traditional type of bbs - and after one call don't return since they didn't spend the time to learn AKCS. I've been amazed that the Xenix versions of AKCS, support utilities, and news software all run just fine under 386/ix. Xenix versions of ProYam and utilities also run just fine. I am wondering what additional overhead is required to run Xenix binaries under Unix if any. I've been told that nn is an excellent threaded news reader. Does it run well under X? I'm in the process of installing nn right now. Next project - order X-Windows. Bryan @ ISC mentioned that the next release of X (due in a couple of weeks) will support my ATI VGA Wonder board in the 800 by 600 mode - which will be welcome. Now I need more memory - as 4 megabytes will be "on the border" and 8 would be ideal. At least 1meg*80 DRAM are down to 10.00 per chip. Oh BTW - for those of you with the ATI VGA Wonder board - there is a problem with the board getting in sync with some monitors at 31.5 due to excessive filtering which was added in order for the board to get the OK from the FCC. ATI is repairing the boards at no charge - only the cost of shipping to Ontario (Canada). Futher reading about X brings forth that fact that I *really* should have a math co-processor to run X - now what would you get - 4 more megs of ram (making 8 total) or a math co-processor (the 80387 would only be use with X)? Serial IO with my hardware configuration (25mhz '386, 4 megs of RAM, Hostess 8 port dumb board, 16450 com1 board) under 386/ix isn't as fast as with SCO Xenix (using the internal SCO distributed drivers) - but like I mentioned - the file system is much faster. I am having problems getting hardware flow control working - and currently have the modems locked using only XON/ XOFF (USR HST 14.4kbaud carrier & Telebit T2000 are locked at 19.2kbaud, and the Hayes V-Series (V.42) are locked (both of them) at 9600 baud). All modems support 1200/2400 and high speed connections. With the above hardware under SCO Xenix throughput was averaging 1430 (cps) on the PEP while 1640 on the HST and 940 on the Hayes - but under 386/ix the throughput appears to be around 60% of that when operating under SCO Xenix 2.3.3. I plan on getting a multiport board with 16550ANs and hopefully using the FIFO buffers can get the throughput back up there under ISC - either that or picking up a cheap smart multiport board that works with bi-directional communications. I looked into multiport smart boards a couple of months ago when running SCO Xenix and never found one that had a driver that worked correctly under heavy bi- directional communications (4 high speed modems all locked at 19.2kbaud and using hardware flow control). Maybe the Unix drivers work better than the Xenix ones supplied with boards? Another idea is using the X5 modifications which according to the documentation support up to 16 serial ports and include FIFO support of the 16550AN chips. In the X5 docs they suggest using rotating gettydefs for the incoming modems - which doesn't allow for "pushing" throughput on error free connections - (up to 267 cps on 2400 baud MNP connections), and 1450 on PEP connections. Also, they (ISC) suggests turning flow control OFF "since the modem DTE connection will be at that of the carrier rate". Why not use a single gettydef entry and let the modem handle the "stepdown" to the carrier rate? PC-NFS also sounds interesting - which I can run on my 286 Fidonet server - either that or TCP/IP between the Unix and DOS boxes. BTW - ISC VP/ix allows users to run multiple DOS tasks at one time in the background (even with VGA). Don't count on hot serial IO though, as I have mentioned it is much slower in the native mode let alone with the additional overhead of VP/ix. I consider the serial IO throughput the major problem with ISC - but feel that it can be handled - but still haven't found how. Multiple 2400 baud modems (4 to be exact) should work fine, but 4 9600 baud modems (let alone 4 19,200 baud modems) will overload the system - and connections will be dropping characters like crazy. Maybe this Computone (10 mhz 80186) will work with the new drivers? Or maybe a dumb card with multiple 16550AN's will cut it with the FIFO's enabled? Maybe Jim's driver is