circuit@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (circuit) (10/15/90)
Could someone tell me or send me som information about AMiga's UNIX system V r4.0 ? I am interested in putting together a UNIX based system to do computer graphics and animation. I am considering a 386 based PC with Unix House version of UNIX V r 4.0 [no flames please :-)] . But I have an Amiga 1000 and love Amiga's in general. But I have not really heard much about it , matter of fact just a little blurb that it would be available (when??) I want to know who would I have to get it through (i.e. my dealer, or Commodore directly)? What hardware conifiguration would I need? Any other information would be appreciated! Chris p.s. Yes I know my 1000 is not enough, I'm thinking about buy a 3000 or a loaded up 2000 if I can get UNIX for the Amiga instead of getting the 386 machine. --- circuit@csd4.csd.uwm.edu :internet circuit%csd4.csd.uwm.edu@INTERBIT :Bitnet uunet!circuit@csd4.csd.uwm.edu :uucp
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (10/15/90)
I heard that Amiga UNIX will have lots of neato BSD type stuff. One that I (a friend actually) REALLY needs is BSD type sockets. (This makes MUDs, Dnet, etc. lots easier) -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
ken@cbmvax.commodore.com (Ken Farinsky - CATS) (10/16/90)
In article <6956@uwm.edu> circuit@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (circuit) writes: > > Could someone tell me or send me som information about AMiga's >UNIX system V r4.0 ? I am interested in putting together a UNIX based >system to do computer graphics and animation. I am considering a 386 >based PC with Unix House version of UNIX V r 4.0 [no flames please :-)] Why do you think you need Unix for computer graphics and animation? It seems to me that native AmigaOS would be better for this task. -- -- Ken Farinsky - CATS - (215) 431-9421 - Commodore Business Machines uucp: ken@cbmvax.commodore.com or ...{uunet,rutgers}!cbmvax!ken bix: kfarinsky
kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) (10/17/90)
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >I heard that Amiga UNIX will have lots of neato BSD type stuff. One that >I (a friend actually) REALLY needs is BSD type sockets. (This makes MUDs, >Dnet, etc. lots easier) >-Joseph Hillenburg Ahem. SysV 4.0 is OUT and AVAILABLE. Here at UK we have a lab full of 80386 systems running it. There are a bunch of unix-specific newsgroups and some of the discussion is about 4.0. If you or anyone have any questions about what it has or doesn't have, you can get real, hard answers from these groups. What little information Commodore has released about their port indicates that if it's true for AT&T sysv 4.0, then it's true for Commodore Sysv 4.0. Given this, I see no reason for this group to be cluttered with generic sysv 4.0 questions. Kenneth Herron
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/18/90)
ken@cbmvax.commodore.com (Ken Farinsky - CATS) writes: > circuit@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (circuit) writes: >> >> Could someone tell me or send me som information about AMiga's >> UNIX system V r4.0 ? I am interested in putting together a UNIX based >> system to do computer graphics and animation. I am considering a 386 >> based PC with Unix House version of UNIX V r 4.0 [no flames please :-)] > > Why do you think you need Unix for computer graphics and animation? >It seems to me that native AmigaOS would be better for this task. I don't think you should read that as "graphics and animation -> need Unix", but as "my three requirements are Unix, graphics, and animation"; for lots of us, Unix as a development environment seems a simple and obvious necessity of life, on a par with, say, air to breathe. Remember all the flames four years back "why isn't AmigaDOS (more like) Unix"? Same crowd; we're still out here. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/18/90)
In article <kherron.656130318@s.ms.uky.edu> kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) writes: >What little information Commodore has released about their port The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. >indicates that if it's true for AT&T sysv 4.0, then it's true for >Commodore Sysv 4.0. This is true. Commodore's Amiga UX will have everything AT&T's System V Release 4.0 unix has minus some bugs. The opposite is not true, though. The Amiga Unix group has spent a long time adding to SVR4. Pax, Keith
jjfeiler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (John Jay Feiler) (10/18/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >In article <kherron.656130318@s.ms.uky.edu> kherron@ms.uky.edu >(Kenneth Herron) writes: >>What little information Commodore has released about their port >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ OK, I'll ask. When? How Much? And most important, is there any way I can get an A3000 now with the Edu. Disc., and get UNIX when it comes out, also on Edu. Disc. If not, why not? I'd love to add ~$3000 to CBM's available capital right now. I don't want it sitting in my bank account earning interest!!!! =-) >The opposite is not true, though. The Amiga Unix group has spent a >long time adding to SVR4. Great. >Pax, Keith John Feiler
mrush@csuchico.edu (Matt "C P." Rush) (10/18/90)
In article <15224@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. OK, alledgedly UNIX will run on a 2630 board. So how will it be distributed to those of us who would like to run it on such a beast? Will we need to get a tape drive, or does it come on a SCSI hard drive, or...? -- Matt *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* % "I programmed three days % Beam me up, Scotty. % % And heard no human voices. % There's no Artificial % % But the hard disk sang." % Intelligence down here. % % -- Yoshiko % % E-mail: mrush@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu % *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* This is a SCHOOL! Do you think they even CARE about MY opinions?!
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/18/90)
In article <1990Oct17.215639.3657@nntp-server.caltech.edu> jjfeiler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (John Jay Feiler) writes: >ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >>In article <kherron.656130318@s.ms.uky.edu> kherron@ms.uky.edu >>(Kenneth Herron) writes: >>>What little information Commodore has released about their port > >>The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >OK, I'll ask. When? How Much? And most important, is there any way >I can get an A3000 now with the Edu. Disc., and get UNIX when it >comes out, also on Edu. Disc. If not, why not? `it' ment the port. The article I responded to: <kherron.656130318@s.ms.uky.edu> talked about porting issues (ie, Amiga Unix not having any extras in it). I can address those questions. Pax, Keith
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (10/18/90)
In article <15224@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. Oh, you blew it :) >The opposite is not true, though. The Amiga Unix group has spent a >long time adding to SVR4. Okay: a) How do I get one. b) How much will it set me back. c) Can I add on to my already existant 3000-25/10? d) What things have been added? :) David Navas navas@sim.berkeley.edu "Excuse my ignorance, but I've been run over by my train of thought." -me
cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) (10/19/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: < The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. Really?? Oh, boy, I hope you have a LARGE e-mail box :-). < >[ ... ] if it's true for AT&T [System V Release] 4.0, then it's true for < >Commodore [Amiga UX]. < < This is true. Commodore's Amiga UX will have everything AT&T's System < V Release 4.0 unix has minus some bugs. < < The opposite is not true, though. The Amiga Unix group has spent a < long time adding to SVR4. < < Pax, Keith Well, I've seen many people asking about availability for their 3000/??, but what about 2500/20 (and /30) owners? Can we run this gargantuan beast? If so, what do we stand to lose (besides speed and resolution) as compared to the 3000? Oh, and the usual: 1 - How much? 2 - When? 3 - Does it do windows? :-) 4 - Can I run my good ol' AmyDOS software under it? (I didn't think so) 5 - Anything else you'd care to divulge... -- Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | o\ /o See cseaman@gateway.sequent.com <or> | || "Attack of the Killer Smiley"! ...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | \vvvvvv/ Coming Soon | \____/ to a newsgroup near you!
