mark@motcsd.UUCP (Mark Jeghers) (03/31/89)
In article <649@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.islp.ny.us (Lenny Tropiano) writes: >In article <175@orac.pgh.pa.us> pat@orac.pgh.pa.us (Pat Barron) writes: >|>Can someone send me a list of the proper S-register settings for a >|>TrailBlazer Plus on a Unix-PC? I've tried a set of "intuitive" settings, >This is in reply to this article ... I've shar'd up a possible setup for >the UNIX PC using HDB... *** flame on NO! NO! NO! Listen folks! Some of us pathetic cretins out here DO NOT HAVE HDB! Remember? AT&T won't give it out to anyone else, remember???? *** flame off ahem, sorry about that... Now, can some kind folk out there please let us know what we NON-HDB people can do to set up Trailblazers on our 3B1's? Pleeeeeeez? (pardon my behavior today, I forgot to take my medication :-) Mark Jeghers Motorola Computer Systems
wnp@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Wolf Paul) (04/01/89)
In article <290@greek.UUCP> mark@greek.UUCP (Mark Jeghers) writes: >>This is in reply to this article ... I've shar'd up a possible setup for >>the UNIX PC using HDB... > >*** flame on > >NO! NO! NO! Listen folks! Some of us pathetic cretins out here DO NOT >HAVE HDB! Remember? AT&T won't give it out to anyone else, remember???? > >*** flame off Are you reading the unic-pc.* newsgroups? Apparently not. Otherwise you would have found out long ago that while the SHOP feature of the user agent won't let you grab HDB from THE SHOP, a simple uucp command will grab it. Like this: uucp shop!/store/STOREROOM/HDB3.5+IN /usr/spool/uucppublic/ and there you go. >ahem, sorry about that... > >Now, can some kind folk out there please let us know what we NON-HDB people >can do to set up Trailblazers on our 3B1's? > >Pleeeeeeez? (pardon my behavior today, I forgot to take my medication :-) In any case, the strings of TB+ register settings are the same for either software version, and you could just study your manuals to see where to insert them (i.e. in dialinfo) to send them to the modem. But as I under- stood the original problem (and therefore the reply you are complaining about), it was not so much getting TB+ working on the 3b1, but getting a TB+ on a remote system talking to the 3b1's OBM. > >Mark Jeghers >Motorola Computer Systems -- Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101 UUCP: killer!wnp ESL: 62832882 DOMAIN: wnp@killer.dallas.tx.us TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD
smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin) (04/01/89)
In article <290@greek.UUCP>, mark@motcsd.UUCP (Mark Jeghers) writes: > NO! NO! NO! Listen folks! Some of us pathetic cretins out here DO NOT > HAVE HDB! Remember? AT&T won't give it out to anyone else, remember???? ``Give it out''? No, of course not. But AT&T does *sell* it. Why, in the current environment, should AT&T ``give it out''?
rjg@sialis.mn.org (Robert J. Granvin) (04/02/89)
In article <290@greek.UUCP> mark@greek.UUCP (Mark Jeghers) writes: >In article <649@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.islp.ny.us (Lenny Tropiano) writes: >>In article <175@orac.pgh.pa.us> pat@orac.pgh.pa.us (Pat Barron) writes: >>|>Can someone send me a list of the proper S-register settings for a >>|>TrailBlazer Plus on a Unix-PC? I've tried a set of "intuitive" settings, > >>This is in reply to this article ... I've shar'd up a possible setup for >>the UNIX PC using HDB... >*** flame on > >NO! NO! NO! Listen folks! Some of us pathetic cretins out here DO NOT >HAVE HDB! Remember? AT&T won't give it out to anyone else, remember???? > >*** flame off Well, I'll flame right back! A lot of people DO have HDB, and HDB is the more difficult configuration to set up. If you don't get it tuned Just Right, it won't work, or it won't work globally, or it'll start behaving totally anti-socially. Unix-PC HDB also has some intriguing little bugs that need external attention, which was addressed in Lenny's posting. >ahem, sorry about that... Indeed. :-) >Now, can some kind folk out there please let us know what we NON-HDB people >can do to set up Trailblazers on our 3B1's? > >Pleeeeeeez? (pardon my behavior today, I forgot to take my medication :-) Anyways.... I have a Trailblazer configuration for Vanilla UUCP on the Unix-PC. This configuration is an older one and hasn't undergone any fine tuning in quite some time, but it _does_ work. The complete distribution is significantly larger than the HDB configuration since it includes two utilities written by Gene Olson, called `scc`, which is