better than the ISC X5 modification? Over the next couple of months I should have some answers on these questions. I do miss the Xenix mail program - where I could use ~m and ~v to quote mail - maybe I should install ELM under ix? I wonder how ELM runs under X? So far so good. I'm happy to be running Unix again, and time will be the true test. I might need to sell my SCO if I need both the memory and the co- processor (how does $325 sound for 2.3.2 (with 2.3.3 update) of the '386 release (5 months old)? Regards to all, and the best of the Holiday Season to you and your family. -- Larry Snyder, Northern Star Communications, Notre Dame, IN uucp: root@nstar -or- ...!iuvax!ndmath!nstar!root
asv@gaboon.UUCP (Stan Voket) (12/20/89)
In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: >If I can't get this running, I'll either need to install smail under 386/ix It's already there but by all means update to a current version with your own smail source. >I consider the serial IO throughput the major problem with ISC - but feel >that it can be handled - but still haven't found how. Multiple 2400 baud I'm having a wonderful time with the Equinox Megaport board. It handles bi-directional Telebit uucp at 19,200 very well. Also, terminals, printers and mice. >- maybe I should install ELM under ix? I wonder how ELM runs under X? Elm works well with or without X. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | - Stan Voket, asv@gaboon - OR - ...uunet!hsi!stpstn!gaboon!asv | | Land Line: (203) 746-4489 TELEX 4996516 - | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) (12/21/89)
In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes:
<
<I do miss the Xenix mail program - where I could use ~m and ~v to quote mail
<- maybe I should install ELM under ix? I wonder how ELM runs under X?
<
Yes, bring up ELM under 386/ix. I have it running under Microport 386 SysV
right now, but will be moving over to ISC 386/ix as soon as it arrives.
Compared to ELM, to me, every other user mail handler sucks.
--
harvard\ att!nicmad\
Vidiot ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown
rutgers/ decvax!nicmad/
ARPA/INTERNET: <@spool.cs.wisc.edu,@astroatc:brown@vidiot>karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (12/21/89)
In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: > >Sendmail is not handling mail to bbs users (addressed to akcs.larry@nstar) >correctly. When I was running smail - the mail was tossed using the transport >file which isn't available with sendmail. I need to get sendmail setup to >handle messages addressed to akcs.larry@nstar to place the message in >/user/akcs/.users/larry/mbox which seems very possible - maybe in sendmail.cf? Don't bother. Throw it out and run smail 3. We did that, and after a little tweaking in the EDITME file it compiles and works just fine. And it really >is< a drop-in sendmail replacement, including the TCP/IP connections! Wonderful stuff :-) >If I can't get this running, I'll either need to install smail under 386/ix >or replace akcs. AKCS is one of the best BBS packages I have ever seen - and >it's link into usenet is neat - and fast. The threading is great, when you >go into a specific conference, messages are combined by topic instead of by >message number this way for example all the messages relating to "SCO with >RLL drives" are combined into one large item. Not only is this easier to >read, but doesn't require a single directory entry for each and every message, >thus saving inodes which means that your drive's inode allocation will not >need to be changed. Karl has done an excellent job with AKCS. Thanks for the kudo! We don't often see stuff like this on the net :-) >I've been amazed that the Xenix versions of AKCS, support utilities, and >news software all run just fine under 386/ix. Xenix versions of ProYam >and utilities also run just fine. I am wondering what additional overhead >is required to run Xenix binaries under Unix if any. Not much. Xenix stuff seems to work just fine here too. I didn't bother recompiling the news software ("C" News); it still works ok. >I've been told that nn is an excellent threaded news reader. Does it run >well under X? I'm in the process of installing nn right now. IMHO "nn" bites. But