terry@chaplin.uwo.ca (Terry Cudney) (10/19/90)
In article <15224@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > Commodore's Amiga UX will have everything AT&T's System >V Release 4.0 unix has minus some bugs. What bugs have been eliminated? Will the bug fixes make portability to '386 SysVr4 a painful #ifdef problem or somesuch? > >The opposite is not true, though. The Amiga Unix group has spent a >long time adding to SVR4. > >Pax, Keith What does Amiga Unix have that AT&T's doesn't? --terry /* * terry@chaplin.csd.uwo.ca * Terry Cudney Amistosa MicroWare 9 Durham Street, LONDON, Ontario, N5Y 2H9 */ -- --terry /* * terry@chaplin.csd.uwo.ca
bscott@isis.cs.du.edu (Ben Scott) (10/19/90)
In article <15224@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >In article <kherron.656130318@s.ms.uky.edu> kherron@ms.uky.edu >(Kenneth Herron) writes: >>What little information Commodore has released about their port > >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. OK - how much will it cost? I know, I know, marketing question... (here's a thought - get someone from marketing on the net who can answer questions like that!!) But all I really want is an order of magnitude. I mean, knowing Unix it could be real expensive and knowing Commodore it could be real cheap. So... are we talking $100? $500? $1500? $2500? I won't hold you to an exact number if you'll just give us a general idea. I'm curious as heck about it. And a technical question: How will it be distributed? Obviously the 3000UX will come with it installed on the HD, but assuming it will also be offered separately, how will it be shipped? Floppies are probably out of the question, but not a lot of people have tape drives... unless C= is planning to make one? >This is true. Commodore's Amiga UX will have everything AT&T's System >V Release 4.0 unix has minus some bugs. I'll just bet! Plus the ability to run on an Amiga, which to me is a great feature by itself. Would someone please give me a little information on what "ABI compliant" means? I've heard this phrase, and the context leads me to believe that there is some binary-executable standard for 68K Unix machines. So what is ABI, and is it new, and how many other 68K series Unix machines will support it, and all that? Someone on a local board does not think such a standard exists except for 88K series machines, and to be honest all I can report is what I've heard here which is not enough. Anyway, even though I am not much of a Unix guru I'm very interested in Amiga Unix (and there are people still calling it Amix! Commodore pays license fees probably in the hundreds of thousands to be able to spell it properly unlike certain other companies and people still call it Amix...). . <<<<Infinite K>>>> -- |Ben Scott, professional goof-off and consultant at The Raster Image, Denver| |FIDO point address 1:104/421.2, bscott@nyx.cs.du.edu, or BBS (303)424-9831 | |"Quantum Mechanics: The dreams that || The Raster Image IS responsible for| | stuff is made of..." - Michael Sinz || everything I say! ** Amiga Power**|
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/19/90)
In article <1226@ria.ccs.uwo.ca> terry@chaplin.uwo.ca (Terry Cudney) writes: >>The opposite is not true, though. The Amiga Unix group has spent a >>long time adding to SVR4. > > What does Amiga Unix have that AT&T's doesn't? There is screen support for one. You may open a text or bitmap screen of various sizes and ``connect'' it to one of the functions keys as sort of a ``virtual console'' (a somewhat better interface than the 386 offers). User and Tutorial Manuals that do not replace but add to the documentation that AT&T offers. GCC, GNU Emacs, and a dozen other Freely Distributable products. GCC has been modified to deal with ELF executables as well as Position Independent Code. There are also several third party developers that are working on their respected ports to Amiga Unix. Pax, Keith
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/19/90)
In article <1990Oct19.092925.4876@isis.cs.du.edu> bscott@isis.UUCP (Ben Scott) writes: >Would someone please give me a little information on what "ABI compliant" >means? I've heard this phrase, and the context leads me to believe that >there is some binary-executable standard for 68K Unix machines. So what >is ABI, and is it new, and how many other 68K series Unix machines will >support it, and all that? There is a 68k binary-executable standard that was developed by Motorola and UniSoft. It tells us how an executable will interface to system calls and libraries. If you make your system compatible with the ABI any ABI-compliant program can run on it (whether it was compiled on an Amiga Machine or a Motorola Machine or whatever) Pax, Keith
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/19/90)
In article <44583@sequent.UUCP> cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris Seaman) writes: >what about 2500/20 (and /30) owners? Can we run this gargantuan >beast? Yes. >3 - Does it do windows? :-) X11R3. >4 - Can I run my good ol' AmyDOS software under it? (I didn't think so) No. Pax, Keith
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (10/20/90)
In article <15271@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > GCC, GNU Emacs, and a dozen other Freely Distributable products. Wow... I didn't expect that! I'm happy! > GCC has been modified to deal with ELF executables as well as Position > Independent Code. I'll bite, what is ELF? (...and where is PIC usable in Unix?) -Tom -- tlimonce@drew.edu Tom Limoncelli "Freedom and justice tlimonce@drew.uucp +1 201 408 5389 are opposites" tlimonce@drew.Bitnet limonce@pilot.njin.net -me
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (10/20/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > User and Tutorial Manuals that do not replace but add to the > documentation that AT&T offers. Does it come with the standard AmigaDOS stuff? > > GCC, GNU Emacs, and a dozen other Freely Distributable products. > > GCC has been modified to deal with ELF executables as well as Position > Independent Code. Does GNU let you distribute them in a commercial product? Do they let you modify them? Does it come with GNU-Chess? (Yeah, I know, a game, but we have to have fun sometimes!) > > There are also several third party developers that are working on their > respected ports to Amiga Unix. Who? Can we get a list? Are we going to see Lotus 1-2-3 for UNIX? (I already know there's a System V version) Does Amiga UNIX support sockets? (I already asked about this, but the only response I got was from somebody at AT&T, who said that was in V.4, but he didn't say if it was in Amiga UNIX) > > Pax, Keith -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz (10/21/90)
In article <kherron.656130318@s.ms.uky.edu>, kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) writes: > joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: > >>I heard that Amiga UNIX will have lots of neato BSD type stuff. One that >>I (a friend actually) REALLY needs is BSD type sockets. (This makes MUDs, >>Dnet, etc. lots easier) > >>-Joseph Hillenburg > > Ahem. > > SysV 4.0 is OUT and AVAILABLE. Here at UK we have a lab full of 80386 > systems running it. There are a bunch of unix-specific newsgroups and > some of the discussion is about 4.0. If you or anyone have any questions > about what it has or doesn't have, you can get real, hard answers from > these groups. > > What little information Commodore has released about their port indicates > that if it's true for AT&T sysv 4.0, then it's true for Commodore Sysv 4.0. > Given this, I see no reason for this group to be cluttered with generic > sysv 4.0 questions. > Hey you guys! SysV 4.0 is out and available _HERE_. Why not in the USA? See reproduction of a fax below: Regards Alan ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FROM : Mary-Louise Parkison (General Manager, Sales) AN INVITATION TO ATTEND A UNIX WORKSTATION DEMONSTRATION Commodore recently released the Amiga 3000 workstation running the new AT&T Unix version 5.4 Demonstrations and open discussion dessions are being held in Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and Adelaide during October/November. The following sessions are planned in October for Melbourne and Adelaide. Key features of the Amiga 3000 as a Unix workstation: o 68030 architecture o 100M Hard Disk o 4MB RAM (expandable to 32MB +) o Ethernet o TCPIP o NFS & RFS o XWindows o AT&T V5.4 o LOW COST o Hight resolution colour graphics o Multi Operating systems (Amiga DOS, MS-DOS and Unix) If you are interested in attending one of these sessions please RSVP to Maria on (02) 428 7777 (Commodore Sydney). MELBOURNE Open to all Melbourne Universities - key Unix and Workstation evaluation people suggested should attend. Particularly if looking at, or currently using, SUN, Apollo, MIPS or Macintosh Unix systems. VENUE: MicroHelp 186 Lygon Street BRUNSWICK EAST Tel 388 1311 Contact Jennifer Freeman DATE: Friday 19th October, 1990 2.30 pm start Sessions to run for at least 1 hour Refreshments to be provided ADELAIDE: VENUE: Lodin 10 William Street NORWOOD Tel 332 5007 Contact Chris Dillon DATE: Wednesday 24th October, 1990 2.30 pm start Session to run for at least 1 hour Refreshments to be provided ------------------------ End of Fax ------------------------ Ian Farquhar Phone : 61 2 805-9403 Office of Computing Services Fax : 61 2 805-7433 Macquarie University NSW 2109 Also : 61 2 805-7205 Australia EMail : ifarqhar@suna.mqcc.mq.oz.au
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/21/90)
In article <Oct.19.21.05.49.1990.9272@pilot.njin.net> limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) writes: >In article <15271@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >> GCC has been modified to deal with ELF executables as well as Position >> Independent Code. > >I'll bite, what is ELF? (...and where is PIC usable in Unix?) ELF is the new a.out format used in SVR4. PIC code is used in dynamic libraries. Pax, Keith