a shared library "front end" for cc, and `putty` which is a utility helping you make your serial line operate bidirectionally. Absolutely no warranties are provided with any of the configuration recommendations. Since it consists of, and relies on these additional tools, I could resubmit them to unix-pc.sources in parts. scc, putty and the Vanilla UUCP configuration. However, I'd like to resist that, since I'm not sure of the current version of scc and putty, and would prefer not to post outdated versions. Therefore, I'll start by suggesting mail requests. If you'd like to see my concept of a configuration, email me, and I'll send the set to you. If the volume is overwhelming, _then_ I'll post it (after I verify the versions). -- Robert J. Granvin National Information Services North Dakota: 11 months of winter and one rjg@sialis.mn.org month of bad ice skating. {amdahl,hpda}!bungia!sialis!rjg
eed_wwhh@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (William H. Huggins) (04/04/89)
In article <11398@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin) writes: >In article <290@greek.UUCP>, mark@motcsd.UUCP (Mark Jeghers) writes: >> NO! NO! NO! Listen folks! Some of us pathetic cretins out here DO NOT >> HAVE HDB! Remember? AT&T won't give it out to anyone else, remember?? > >``Give it out''? No, of course not. But AT&T does *sell* it. Why, >in the current environment, should AT&T ``give it out''? After spending 2 hours calling 4 different AT&T offices, 1-800-6358866, 1-800-2471212, 1-800-8288649, 1-800-9220354 I could find none that could sell the HDB for my 3B1. Pray tell, *who* should I contact? I call to buy it? -- W.H. Huggins ECE Dept. Home: 8894780 (voice), 8895433 (data))
kls@ditka.UUCP (Karl Swartz) (04/09/89)
In article <11398@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven M. Bellovin) writes: >In article <290@greek.UUCP>, mark@motcsd.UUCP (Mark Jeghers) writes: >> NO! NO! NO! Listen folks! Some of us pathetic cretins out here DO NOT >> HAVE HDB! Remember? AT&T won't give it out to anyone else, remember???? > >``Give it out''? No, of course not. But AT&T does *sell* it. Why, >in the current environment, should AT&T ``give it out''? AT&T does *not* sell HoneyDanBer for the UNIX PC. They ship the stock System V uucp with the machine, which is buggy as hell, and refuse to ship HDB, which works nearly flawlessly, because they don't want to have the extra support task. You can of course spend $3000 on sources (10 times what I paid for an entire UNIX PC!) and then do your own hacking to adapt it to the UNIX PC, unless they'd be charitable enough to sell you the already ported version. If AT&T's attitude towards UNIX PC customers is typical of their attitude towards *all* computer customers, they're going to have to start giving stuff away one of these days -- because nobody will be willing to pay to endure AT&T's contemptful attitude. (There are, of course, good people inside AT&T. But you have to dig and go under the table to reach them.) -- Karl Swartz |UUCP {ames!hc!rt1,decuac!netsys}!ditka!kls 1-505/667-7777 (work) |ARPA rt1!ditka!kls@hc.dspo.gov 1-505/672-3113 (home) |BIX kswartz "I never let my schooling get in the way of my education." (Twain)
bob@rush.howp.com (Bob Ames) (04/10/89)
In article <1117@ditka.UUCP> kls@ditka.UUCP (Karl Swartz) writes: > >AT&T does *not* sell HoneyDanBer for the UNIX PC. They ship the >stock System V uucp with the machine, which is buggy as hell, and >refuse to ship HDB, which works nearly flawlessly, because they >don't want to have the extra support task. I just signed up for the toolchest and that's the exact reason they attribute to the Toolchest's existance, because they don't want the extra support work. >You can of course spend $3000 on sources (10 times what I paid >for an entire UNIX PC!) and then do your own hacking to adapt it >to the UNIX PC, unless they'd be charitable enough to sell you >the already ported version. > >If AT&T's attitude towards UNIX PC customers is typical of their >attitude towards *all* computer customers, they're going to have >to start giving stuff away one of these days -- because nobody >will be willing to pay to endure AT&T's contemptful attitude. > >(There are, of course, good people inside AT&T. But you have to >dig and go under the table to reach them.) OK, everybody. If we want HDB, let's all get together and send a joint letter to AT&T saying that we'll each pay $x for the binaries. We don't need support, except for maybe a correct manual ( 1/2 |-) ) It won't cost them anything to make it available