some people do like it. To each their own. >Next project - order X-Windows. Bryan @ ISC mentioned that the next release >of X (due in a couple of weeks) will support my ATI VGA Wonder board in the >800 by 600 mode - which will be welcome. Now I need more memory - as 4 >megabytes will be "on the border" and 8 would be ideal. At least 1meg*80 DRAM >are down to 10.00 per chip. > >Futher reading about X brings forth that fact that I *really* should have a >math co-processor to run X - now what would you get - 4 more megs of ram >(making 8 total) or a math co-processor (the 80387 would only be use with X)? GET THE MEMORY. Even if you can't get the math chip. Our 4MB system was really bogging with news and all running -- with 8MB it >smokes<! >PC-NFS also sounds interesting - which I can run on my 286 Fidonet server - >either that or TCP/IP between the Unix and DOS boxes. We have the ISC PC interface. It's "ok", but not great. I want to find a place that has PC/NFS, and/or get an evaluation copy. >I do miss the Xenix mail program - where I could use ~m and ~v to quote mail >- maybe I should install ELM under ix? I wonder how ELM runs under X? Install ELM. We don't have "X" yet (we're waiting for the new release) but when it arrives.... >So far so good. I'm happy to be running Unix again, and time will be the true >test. I might need to sell my SCO if I need both the memory and the co- >processor (how does $325 sound for 2.3.2 (with 2.3.3 update) of the '386 >release (5 months old)? On the other hand, my experience with ISC support is just so-so. Brian has not returned any of my phone calls (boo hiss). We have a problem with NFS which they say will be "fixed in the next release" -- even though it's a one-line patch, and we NEED it (root mapping cannot be turned off in ISC's NFS, and there is no tape server -- be wary of this if you intend to do backups across the net as this currently appears to be IMPOSSIBLE!) -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 708 566-8911], Voice: [+1 708 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"
thurm@shorty.cs.wisc.edu (Matthew Thurmaier) (12/23/89)
In article <340@vidiot.UUCP> brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes: >[stuff deleted] >Compared to ELM, to me, every other user mail handler sucks. >-- > harvard\ att!nicmad\ >Vidiot ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown > rutgers/ decvax!nicmad/ > ARPA/INTERNET: <@spool.cs.wisc.edu,@astroatc:brown@vidiot> I've never tried ELM - that I know of. However, have YOU tried the mail interface on SCO's Office Portfolio. It's GREAT! Chose your editor, uses menus, great stuff. Later, Matthew. -- Snail Mail: E Mail: Matthew J. Thurmaier ...decvax!garp!harvard!uwvax!thurm The Computer Classroom matt@shorty.cs.wisc.edu 6701 Seybold Road, Ste. 122
brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) (12/24/89)
In article <9440@spool.cs.wisc.edu> thurm@shorty.cs.wisc.edu (Matthew Thurmaier) writes: <In article <340@vidiot.UUCP> brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes: <>[stuff deleted] <>Compared to ELM, to me, every other user mail handler sucks. < <I've never tried ELM - that I know of. However, have YOU tried the mail <interface on SCO's Office Portfolio. It's GREAT! Chose your editor, uses <menus, great stuff. Exactly what ELM has and then some. If you haven't run ELM, you just haven't run! -- harvard\ att!nicmad\ Vidiot ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown rutgers/ decvax!nicmad/ ARPA/INTERNET: <@spool.cs.wisc.edu,@astroatc:brown@vidiot>
pax@ankh.COM (Garry M. Paxinos) (12/25/89)
In article <1989Dec20.184947.3562@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
On the other hand, my experience with ISC support is just so-so. Brian has
not returned any of my phone calls (boo hiss). We have a problem with NFS
which they say will be "fixed in the next release" -- even though it's a
one-line patch, and we NEED it (root mapping cannot be turned off in ISC's
NFS, and there is no tape server -- be wary of this if you intend to do
backups across the net as this currently appears to be IMPOSSIBLE!)
Inelegant but not impossible, I just remote mount the disks on the machine
with a tape drive and backup from there...