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) (10/21/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > In article <Oct.19.21.05.49.1990.9272@pilot.njin.net> limonce@pilot.njin.net > (Tom Limoncelli) writes: > >In article <15271@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com > (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > >> GCC has been modified to deal with ELF executables as well as Position > >> Independent Code. > > > >I'll bite, what is ELF? (...and where is PIC usable in Unix?) > > ELF is the new a.out format used in SVR4. PIC code is used in dynamic > libraries. > > Pax, Keith Ok. So what the hell is a.out? Also, does Amiga UNIX have online man pages? (I'm used to using XENIX/286. NO ONLINE HELP! [BTW, I've convinced this guy he wants an A3000UX :) -Joseph Hillenburg UUCP: ...iuvax!valnet!joseph ARPA: valnet!joseph@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu INET: joseph@valnet.UUCP
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/22/90)
In article <HT8BR2w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >> User and Tutorial Manuals that do not replace but add to the >> documentation that AT&T offers. > >Does it come with the standard AmigaDOS stuff? I am talking purely Amiga Unix. AmigaDOS is a separate issue. >> >> GCC, GNU Emacs, and a dozen other Freely Distributable products. >> >> GCC has been modified to deal with ELF executables as well as Position >> Independent Code. > >Does GNU let you distribute them in a commercial product? We distribute source will all public domain/freely distributable products. >Does it come with GNU-Chess? (Yeah, I know, a game, but we >have to have fun sometimes!) No. NetHack, though. >Does Amiga UNIX support sockets? Yes. This is a standard part of V.4 Pax, Keith
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/22/90)
Not much help on the ABI compliance, but a little. Traditionally,
because Unix systems are "configure it to your heart's content" systems,
most software outside the operating system had to be sold as source code
with nasty licensing agreements, etc.
As Unix moves down the hardware cost food chain, it became a goal to be
able to sell "shrink wrap", ready to go software. The ABI (Something
Binary Interface) provides a guaranteed OS functionality among the various
platforms using the same CPU so that you can drop in the shrink wrap
binary and it will find the things it needs where it expects in the OS,
without danger of it having been configured away by the OS provider or
the sysop, and be up and running with minimal requirements on the user.
That's pretty high level, and I hope it's all true; at least it gives
the flavor, and it is all I know on the subject, except that a standards
committee designed the beast, and it's fairly new.
I hope that helps a little.
/// It's Amiga
/// for me: why
Kent, the man from xanth. \\\/// settle for
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> \XX/ anything less?ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/23/90)
In article <sgyDR7w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >So what the hell is a.out? A type of format for binary executables. COFF and ELF are other formats. >does Amiga UNIX have online man pages? Yes. Pax, Keith
dlt@locus.com (Dan Taylor) (10/23/90)
Actually, Application Binary Interfaces provide more than configuration consistency. One of the main reasons that 680X0 UNIX has had less commercial success than the 'X86 version, is that each of the developers, worse actually, different customer versions by the same so-called developer, had no commonality of system call paramters or interface, different load addresses for executables (most UNIX variants use fixed addresses, then memory management to sort things out), and, in general, incompatible media. Other than command similarities (no, Virginia, the commands weren't implemented alike, either) they were really different operating systems. A strict ABI prohibits all of these obnoxious practices. The 88000 ABI for UNIX V.4, for instance, requires a QIC-150 catridge tape for media compatiblity. You may have something else, too, but the STANDARD distribution and transport medium is THAT tape. That means that ANY software publisher can create a program ONCE and know that it will work on any ABI- conforming system. Some hardware vendors (and software extensions) may not be covered this way. If you have a a special graphics interface, or neat UNIX add-on feature, it isn't covered by the ABI. That allows for product differentiation. But if I write a word-processor that runs on an 88000 ABI platform, using "curses", which is part of that ABI, then it will run on any compliant platform. However, a windowing package, such as Motif or Open Look would be nice. So, there are further standards for those. Therefore, if Amiga UNIX is compatible with the (in the works) 680X0 ABI, then the cost of selling an Amiga version is reduced, since there's little or no special work involved. Makes the market broader, too. Should do wonders for the availability and price of good software. Hope this helps. * Dan Taylor * The opinions expressed are my own, and in no way * * dlt@locus.com * reflect those of Locus Computing Corporation. * -- * Dan Taylor * The opinions expressed are my own, and in no way * * dlt@locus.com * reflect those of Locus Computing Corporation. *
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/23/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >>Does it come with GNU-Chess? >No. NetHack, though. Well, there goes any chance of AmigaUX contributing to corporate productivity. ;-) /// It's Amiga /// for me: why Kent, the man from xanth. \\\/// settle for <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> \XX/ anything less? -- Convener, comp.sys.amiga grand reorganization.
keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) (10/24/90)
In article <15224@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. > 1. Where do I send my order? 2. How much $$ do I $end? 3. How long until it's in my hands? 4. Why is there air? kEITHe (NOT Keith G. nor Keith P.)
aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) (10/24/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. Alright - 1) Does it support shared code/libraries? By shared code I mean two processes using the same code bytes in real memory. By shared libraries I mean two different executables using the same library code bytes in real memory implying some kind of linking occurring, and if so how is it implemented? 2) Is the executable program code copied to virtual memory when it is run? 3) Is virtual memory kept in a separate fixed size partition on the disk? Alexander Elkins Colorado IC Division (CICD) Hewlett-Packard Company 3404 East Harmony Road Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Telnet: 1-229-4769 Email: aoe@hpfiaoe.HP.COM
amiga@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Paul) (10/24/90)
I am not trying to start a flame but am truly wondering how commodore with it's current support staff are going to support Unix? Just thinking about it, Will commodore sell Unix machines to a stand alone purchaser? Unix is truly a Guru's machine and requires a lot of help for the novice. With Universities you have a stalf to suport unix, same at Buisnesses. For Joe Blow off the street it would be hard to deal with standard unix. Has Commodore put things in their unix to help novices? Would it be worthwhile to support unix for individuals (most sales will come from universities and buisnesses). These are just questions please don't flame me but answer intellegently. ######################################################################## # # I work for myself so my thoughts are mearly my own. # Owner of an #
cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) (10/24/90)
In article <38634@ut-emx.uucp> amiga@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Paul) writes: >I am not trying to start a flame but am truly wondering how commodore with it's current support staff are going to support Unix? Unix won't be on all Amigas, just high-end Amigas as an option. Basically, people who buy UNIX want UNIX and know how to deal with UNIX. I suspect that Commodore's support for Amiga UNIX will be geared toward the professional's tech problems, not like the A500C beginner's line. If you're interested in UNIX and are a beginner, keep doing whatever you're doing to read news and you'll get better. ;^} Seriously, though, dealer support may be a problem. Many, not all, Amiga dealers are home computer dealers who want nothing to do with UNIX and don't have the capital to do it. Of the six or eight Amiga stores in San Diego, I know three will support UNIX, two won't, and I don't know the rest. I think it will work best that way--high end and low end dealers, just like the PC dealers. Thom
zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle) (10/24/90)
In article <8316@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM> keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) writes: >In article <15224@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >> >>The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. > >1. Where do I send my order? <<for Amiga Unix>> You can't. It is still in Beta (although very solid, from what I hear). Large institutional buyers (such as Virginia Tech) can get it. >2. How much $$ do I $end? As much as you want, but since it won't do you any good to send it to your local Commodore dealer, you'd better send it to me. >3. How long until it's in my hands? Use the algorithm that determines how long an arbitrary program will take on an arbitrary input. It will tell you how long this will take. >4. Why is there air? To fill up volleyballs. Dan Zerkle zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (916) 754-0240 Amiga... Because life is too short for boring computers.
gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) (10/24/90)
In article <9010022@hpfcso.HP.COM> aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) writes: >ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >>The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. > >Alright - 1) Does it support shared code/libraries? By shared code I mean >two processes using the same code bytes in real memory. By shared libraries Do you mean lightweight processes by this? I think that this discussion should be moved into csa.tech. >I mean two different executables using the same library code bytes in real >memory implying some kind of linking occurring, and if so how is it >implemented? >2) Is the executable program code copied to virtual memory when it is run? What? I don't understand the question. All things reside in the virtual address space, which is considerably larger than the REAL address space (ie, real RAM). >3) Is virtual memory kept in a separate fixed size partition on the disk? This is usually the case in most UNIX systems, and probably true of Amiga UNIX. I would prefer a separate small, fast disk (say 40 or 80 megs) for paging so that disk thrashing is reduced. >Alexander Elkins >Colorado IC Division (CICD) >Hewlett-Packard Company >3404 East Harmony Road >Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 >Telnet: 1-229-4769 >Email: aoe@hpfiaoe.HP.COM See ya, Ralph gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu Ralph Seguin | "You mean THE Zaphod Beeblebrox?" 536 South Forest | Apartment 915 | "No. Haven't you heard, I come in six packs!" Ann Arbor, MI 48104 | (313) 662-4805
FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) (10/25/90)
Please don't flame - I know this is a naive question. We are talking about setting up a LAN in my department at work. We want something with the capabilities of Novell netware 386 with a Sparc-station as the server, (to give you an idea of the needed capabilities). The DOS machines on the LAN don't need more than a solid low cost connection to the server with good gateway capabilities to the mainframe. Did I mention we have an existing Ethernet/TPC/IP network connecting both IBM mainframes, engineering minis and work-stations? Well, we do. That's what I need to gateway onto. OK, the question. How does an A3000 compare to a Sparc-station as a server? Does Novell have a netware-386 equivalent for the A3000? What does having AUX with sockets do for me in this scenario? EMail answers are probably preferred to postings. Let your conscience be your guide. Thank you for your time in advance. Dana Bourgeois @ cup.portal.com
aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) (10/25/90)
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. A few more come to mind - 1) How many processes does a "ps -ef" show running immediately after entering init state 1 after rebooting? I'm interested in running unix at home, and I'm curious how much overhead there is without any network processes running. 2) How much total real memory is used up by those processes while in init state 1 (single user mode BTW)? In other words, is 16Mbytes sufficient to avoid swapping most of the time? Less wear and tear on the disk, faster too! 3) How much overhead is involved when making a system call? Like save the registers (a0-a7,d0-d7,f0-f7), context switching, etc. I.e how efficient is it? (Let's see, number of getpid() calls per second? Not that one would do that, but it should be mostly overhead time.) 4) What is the typical size of the swap area on the disk? 10Mb, 20Mb, ? 5) Does the X Windows server process go through all the same socket software layers to receive packets from local client processes that it does for networked (remote) client processes? Bypassing can improve performance! 6) Does the X Windows server process allow concurrent access to the display hardware (chipmemory, blitter, etc) via a resource sharing/locking method? 7) Are shared memory segments supported? I.e. can two, or more processes attach the same shared memory segment and read/write to it? 8) Are virtual files supported? I.e. can a file be opened in such a way as to map its contents to an address space in a running process? (Great for data bases, virtual memory is then just a special unnamed file!) 9) Does a system call to brk(1024000) followed by brk(5120) actually return the memory to the system for use by other processes or does the memory used by a process only increase and not get return to the system resource memory pool until it exits? Which happens? 10) What version of gcc comes with the system? Gcc-1.37.1 would be fairly recent. 11) Was all the code compiled using gcc? 12) Is the kernel user configurable? Is this done as a compile/link/reboot process or does the kernel dynamically configure itself by loading/unloading whatever drivers it needs? 13) Are ACL's (access control lists) supported? These allow more finely tuned control over file access permission. 14) Is file locking supported? This means whole files and blocks in a file, which is very useful for concurrent database access. 15) Is ksh (korn shell) included with the system? 16) Is process suspend/resume supported? (Usually control-Z/bg/fg in ksh) 17) Is process tracing supported by the kernel? I.e. a ptrace(request,pid,...) call from another process can suspend/control/modify/resume another process. Usually used by debugger programs. Looking forward to running this on my A3000/25-100 at home :-) Alexander Elkins (aoe@hpfiaoe.HP.COM)
eeh@public.BTR.COM (Eduardo E. Horvath eeh@btr.com) (10/25/90)
Does Amiga UNIX come with Motif as well as Openlook?
=========================================================================
Eduardo Horvath eeh@btr.com
..!{decwrl,mips,fernwood}!btr!eeh
"Trust me, I know what I'm doing." - Sledge Hammer
=========================================================================scot@amigash.UUCP (Scot L. Harris) (10/25/90)
>In article <38634@ut-emx.uucp> amiga@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Paul) writes: >I am not trying to start a flame but am truly wondering how commodore with it's >current support staff are going to support Unix? Just thinking about it, Will >commodore sell Unix machines to a stand alone purchaser? Unix is truly a >Guru's machine and requires a lot of help for the novice. With Universities >you have a stalf to suport unix, same at Buisnesses. For Joe Blow off the >street it would be hard to deal with standard unix. Has Commodore put things >in their unix to help novices? Would it be worthwhile to support unix for I don't think Joe Blow off the street is going to walk into a store and say, "Gimme one of dem uniques boxes over there." Most of the people that are going to purchase a Unix box will probably know a fair amount about that OS before the purchase. So support people will be dealing with questions that are more technical in nature than "duh, my new game won't boot...". Those novice's that need a good system to do graphics etc. will be very happy with AmigaDOS, although some would argue that AmigaDOS requires a Guru at times. [hopefully not one in a red outline box however!] -- _ /// /_\ Scot L. Harris ...!tarpit!bilver!amigash!scot \XX/ / \ M I G A Orlando, FL (407)273-1759 [Prodigy censor messages? Nah, they wou
jap@convex.cl.msu.edu (Joe Porkka) (10/25/90)
Speaking of which - I just saw AmigaUNIX running today at MicrosUnlimited - an Michigan State Computer show. It looks okay - it supports multiple login via ALT-Fkey to flip screens (8 I think). Xwindows was there too - it seemed to run VERY slow and was quite flakey - I crashed to twice just moving things around on the screen (no prob, flip to another screen and kill -9 it!). the machine was marked Amiga3000UX -> special edition of the caseing i guess. it had 300megs of harddisk, and an unkown amount of memory. All the root passwds were x'ed out - nuts. The sales droids there knew zero about the machine (they had hand written instuctions telling them how to login :-) ). They also were showing another 3000 with a CD player and AmigaVision controlling the show. Pretty slick computer animation+video and stereo sounds. I was impressed, but for the 30mins i was around, not many people were interested. There was a crowd around the new NeXT machines though. -- joe P.S. to CBM sales droid support: The sales guy said he has a tough time getting enough paraphernalia and posters from CBM. He must PAY for what he gets. Seems to me CBM should give him a truck load of the stuff - he could deposit them all around campus then. (The sales guy used to be the rep from Zenith, and they treated him the same way.)