--
Internet : home - pax@ankh.ftl.fl.us work : pax@megasys.com
USNail : 3868 NW 21 Ct. Coconut Creek, Fl 33066
UUCP : {gatech!uflorida!novavax, mthvax, attctc, hoptoad}!ankh!pax
VoiceMail: 305-973-8478cassidy@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Cassidy Lynar) (12/25/89)
In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: > >Excellent support, indeed. I did learn of the X7 update coming out that >updates the mailer (sendmail). If you want a REAL mailer, get a copy of smail3, as ISC's mailers are hosed and half-baked... I switched to smail3 about 3 months ago, and all is well... >I've been told that nn is an excellent threaded news reader. Does it run >well under X? I'm in the process of installing nn right now. Works just dandy over here... make sure you do have the lastest of patches tho, as I had problems with anything under patch 6, in which the daemon was from time to time crashing. NN also uses a large amount of disk space to build it's tables. >Next project - order X-Windows. Bryan @ ISC mentioned that the next release >of X (due in a couple of weeks) will support my ATI VGA Wonder board in the Humph! Why spend 800.00 on X11 when you can get the sources and build it yourself? ISC has a wonderful ability to take free sources, hack and screw it up, then turn around and charge you a great deal of money for it. >Futher reading about X brings forth that fact that I *really* should have a >math co-processor to run X - now what would you get - 4 more megs of ram >(making 8 total) or a math co-processor (the 80387 would only be use with X)? Personally, I would go for 4 more megs of ram. >I consider the serial IO throughput the major problem with ISC - but feel >that it can be handled - but still haven't found how. Multiple 2400 baud Alas, ISC *still* has yet to fix the bugs in the asy driver. My TB averages 600 - 800 *tops* using during transfers. I have the X5 update in use but it was only a minor help. One of these days, ISC *may* figure out how to build a driver that works :) >- maybe I should install ELM under ix? I wonder how ELM runs under X? Elm 2.2 is what I am running, and its great under X11. >test. I might need to sell my SCO if I need both the memory and the co- >processor (how does $325 sound for 2.3.2 (with 2.3.3 update) of the '386 >release (5 months old)? Hehe, anybody want to buy a 25 Mhz 386 w/4 megs ram and the full ISC 2.0.2 package? (Unlimited run-time, X11, TCP/IP, SD, 10 Plus crap, the list goes on...) I am getting a *real* os, (Sun 3/80 w/SunOS 4.0.3) I have had it with the poor service and lousey track record of ISC. Bryan? You reading this? Where the hell are my floppies? Its been 3 weeks now... sheesh! >Regards to all, and the best of the Holiday Season to you and your family. Same to you, and everyone else.. Have a Merry Christmas. -cassidy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cassidy Lynar CyberSpace TechnoWizards Consortium, Inc Irving, Texas Inet: texbell!walstib!sysop@cs.utexas.edu UUCP: sysop@walstib.lonestar.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
bill@ssbn.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy) (12/25/89)
I re-read Cassidy's article a couple of times before hitting the `F' button. I'm no great fan of ISC, their support, or their documentation but the criticism is unnecessarily harsh (his privilege) and potentially misleading. In article <10732@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> cassidy@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Cassidy Lynar) writes: >In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: >> >>Excellent support, indeed. I did learn of the X7 update coming out that >>updates the mailer (sendmail). > > If you want a REAL mailer, get a copy of smail3, as ISC's mailers >are hosed and half-baked... I switched to smail3 about 3 months ago, and all >is well... You don't have to use ISC's sendmail. I really question the wisdom of a small uucp-only site using sendmail. ISC's mailers are not "hosed and half-baked", but if you read the man page from a "*real* os", Sun, you will find candid cautions regarding the nettles surrounding sendmail. It is entirely possible to hose a functional package if you set it up wrong. It's even more likely that something like sendmail will fail to meet your expectations if you do not understand it. I've not seen any necessity for sendmail in any site that's uucp only. It claws and bites, ask anyone who has to deal with it. Smail 2.5 and 3 are quite adequate, agreed. No one is forced to use ISC's sendmail, the regular mailer works OK as well. [ nn comments deleted, I'm ignorant ... ] >>Next project - order X-Windows. Bryan @ ISC mentioned that the next release >>of X (due in a couple of weeks) will support my ATI VGA Wonder board in the > > Humph! Why spend 800.00 on X11 when you can get the sources and build >it yourself? ISC has a wonderful ability to take free sources, hack and screw >it up, then turn around and charge you a great deal of money for it. Cassidy, did you bring up X from scratch on '386/VGA? If so, I salute you. If you did and only spent 80 hours on it (_serious_ doubt here), then you're worth $10/hr. I don't know any $10/hr people who could bring up X11 from scratch in 80 hours. In the strictest sense of the word the sources are not "free", but the license arrangements are reasonable. What did they "hack and screw up"? I probably had more trouble bringing up X11 than anyone I know and I find it quite even tempered. I have worked with Sun's windows and IBM's X. ISC's work is a pleasure compared with the other two. Did you support most of the popular EGA/VGA/displays in your work? VP/ix? The remarks are misleading and uncalled for. >>Futher reading about X brings forth that fact that I *really* should have a >>math co-processor to run X - now what would you get - 4 more megs of ram >>(making 8 total) or a math co-processor (the 80387 would only be use with X)? > > Personally, I would go for 4 more megs of ram. He's right on the money here, I agree 100% >>I consider the serial IO throughput the major problem with ISC - but feel >>that it can be handled - but still haven't found how. Multiple 2400 baud > > Alas, ISC *still* has yet to fix the bugs in the asy driver. My TB >averages 600 - 800 *tops* using during transfers. I have the X5 update in use >but it was only a minor help. One of these days, ISC *may* figure out how to >build a driver that works :) Maybe so, maybe not, but there are a number of viable alternatives. I started using Jim Murray's driver before the X5 update came out and routinely see 600-800cps receiving, 1100-1400cps transmitting. That's on a 4Mb 16MHz '386, not as much punch as Cassidy's system. There is one function name that conflicts with ISC's kernel, other than that it's plug and play. I don't mean to suggest that ISC's asy driver is any good, quite the contrary. I do mean that there are working alternatives to it unless you just want to be stubborn and bitch a lot. For the systems I administer I try and collect the components that work and put them into place. Smail and the Murray driver work quite well in place of the ISC components, so I don't feel the need to rag ISC about sendmail and asy. [ ELM comments deleted ... ] > Hehe, anybody want to buy a 25 Mhz 386 w/4 megs ram and the full >ISC 2.0.2 package? (Unlimited run-time, X11, TCP/IP, SD, 10 Plus crap, >the list goes on...) I am getting a *real* os, (Sun 3/80 w/SunOS 4.0.3) You've a rude shock in store for you. On an average UNIX work mix (which excludes standalone workstation stuff) the system you want to sell will outperform a 3/80. With your "*real* os" you've got a lot of vendor overhead that has to be amortized over a smaller installed base. That means that add ons will be more expensive as well as service and support. If you are spending money that you personally paid taxes on, I wonder if the additional expense is worth the warm feeling. If you're spending the company's money and they can afford Sun, then you probably made a good decision. By that I mean that you'll have Sun warts, they ALL have warts. >I have had it with the poor service and lousey track record of ISC. >Bryan? You reading this? Where the hell are my floppies? Its been 3 weeks >now... sheesh! I'll buy your TCP/IP, I can't get my diskettes either. ISC service and support is no worse than any others that you don't pay for and better than some you do pay for. They're frustrating and they make you mad, but on balance they aren't worse than anyone else around the same price point. Three weeks for floppies? Horrors! Bill Miskovetz had to wait four months for his ESDI controller and Maxtor drive, I don't think you've got that market cornered at all. >>Regards to all, and the best of the Holiday Season to you and your family. > > Same to you, and everyone else.. Have a Merry Christmas. > >-cassidy Right on the money again, I agree 100% -- Bill Kennedy usenet {attctc,att,cs.utexas.edu,sun!daver}!ssbn!bill internet bill@ssbn.WLK.COM or attmail!ssbn!bill
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (12/25/89)