crash@ckctpa.UUCP (Frank J. Edwards) (10/25/90)
In article <9010022@hpfcso.HP.COM>, aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) writes: >ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >>The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. > >Alright - 1) Does it support shared code/libraries? By shared code I mean >two processes using the same code bytes in real memory. By shared libraries >I mean two different executables using the same library code bytes in real >memory implying some kind of linking occurring, and if so how is it >implemented? If I understand correctly (and I think I do :-) since the Amiga Unix is SysV.4 it will have shared libraries and read/only executable code sharing. >2) Is the executable program code copied to virtual memory when it is run? Considering that the processor can only execute code from *REAL MEMORY* the answer is yes. I think the question, however, should have been, "can the executable code be run directly from the file on disk, or does it take up paging space?" In a lot of Unix environments nowadays it is not necessary to load the program into virtual storage to execute it, i.e. paging of the read/only portion of the file is performing directly to the file on the disk (since it's only read, never written). >3) Is virtual memory kept in a separate fixed size partition on the disk? Again, on most Unix systems, "yes". Some OS's (notably SunOS) allow paging to be performed to a file instead of raw storage. Personally, I couldn't understand why you'd want this since you'd then have the overhead of the filesystem getting in the way of I/O. I don't know enough about the Sun's /dev/swap file-or-device to make further comments. >Alexander Elkins Good questions, A.E. Now I have few: 1) what is the minimum hard drive partition configuration? Ie, how small can my paging space be, and how many partitions are there minimum (such as /, /usr, /tmp, et al). I understand all of the variables concerned -- number of concurrently running processes (for page space) and other variables. What is the *minimum*? 2) BRU seems to have been written for use on both sides of the coin. Is there other software slated that will be similarly available? 3) What I've read in AT&T documentation seems to indicate at least a minimal dynamically-configurable kernel. Is this true? Would that include the ability to add/remove device drivers on-the-fly? ----- Frank J. Edwards | //|| "I have made up my mind; there Edwards and Edwards Consulting | //_|| simply WASN'T any other choice!" Phone: (813) 786-3675 | _// ||_ (Amigans do it with Intuition) "An Amiga3000 with 4MB of SCRAM and 2MB of CHIP... Glorious!!!" -- Me, Certified Amiga Developer
johnk@pro-graphics.cts.com (John Kohanski) (10/25/90)
In-Reply-To: message from joseph@valnet.UUCP
a.out is the executable file that is creayed by the C compiler on a unix
system. For instance if you were to create a source file named hello.c
and then compile it, the compiler will compile hello.c and then spit out
a.out as the executable.
-- John Kohanski
Pro-Graphics BBS 908/469-0049 "It's better than a sharp stick in the eye!"
Internet: johnk@pro-graphics.cts.com
UUCP: crash!pro-graphics!johnk
ARPA: crash!pro-graphics!johnk@nosc.milpab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) (10/25/90)
In a previous article, amiga@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Paul) says: >I am not trying to start a flame but am truly wondering how commodore with it's >current support staff are going to support Unix? Just thinking about it, Will >commodore sell Unix machines to a stand alone purchaser? Unix is truly a >Guru's machine and requires a lot of help for the novice. With Universities >you have a stalf to suport unix, same at Buisnesses. For Joe Blow off the >street it would be hard to deal with standard unix. Has Commodore put things >in their unix to help novices? Would it be worthwhile to support unix for >individuals (most sales will come from universities and buisnesses). These >are just questions please don't flame me but answer intellegently. > > >######################################################################## > # # >I work for myself so my thoughts are mearly my own. # Owner of an # > I think there is not much need to support novices because IMHO novices will not buy a 3000UX. Regular Amigados is much more suited to the casual computer user than Unix and I think Joe Bloe off the street will stick to that. -- /// Pete Babic - pab@po.cwru.edu | /// /\ Integrated Library Systems | \\\ /// /--\MIGA Case Western Reserve University | \\\/// The future is here now!
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/26/90)
In article <789@public.BTR.COM> eeh@public.BTR.COM (Eduardo E. Horvath) writes: >Does Amiga UNIX come with Motif as well as Openlook? Motif has been ported to Amiga Unix but does not appear on the current release. It may in the future. Pax, Keith
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/26/90)
In article <1990Oct25.004837.22651@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> jap@convex.cl.msu.edu (Joe Porkka) writes: >Speaking of which - I just saw AmigaUNIX running today at >MicrosUnlimited - an Michigan State Computer show. > >Xwindows was there too - it seemed to run VERY slow and was >quite flakey - I crashed to twice just moving things >around on the screen (no prob, flip to another screen and kill -9 it!). This must be an old version. Our current version of X is very stable and in quite pleasant to use. >All the root passwds were x'ed out - nuts. This means that the encrypted passwords are kept in /etc/shadow. Pax, Keith
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/26/90)
In article <9010025@hpfcso.HP.COM> aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) writes: >1) How many processes does a "ps -ef" show running immediately after >entering init state 1 after rebooting? UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME COMD root 0 0 0 Oct 23 ? 0:01 sched root 1 0 0 Oct 23 ? 3:46 /sbin/init root 2 0 0 Oct 23 ? 0:07 pageout root 3 0 0 Oct 23 ? 4:37 fsflush root 4 0 0 Oct 23 ? 0:00 kmdaemon root 7 1 0 Oct 23 ? 0:47 INITSH -c exec >/dev/cage& >2) In other words, is 16Mbytes sufficient to avoid swapping most of >the time? 16 Mbytes is more than enough. 8Mb is a totally reasonable system. >4) What is the typical size of the swap area on the disk? 10Mb, >20Mb, ? Standard 10Mb. >5) Does the X Windows server process go through all the same socket >software layers to receive packets from local client processes that >it does for networked (remote) client processes? No. >6) Does the X Windows server process allow concurrent access to the >display hardware (chipmemory, blitter, etc) via a resource >sharing/locking method? Yes (for chip memeory). The blitter is not used for X. >7) Are shared memory segments supported? I.e. can two, or more >processes attach the same shared memory segment and read/write to it? Yes. >8) Are virtual files supported? I.e. can a file be opened in such a >way as to map its contents to an address space in a running process? You are talk about mmap(). Yes. >9) Does a system call to brk(1024000) followed by brk(5120) actually >return the memory to the system for use by other processes or does >the memory used by a process only increase and not get return to the >system resource memory pool until it exits? Which happens? Memory would be released provided the above two brk() calls were actually valid. sbrk(2) accepts a negative value, also. I think you are talking about sbrk(). sbrk() accepts a negit >10) What version of gcc comes with the system? Gcc-1.37.1 would be fairly >recent. 1.37 >11) Was all the code compiled using gcc? The system utilities have been compiled with gcc. The Kernel is being worked on. >12) Is the kernel user configurable? Is this done as a >compile/link/reboot process or does the kernel dynamically configure >itself by loading/unloading whatever drivers it needs? As of now, no. This is being worked on for final release. >13) Are ACL's (access control lists) supported? Not to my know knowledge. >14) Is file locking supported? >15) Is ksh (korn shell) included with the system? >16) Is process suspend/resume supported? Yes. >17) Is process tracing supported by the kernel? truss(1) -p PID. also adb and sbd of running processes are supported. Pax, Keith
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (10/26/90)
In article <1990Oct25.134643.27877@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> pab@po.CWRU.Edu (Pete Babic) writes: > Regular Amigados is much more suited to the casual computer > user than Unix... Than SVR4, maybe. I think HP completely disproved the UNIX=HOSTILE myth nearly a decade ago with the HP Integral. (the original multitasking 68000 personal computer) -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) (10/26/90)
In <dlt.656646939@snap.la.locus.com> dlt@locus.com (Dan Taylor) writes:
The 88000 ABI for UNIX V.4, for instance, requires a QIC-150
catridge tape for media compatiblity. You may have something
else, too, but the STANDARD distribution and transport medium is
THAT tape.