In article <10732@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>, cassidy@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Cassidy Lynar) writes: > In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: > > > >Excellent support, indeed. I did learn of the X7 update coming out that > >updates the mailer (sendmail). > > If you want a REAL mailer, get a copy of smail3, as ISC's mailers > are hosed and half-baked... I switched to smail3 about 3 months ago, and all > is well... I have been using ISCs sendmail without any real problems once I got it working. There were a couple of configuration changes that we made to sendmail.cf and we decided to link /usr/lib/sendmail to /bin/rmail. That was it. Mail has been working fine here. > >Next project - order X-Windows. Bryan @ ISC mentioned that the next release > >of X (due in a couple of weeks) will support my ATI VGA Wonder board in the > > Humph! Why spend 800.00 on X11 when you can get the sources and build > it yourself? ISC has a wonderful ability to take free sources, hack and screw > it up, then turn around and charge you a great deal of money for it. You get X sources, yes. But who is gonna port the server? The x source tape does not include a server for 386 machines/hardware, so it is not just a case of dropping in the software and running. Don't recommend something to somebody else when you don't know the first thing about what you are talking about. Telling somebody to get the X sources and do the port themselves will wast alot more than $800 dollars worth of thier time. -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Conor P. Cahill uunet!virtech!cpcahil 703-430-9247 ! | Virtual Technologies Inc., P. O. Box 876, Sterling, VA 22170 | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
djm@eng.umd.edu (David J. MacKenzie) (12/25/89)
In article <10732@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> cassidy@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Cassidy Lynar) writes:
I am getting a *real* os, (Sun 3/80 w/SunOS 4.0.3)
I have had it with the poor service and lousey track record of ISC.
Funny. In comp.sys.sun about a week ago I read someone suggesting
that perhaps Sun users should revolt and turn to another vendor because
Sun couldn't get its support and bug fix act together. The immediate
provocation was a problem with jittering system clocks.
I wonder if any vendor's support satisfies everyone (WordPerfect is
supposed to be good, but I wouldn't know).
--
David J. MacKenzie <djm@eng.umd.edu>krus@rimfaxe.diku.dk (Lars Povlsen) (12/27/89)
cassidy@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Cassidy Lynar) writes: >>I've been told that nn is an excellent threaded news reader. Does it run >>well under X? I'm in the process of installing nn right now. > > Works just dandy over here... make sure you do have the lastest of >patches tho, as I had problems with anything under patch 6, in which the >daemon was from time to time crashing. NN also uses a large amount of disk >space to build it's tables. Nn has no support for X- or other -windows. It just uses a terminal interface, which xterm may provide. >>Next project - order X-Windows. Bryan @ ISC mentioned that the next release >>of X (due in a couple of weeks) will support my ATI VGA Wonder board in the > Humph! Why spend 800.00 on X11 when you can get the sources and build >it yourself? ISC has a wonderful ability to take free sources, hack and screw >it up, then turn around and charge you a great deal of money for it. You still need the servers. Have somebody take the sample server and converted it for some VGA boards? That would give your statement impacts, otherwise its a car without wheels... Happy New Year, Lars Povlsen, Computer Science Dept., University of Copenhagen, Denmark E-mail: krus@diku.dk / ...!mcvax!dkuug!diku!krus
karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (12/28/89)
In article <269@ankh.COM> pax@ankh.COM (Garry M. Paxinos) writes: >In article <1989Dec20.184947.3562@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes: > > On the other hand, my experience with ISC support is just so-so. Brian has > not returned any of my phone calls (boo hiss). We have a problem with NFS > which they say will be "fixed in the next release" -- even though it's a > one-line patch, and we NEED it (root mapping cannot be turned off in ISC's > NFS, and there is no tape server -- be wary of this if you intend to do > backups across the net as this currently appears to be IMPOSSIBLE!) > >Inelegant but not impossible, I just remote mount the disks on the machine >with a tape drive and backup from there... With ISC 2.0.2, eh? How do you handle the fact that your root isn't root on the other filesystems? That is, you can't read the files! The fix is to patch "nobody" in the kernel to 0 instead of -2. That works. Thanks to the unnamed person (by his request) who provided the hint. Then it works. Thank the Gods. Now if the lock daemon would function....... -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 708 566-8911], Voice: [+1 708 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"
pcg@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) (12/29/89)
In article <1989Dec25.040854.9409@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: > In article <511090@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: > Humph! Why spend 800.00 on X11 when you can get the sources and build > it yourself? ISC has a wonderful ability to take free sources, hack and screw > it up, then turn around and charge you a great deal of money for it. You get X sources, yes. But who is gonna port the server? The x source tape does not include a server for 386 machines/hardware, so it is not just a case of dropping in the software and running. Don't recommend something to somebody else when you don't know the first thing about what you are talking about. Telling somebody to get the X sources and do the port themselves will wast alot more than $800 dollars worth of thier time. Uh oh. The ISC X11 *libraries* (their so called developer's set) cost $795. The *server* costs $295. From ISC just get the server, which is very well done (has a reputation for being the fastest around), and get the libraries and toolkits and clients off the X11 servers or tapes and compile them -- you are likely to get a more recent and more up-to-date version than ISC's. ISC is pricing the libraries at $795 probably to discourage end users from "developing" on their own, while offering the same at 75% discount to developers. Probably their rationale is that they do not want to support the libraries to end users, while probably developers are far fewer and tend to be more technically sophisticated. Don't believe the ISC people when they say that their high prices are because of exacting QA -- for one thing their AT386 terminfo entry has been broken for years now... ISC are *very* good, but they are often as sloppy as anybody. -- Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi | ARPA: pcg%cs.aber.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!aber-cs!pcg Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk
pcg@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) (12/29/89)
In article <PCG.89Dec28225254@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk> pcg@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes: In article <1989Dec25.040854.9409@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes: You get X sources, yes. But who is gonna port the server? The x source tape does not include a server for 386 machines/hardware, so it is not just a case of dropping in the software and running. Don't recommend something to somebody else when you don't know the first thing about what you are talking about. Telling somebody to get the X sources and do the port themselves will wast alot more than $800 dollars worth of thier time. Uh oh. The ISC X11 *libraries* (their so called developer's set) cost $795. The *server* costs $295. From ISC just get the server, which is very well done (has a reputation for being the fastest around), and get the libraries and toolkits and clients off the X11 servers or tapes and compile them -- you are likely to get a more recent and more up-to-date version than ISC's. How embarassing! :-> Ten minutes after posting this to comp.sys.ibm.pc I read the following in comp.windows.x: From rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU Thu Dec 28 23:10:22 1989 From: rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU (Bob Scheifler) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: x11r4 will I be able to build it for aix386/ps2 ... Date: 22 Dec 89 17:04:28 GMT Organization: The Internet The R4 server is supposed to build and run on the PS/2 under AIX for VGA and 8514 displays. Another article also confirms that the new b&w and color PD servers are much faster (I have read that *professional* tuning has been done, with loads of profiling and hard thinking). Which more or less makes it. Even if the only 386 Unix support on the X11 R4 tape is for PS/2 under AIX, I am pretty sure sombody will soon post mods to have it run under any stock 5.3.2 Unix. It will not be difficult to do... (and, please :->, using a stream implementation or shared memory for local connections -- there are those of us that do not have TCP/IP packages). -- Piercarlo "Peter" Grandi | ARPA: pcg%cs.aber.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk Dept of CS, UCW Aberystwyth | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!aber-cs!pcg Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk
rfarris@serene.UUCP (Rick Farris) (12/29/89)