Those who doubt the importance of this should remember CP/M. Part of
the reason MS-DOS became so popular (apart from the fact that IBM
backed it) was that for the first time in many years, a standard for
magnetic media emerged -- the good old 360 K double-sided double-
density floppy disk. Before this happened, the CP/M world had been a
mish-mash of strange disk formats with varying densities, track and
sector counts, and when everything else matched, different sector
"skew" strategies. The result was that there were somewhere between 50
and 100 disk formats in existence. Digital Research, having a virtual
monopoly, was in an excellent position to take the lead in setting some
sort of disk format standard, but did not do so. When Adam Osborne
introduced his Osbourne 1 machine, he justified introducing a new disk
format by saying that there was no existing standard to follow.
That means that ANY software publisher can create a program ONCE
and know that it will work on any ABI- conforming system.
Aye, there's the rub. This is where things begin to break down. Most
low-budget users don't have QIC-150 tape drives. You need not just any
standard, but one that *might have existed even it weren't a
standard*. In other words, something inexpensive and relatively
ubiquitous. Like 1.44 M floppies, for example. (Or 360 K disks some
years ago.) Nobody is going to get rich distributing software for the
mass market on QIC-150 tapes. By the time such tape drives become
ubiquitous, they will have been obsoleted by DAT.
--
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com>
UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi
A pointer is not an address. It is a way of finding an address. -- mephilip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) (10/26/90)
In article <6896@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: [In response to Unix and the casual user] > >Than SVR4, maybe. I think HP completely disproved the UNIX=HOSTILE myth >nearly a decade ago with the HP Integral. (the original multitasking >68000 personal computer) I had an HP Integral for 6 years. It was a wonderful computer, and you could even get most of SystemV (SVID HP-UX) in ROM! Nice windowing, point and click, graphics' coprocessor, flat electrolumenescent screen( not LCD- really a beautiful screen) , HP-IB,printer,etc...all in one neat box( transportable). I will never forgive HP for dropping the Integral. It was way before its time. Since then the micro division of HP has turned into a quality IBM clone making division. They used to make really neat micros( touch screen, nice portable, Integral,...) but of course these were not IBM compatible( they used a 719k formatted 3.5" floppy drive). I'm not an Amiga user, but I hope the Amiga does well. If not, that will simply increase the chances of never seeing neat computers. Apple has given in to the corporate world, HP's engineers lost their power to bean counters,etc...It's all very depressing. Lotus 1-2-3, WordPerfect, Excel,etc....That's what I call advancing the human condition. Philip McDunnough University of Toronto-> philip@utstat.toronto.edu [my opinions, probably also shared by my fellow academics, may or may not be shared by my employer]
stevem@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM (Steve McClure) (10/26/90)
In article <15404@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >In article <9010025@hpfcso.HP.COM> aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) writes: [ 1-3 deleted ] >>4) What is the typical size of the swap area on the disk? 10Mb, >>20Mb, ? > >Standard 10Mb. > I guess the 68k and 386 versions are different. 386 uses 2x memory size for swap. Won't you be limiting yourself to 10M of application space this way? My understanding is that you have to have swap for the whole application. Seems that this was done to avoid deadlocks. [ rest deleted ] -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve email: Steve.McClure@Columbia.NCR.COM 803-791-7054 The above are my opinions, which NCR doesn't really care about anyway! CAUSER's Amiga BBS! | 803-796-3127 | 8pm-8am 8n1 | 300/1200/2400
new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) (10/26/90)
In article <2608@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: >Those who doubt the importance of this should remember CP/M. Part of >the reason MS-DOS became so popular (apart from the fact that IBM >backed it) was that for the first time in many years, a standard for >magnetic media emerged -- the good old 360 K double-sided double- >density floppy disk. Bull puckey. CP/M had a standard disk format. 8" floppyies, 26 sectors per track, 128 bytes per sector, 80 tracks (if I remember right). I.e., the original IBM floppy format. The Radio Shack model II used this, as did various other "high performance" machines, MP/M machines, and a few multi-CPU machines. Only the 5" floppies were non-standard formats, and only late in its life did CP/M start to be really used on 5" floppies. The only reason that MS-DOS only had one floppy format is that clones duplicated all the hardware because the OS wasn't portable enough to include other drivers easily and programs came to take advantage of the hardware, making it unprofitable to make MS-DOS machines that were not PC-DOS machines. Remember the Wang computer? How about the TRS-2000? Both were MS-DOS machines that were not PC-DOS. Both essentially died at birth. We are starting to see the same kind of problem now with 360K disks, 320K disks, 1.44M disks, 3.5" disks, and so on. There are still fewer disk formats because many programs that run under PC-DOS don't run under MS-DOS and thus cloners make their hardware PC-DOS compatible and therefore use only PC-DOS disk formats. -- Darren -- --- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware --- ----- Network Protocols, Graphics, Programming Languages, Formal Description Techniques (esp. Estelle), Coffee -----
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (10/27/90)
cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) writes: >Seriously, though, dealer support may be a problem. Many, not >all, Amiga dealers are home computer dealers who want nothing to >do with UNIX and don't have the capital to do it. Of the six or >eight Amiga stores in San Diego, I know three will support UNIX, >two won't, and I don't know the rest. I think it will work best >that way--high end and low end dealers, just like the PC >dealers. I wonder if CBM will have telephone technical support for their Unix? After having gone through problems with 386 machines running Microport and Interactive Unix Sys V, we can truthfully say, that phone support is a neccesity. There is nothing more frustrating than trying to install or update a Unix OS without the option to call up the vendor and bitch and try to get some answers. Unix isn't something that you just dump on the market and say RTFM. Dealer support is OK, but actual support direct from CBM is best. -- John Sparks |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS | Usenet, Chatting, =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system. | Downloads & more. A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash
aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) (10/27/90)
aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) writes: >Alright - 1) Does it support shared code/libraries? ... gilgalad@dip.eecs.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes: >Do you mean lightweight processes by this? >I think that this discussion should be moved into csa.tech. OK - my response is in comp.sys.amiga.tech (Re: Amiga UNIX - shared libraries?) Alexander Elkins (aoe@hpfiaoe.HP.COM)
bcphyagi@Twg-S5.uucp (Stephen Walton) (10/27/90)
In article <2401@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM> stevem@sauron.UUCP (Steve McClure) writes: >In article <15404@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >> >>[Amiga UNIX uses as swap space] Standard 10Mb. >> > >I guess the 68k and 386 versions are different. 386 uses 2x memory size for >swap. Won't you be limiting yourself to 10M of application space this way? I don't know the answer to the question; I do know that 386 binaries tend to be a whole lot bigger than 68k ones, for somewhat unclear reasons. The IRAF system (Image Reduction and Analysis Facility) has a recommended minimum of 8 MB RAM for a Sun-3 and 16 MB for a 386i; same source code, different Fortran compilers. -- Stephen R. Walton, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Cal State Northridge I am srw@csun.edu no matter WHAT the stupid From: line says!