In article <1989Dec29.033057.10673@jdyx.UUCP> tpf@jdyx.UUCP (Tom Friedel) writes: > our companies 386/Unix graphics package started as an X port that was > > 1/2 way done in < 1 man year. Well, to start off with, you're comparing apples and oranges, but even if it was a good comparison, you've implied that the second "half" of your port would take no longer than the first "half." I hope you don't believe that. Rick Farris RF Engineering POB M Del Mar, CA 92014 voice (619) 259-6793 rfarris@serene.uu.net ...!uunet!serene!rfarris serene.UUCP 259-7757
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (12/31/89)
cassidy@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Cassidy Lynar) wrote: > Humph! Why spend 800.00 on X11 when you can get the sources and build >it yourself? ISC has a wonderful ability to take free sources, hack and screw >it up, then turn around and charge you a great deal of money for it. I think other folks covered most of this one - assuming you want a working server for your display on a 386 box, it's a lot more work than just rebuilding it. But on the other side, tpf@jdyx.UUCP (Tom Friedel) writes: > I've been told that ISC spent over 1 million on the X-port,... Red herring. What's the $1M cover? Just the engineering work, or also all of the associated product work (marketing, sales, packaging, etc.)? And what is "the X-port"? Ain't no such thing _per_se_; there are lots of pieces and it's still going on (because people keep coming out with new displays and adapters). It's not as if they just did one server and quit. >...and that it > took GSS (another company) 11 man years. These are excessive > as our companies 386/Unix graphics package started as an X port that > was > 1/2 way done in < 1 man year... OK, half done in less than a man year...by the typical rule, the remaining half of the work will take 80% of the total time, so you're in the 4 man- year range for the project. My turn to appeal to anonymous authority - "I've been told that ISC" had the output side of the first server working in under two weeks. And my source is reliable on this one. Moreover, ISC did not just *one* port but many, to accommodate many adapters and monitors...I should know; my office- mate's half of the office has looked like Discount Dan's Monitor City for about a year, and he's not the only one working on the stuff. In other words, if you pretend to say what's "excessive" cost for a project without knowing anything about what it involves, you're in left field. > What other free sources has ISC hacked on and sold? I'd really like to give this the flame it deserves, but I can't. I'll just note that what ISC is selling is a large chunk of code developed in-house. It may not be that much work to get a generic server working, but getting something that works well, and fast, is another story. -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd (303)449-2870 ...Mr. Natural says, "Use the right tool for the job."
erc@khijol.UUCP (Edwin R. Carp) (01/01/90)
In article <PCG.89Dec28225254@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk> pcg@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes: > >Don't believe the ISC people when they say that their high >prices are because of exacting QA -- for one thing their AT386 >terminfo entry has been broken for years now... ISC are *very* >good, but they are often as sloppy as anybody. Isn't everyone's terminfo busted? -- --------------------------- discard all after this line ----------------------- Ed Carp N7EKG/5 (28.3-28.5) uunet!cs.utexas.edu!khijol!erc "Good tea. Nice house." -- Worf
jiii@visdc.UUCP (John E Van Deusen III) (01/02/90)
In article <1989Dec20.184947.3562@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@mcs.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes: > > ...Throw it [sendmail] out and run smail 3. We did that, and ... > it really >is< a drop-in sendmail replacement, including the TCP/IP > connections! I pulled smail3 from the UUNET archives, uunet~/ftp/comp.sources.unix/volume11/smail3/part0[123].Z, and it's not smail 3 at all; it's smail 2.5. If smail2.5 is called smail3, what is smail 3 called? Have I entered the Twilight Zone? -- John E Van Deusen III, PO Box 9283, Boise, ID 83707, (208) 343-1865 uunet!visdc!jiii
mark@brandy.UUCP (mark hilliard) (01/03/90)
>> one-line patch, and we NEED it (root mapping cannot be turned off in ISC's >> NFS, and there is no tape server -- be wary of this if you intend to do >> backups across the net as this currently appears to be IMPOSSIBLE!) This is NOT the case! If you buy LIFELINE from SUN, it includes the proper utilities for remote backups from MS-DOS machines on NFS to my INTERACTIVE server. I am currently using this on 11 systems to do remote backups with no problems. Mark Hilliard N2HHR rutgers!rochester!kodak!brandy!mark