bill@bilver.UUCP (Bill Vermillion) (10/28/90)
In article <2608@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: >Those who doubt the importance of this should remember CP/M. Part of >the reason MS-DOS became so popular (apart from the fact that IBM >backed it) was that for the first time in many years, a standard for >magnetic media emerged -- the good old 360 K double-sided double- >density floppy disk. Before this happened, the CP/M world had been a >mish-mash of strange disk formats with varying densities, track and >sector counts, and when everything else matched, different sector >"skew" strategies. The result was that there were somewhere between 50 >and 100 disk formats in existence. Digital Research, having a virtual >monopoly, was in an excellent position to take the lead in setting some >sort of disk format standard, but did not do so. Rahul. There was a standard, and Digital Set it. 8" SD with the standard IBM 128 byte/sec format. ALL CPM machines could read that format. Many went with their own format for their internal working, some with DD, some with SD track 0, and DD the rest. But there was a format. Until people decided there would be 5" diskettes, and then there was NO standard format. If there had been a 5" distribution format specified then all would have been weel and good. And IBM standardized on the 160K disk first, then the 320K, and finally the 360K for distribution, before they changed to the 3.5" 720k which is now their standard. The biggest NON-standard thing IBM did that caused a lot of problems was using a disk controller chip that couldn't read the SD formats of all who had gone before. This is standardization. Gimmee a break! -- Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill : bill@bilver.UUCP
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (10/28/90)
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) in <1990Oct23.083501.3077@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> writes (re: Amiga UNIX): ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >>Does it come with GNU-Chess? >No. NetHack, though. Well, there goes any chance of AmigaUX contributing to corporate productivity. ;-) Well, gee whiz. If you use #pragma (or #fragme or #smegma or whatever :-) with gcc (the GNU C compiler), it will do the following (per its docs): `` The #pragma command is specified in the ANSI standard to have an arbitrary implementation-defined effect. In the GNU C preprocessor, #pragma first attempts to run the game rogue; if that fails, it tries to run the game hack; if that fails, it tries to run GNU Emacs displaying the Tower of Hanoi; if that fails, it reports a fatal error. In any case, preprocessing does not continue. '' What more productivity could you want? :-) Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]
Chuck.Phillips@FtCollins.NCR.COM (Chuck.Phillips) (10/28/90)
>>>>> On 24 Oct 90 19:45:08 GMT, aoe@hpfcso.HP.COM (Alexander Elkins) said: >The port is out. Ask questions about it and you will get answers. Alexander> A few more come to mind - Alexander> 7) Are shared memory segments supported? I.e. can two, or more Alexander> processes attach the same shared memory segment and read/write Alexander> to it? Shared memory is an _integral_ part of SVr4, either through the SVr3 compatible shmem interface or, better IMHO, the mmap() interface. Alexander> 8) Are virtual files supported? I.e. can a file be opened in Alexander> such a way as to map its contents to an address space in a Alexander> running process? (Great for data bases, virtual memory is then Alexander> just a special unnamed file!) Under SVr4, the VM system underwent a _radical_ rewrite. The essential difference between swap space memory mapping and file system memory mapping is that swap space is anonymous (i.e. not mapped into the file system). So to answer your questions, yes and yes. Another advantage: If your application exhausts the swap space, you can grab still more by creating a file of arbitrary size, then mmap() it into your address space on the fly. Also, by mmap()ing a file into your process's address space, you get random-access, on-demand paging of your data without system call overhead every time you change location in the file and every time you read or write to the file. Independent processes can mmap() the same file for IPC, etc, etc, etc. Alexander> 9) Does a system call to brk(1024000) followed by brk(5120) Alexander> actually return the memory to the system for use by other Alexander> processes or does the memory used by a process only increase and Alexander> not get return to the system resource memory pool until it Alexander> exits? Which happens? Once you munmap() from anonymous memory, the swap space is released back to the OS for reuse. (If your were mmap()ing a file system file, it never ate into your swap space to begin with!) Using the old brk() mechanism, you have to worry about fragmentation of the allocated space and what library routines (like malloc and fopen) may have stuffed into your address space behind your back. Unless you're doing _all_ of your own memory allocation, making your address space smaller via brk() is a _very_ dangerous thing to do. Alexander> 14) Is file locking supported? This means whole files and Alexander> blocks in a file, which is very useful for concurrent database Alexander> access. Better than by blocks, you can specify byte ranges for _advisory_ locking; you can mark ranges as locked, but only applications explicitly checking for locks will know not to access the area. #include <std/disclaimer.h> Hope this helps, -- Chuck Phillips MS440 NCR Microelectronics chuck.phillips%ftcollins.ncr.com 2001 Danfield Ct. Ft. Collins, CO. 80525 ...uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-mpd!bach!chuckp
lron@easy.UUCP (Dwight Hubbard) (10/28/90)
[many previous words of wisdom deleted] >I wonder if CBM will have telephone technical support for their Unix? >After having gone through problems with 386 machines running Microport >and Interactive Unix Sys V, we can truthfully say, that phone support >is a neccesity. There is nothing more frustrating than trying to install >or update a Unix OS without the option to call up the vendor and bitch and >try to get some answers. > >Unix isn't something that you just dump on the market and say RTFM. Dealer >support is OK, but actual support direct from CBM is best. > Not a bad Idea. In fact they should do that for the whole Amiga line. It might even help the users who have only one local Amiga dealer, that really shouldn't be one (like the only one on this island...) get around the problem. -- -Dwight Hubbard, |-Kaneohe, HI -USENET: uunet.uu.net!easy!lron |-GT-Power: 029/004
cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) (10/29/90)
>I wonder if CBM will have telephone technical support for their Unix? >After having gone through problems with 386 machines running Microport >and Interactive Unix Sys V, we can truthfully say, that phone support >is a neccesity. There is nothing more frustrating than trying to install >or update a Unix OS without the option to call up the vendor and bitch and >try to get some answers. > I agree, and I'm sure that it will happen. (Right???) I'm curious, I know CBM implemented a phone-help-line policy for A500C purchasers, but last I knew (when I worked at a dealership) they were undecided whether this phone line would be accessible to A500P/2x00/3x00 purchasers (i.e., from dealers). What is the extent of Commodore's phone support now? Thom
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (10/29/90)
In article <sgyDR7w163w@valnet> joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph P. Hillenburg) writes: >Ok. So what the hell is a.out? Also, does Amiga UNIX have online man >pages? (I'm used to using XENIX/286. NO ONLINE HELP! The version I saw has man. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) (10/30/90)
In article <15404@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: > >>6) Does the X Windows server process allow concurrent access to the >>display hardware (chipmemory, blitter, etc) via a resource >>sharing/locking method? > >Yes (for chip memeory). The blitter is not used for X. > [ possibly ignorant question from a non-Amiga-literate X person ] You have hardware bitblt and don't use it for X? Why not? -- ken seefried iii "A snear, a snarl, a whip that ken@dali.gatech.edu stings...these are a few of my favorite things..."
ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) (10/30/90)
In article <1990Oct26.230141.22552@csun.edu> bcphyagi@Twg-S5.uucp (Stephen Walton) writes: >In article <2401@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM> stevem@sauron.UUCP (Steve McClure) writes: >>In article <15404@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >>> >>>[Amiga UNIX uses as swap space] Standard 10Mb. >>> >> >>I guess the 68k and 386 versions are different. 386 uses 2x memory size for >>swap. Won't you be limiting yourself to 10M of application space this way? > >I don't know the answer to the question; I do know that 386 binaries tend >to be a whole lot bigger than 68k ones, for somewhat unclear reasons. The >IRAF system (Image Reduction and Analysis Facility) has a recommended minimum >of 8 MB RAM for a Sun-3 and 16 MB for a 386i; same source code, different >Fortran compilers. First...as a general rule, swap space should be 2 and 3 times physical memory. For a one or two user machine, closer to 2 time; more users, more swap. Second, 386 code is generally less dense because of its lousy, non-orthoginal, special-cased-to-death instruction set. This makes the job of automatic code generation (i.e. compilers) exceedingly difficult. Interested parties are directed to several papers by Niklaus Wirth on the influence of architecture on code generation (sorry, I don't have the references in front of me). -- ken seefried iii "A snear, a snarl, a whip that ken@dali.gatech.edu stings...these are a few of my favorite things..."
ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) (10/30/90)
In article <16001@hydra.gatech.EDU> ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) writes: >In article <15404@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >>The blitter is not used for X. > >You have hardware bitblt and don't use it for X? Why not? It was determined that the 030 can do the bitblts much faster. Pax, Keith
ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) (10/31/90)
In article <15464@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com (Keith Gabryelski) writes: >In article <16001@hydra.gatech.EDU> ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) >writes: >>In article <15404@cbmvax.commodore.com> ag@cbmvax.commodore.com >(Keith Gabryelski) writes: >>>The blitter is not used for X. >> >>You have hardware bitblt and don't use it for X? Why not? > >It was determined that the 030 can do the bitblts much faster. But the 030 plus the blitter is able to do bitblits plus run applications faster than the 030 alone. This is the reason to have a graphics co-processor, so that your applications get more CPU because the CPU is spending fewer cycles doing graphics. Now if you tell me that the 030 alone *can* run applications and do graphics faster than the 030 plus the blitter, well then I won't believe you... -- First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T T E C H N O L O G I E S / / \\ / / Then, the disclaimer: All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \ / o Now for the witty part: I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam! \/
ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) (10/31/90)
In article <22912@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: > >But the 030 plus the blitter is able to do bitblits plus run >applications faster than the 030 alone. This is the reason to >have a graphics co-processor, so that your applications get more CPU >because the CPU is spending fewer cycles doing graphics. This is, of course, absolutely wrong (though it is a common fallicy). The actual advantage gained from a graphics coprocessor depends on many things. For example, setup time for the graphics chip can have a big influence on how useful it is. Another big area (especially in low-end machines) is memory architecture. Keith Packard (keith@expo.lcs.mit.edu) is a useful source of hard data on the relative usefulness of graphics co-processors, especially under X. In general, a graphics chip *can* be an advantage, but it isn't always. I don't know anything about the Amiga blitter implimentation, so I can't comment on what may or may not be it's problems. An additional disadvantage of the graphics chips is that, being somewhat specialty items, they do not track advances in technology as fast a general purpose CPUs. >Now if you tell me that the 030 alone *can* run applications and do >graphics faster than the 030 plus the blitter, well then I won't believe >you... Never good to make statements like that when totally lacking hard evedence... -- ken seefried iii "A snear, a snarl, a whip that ken@dali.gatech.edu stings...these are a few of my favorite things..."
ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) (10/31/90)
In article <16102@hydra.gatech.EDU> ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) writes: >In article <22912@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: >> >>But the 030 plus the blitter is able to do bitblits plus run >>applications faster than the 030 alone. This is the reason to >>have a graphics co-processor, so that your applications get more CPU >>because the CPU is spending fewer cycles doing graphics. > >This is, of course, absolutely wrong (though it is a common >fallacy). I would be inclined to think that "absolutely wrong" means that it is never true under any circumstances, which I don't think you meant. I assume therefore you mean that in some cases of CPU plus graphics coprocessor, the overhead involved with communication and other factors outweigh the advantage of the co-processor. This I can believe. However, I'm indicating a very specific case, where the system parameters are well known: a 68030-equipped Amiga (A2500 or A3000, where the 68030 in the A3000 would be faster) and the Amiga blitter. (You indicated that you aren't familiar with the Amiga and it's blitter.) Yes, there is setup time burdening the CPU. I suppose I must leave it for other, more experienced graphics guru's to indicate whether the 68030 is better off alone, but I still doubt it. Remember also that I'm thinking about application performance. I have heard many say that the 68030 *can* draw faster than the blitter in some cases (sometimes the 68K can outrun the blitter). I'm willing to have my graphics run a little slower to make my applications compute a little faster. I gain in total system throughput. This another benefit of multi-tasking to a single user. And I have an idea what kind of performance I should expect, I'm using a blitter-driven Amiga now. >>Now if you tell me that the 030 alone *can* run applications and do >>graphics faster than the 030 plus the blitter, well then I won't believe >>you... > >Never good to make statements like that when totally lacking hard >evidence... Ah, but what I said was absolutely true, and I have all the evidence I need. I really would disbelieve it, given my current understanding the of the Amiga's graphics architecture and the 68030 CPU; this is all the claim I was making. I need no further evidence for this than my own opinions. :-) -- First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T T E C H N O L O G I E S / / \\ / / Then, the disclaimer: All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \ / o Now for the witty part: I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam! \/
dlt@locus.com (Dan Taylor) (11/01/90)
ken@dali.gatech.edu (Ken Seefried iii) writes: >In article <22912@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies) writes: >> >>But the 030 plus the blitter is able to do bitblits plus run >>applications faster than the 030 alone. This is the reason to >>have a graphics co-processor, so that your applications get more CPU >>because the CPU is spending fewer cycles doing graphics. >This is, of course, absolutely wrong (though it is a common >fallicy). The actual advantage gained from a graphics coprocessor >depends on many things. For example, setup time for the graphics >chip can have a big influence on how useful it is. Another big >area (especially in low-end machines) is memory architecture. >Keith Packard (keith@expo.lcs.mit.edu) is a useful source of hard >data on the relative usefulness of graphics co-processors, >especially under X. In general, a graphics chip *can* be an >advantage, but it isn't always. I don't know anything about the >Amiga blitter implimentation, so I can't comment on what may or may >not be it's problems. If you can't comment, why did you? >An additional disadvantage of the graphics chips is that, being >somewhat specialty items, they do not track advances in technology >as fast a general purpose CPUs. >>Now if you tell me that the 030 alone *can* run applications and do >>graphics faster than the 030 plus the blitter, well then I won't believe >>you... I am inclined to agree here. What I want to see is the tests performed and the results. The 68030 is bandwidth limited, as are the co-processors. Where was the performance gain? What was the blitter used for? Area fills, i.e. tiling? Font copies? Line drawing? I would believe that the '030 is faster than the blitter for many operations, I've liked the '020 & '030 for a long time because of their graphics capabilities. But I do find it difficult to believe that the blitter was useless for X, actually slowing operation of the total system. >Never good to make statements like that when totally lacking hard >evedence... Please take your own advice. >-- > ken seefried iii "A snear, a snarl, a whip that > ken@dali.gatech.edu stings...these are a few of > my favorite things..." -- * Dan Taylor * The opinions expressed are my own, and in no way * * dlt@locus.com * reflect those of Locus Computing Corporation. *
fredc@umriscc.tmc.edu (Fred Clauss) (11/02/90)
In article <2401@sauron.Columbia.NCR.COM> Steve McClure writes: >I guess the 68k and 386 versions are different. 386 uses 2x memory size for >swap. Won't you be limiting yourself to 10M of application space this way? >My understanding is that you have to have swap for the whole application. >Seems that this was done to avoid deadlocks. Yes, there is a difference. To illustrate the point, I'll give you a little Sun story... I work every day on a Sun 3 with 8M of real memory. I run SunView :-( with a bunch of tools and shells always on the screen. One of those processes is a performance meter showing my swap activity. During normal use, there is seldom a swap. I configured my setup that way because the machine I work on has no disk (so swapping innvolves an NFS access). The shop I work in used to have a 386i with 8M. I tried it out once, with exactly the same setup as I use on the Sun 3. The 386i was paging constantly! It's no wonder that we no longer have the 386i. Even in this resource-starved atmosphere, nobody wanted to use it. The moral of the story is: if you go 386, expect to need more memory and swap space than with a 68K system. -- Fred Clauss INTERNET: fredc@isc.umr.edu (preferred) P.O. Box 815 or fredc@ee.umr.edu Rolla, MO 65401 BITNET: S081192@UMRVMA