to us, we could easily handle distributing the thing - I'll bet one of us will volunteer to act as the distributor if they chose to allow us to have it for free. How much would we be willing to pay to be allowed to use this UUCP? I think $30-50 would cover it. It could be handled through the Documentation Center (Now called Customer Information Center), which already handles distributions of UNIX PC software such as the 3.0 UNIX upgrade. I consider HDB about as mandatory as Objective Programming's (203-866-6900) Objective Utilities. I've used Unremove at least 3 times in the last month! Unremove alone is worth the price of the whole package. Or smail. Or rn. How/Why should we be stuck with the stock software when it would be so easy for them to release the good stufff. Especially since the software has already been written and runs quite adequately. Further, supplying this machine with the stock uucp is a security nightmare. Oh I know, because they own it and can do whatever they want. Well, they promised us that this was the UNIX box for the masses. It seems they should support it with a decent UUCP. How many of us would buy HDB? If only 1000 people bought it for $30, it would bring in $30,000. I know of a few companies that would go right out and get HDB for all of their machines if it was available. It seems like AT&T could make big bucks by selling this thing. Please oh please please please release HDB to us, AT&T. Bob Bob Ames The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, NORML "Pot is the world's best source of complete protein, alcohol fuel, and paper, is the best fire de-erosion seed, and is america's largest cash crop," USDA bob@rush.cts.com or ncr-sd!rush!bob@nosc.mil or rutgers!ucsd!ncr-sd!rush!bob 619-743-2546 "We each pay a fabulous price for our visions of paradise," Rush
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (04/10/89)
If my experience is typical, not letting out HDB is costing AT&T more to support the 3B1. I bought one ofthe fire-sale 3B1's back in 1987. Here is the hardware and O/S configuration: 3B1 2 meg main memory on the CPU board (P3..P5) 67 meg miniscribe winchester rel 3.51 development set When I got the machine, was disappointed that the machine would not run for more than a day or two without crashing. Usually, the crash didn't even result in any sort of panic message or entry in unix.log; just dead. Only thing working was the mouse pointer could still be moved around on the screen. I complained vociferously to the hotline service, which I must admit tried much harder than many other vendors to be helpful. It was difficult to get "the ticket escalated" beyond the first tier of people at the hotline, however. After quite a bit of finger pointing, I removed every stitch of my own software from the system and let it run. The crashes continued. They accused my Hayes modem, which I was using because I suspected the on board modem (OBM) was problematic. I removed the Hayes modem from tty000 and used only th OBM. Still more crashing. With 2 months of my 90 day warranty up, AT&T finally agreed that the uucp implementation must be at fault. A person at the hotline agreed to uucp me a new copy of uucico, which was interesting, since that was the trouble-maker software to start with. The new uucico finally arrived, and I mv'ed it over to proper directory. More crashes. With only a couple of weeks left in the 90 days AT&T was convinced that the motherboard had to be the culprit, so they sent a person out with a new motherboard. It was their $$, so I figured, "what the heck". The new motherboard worked for about a week, then the crashes showed up again. I thought they had it with the new board. About a month after my warranty was up, a an archive file mysteriously showed up in my uucppublic directory. Upon investigation, it turned out to be the HDB package. I decided not to ask questions about where it came from. I unpacked it, and have been using it over a year. The crashes stopped completely the day I installed the HDB. Now it might just be coincidence, but I'm convinced that the uucp that comes with the version 3.51 O/S release is a complete piece of junk. HDB running on my Unix PC has been supporting heavy uucp traffic with both the OBM and a trailblazer without incident. I have no idea if my experience is typical, but if it is, if I were the hotline, I'd find out where that HDB package is, and make sure it is on that disk they're about to send out to fix the time zone bug :-). (I'm not holding my breath!) The hotline could then make the HDB basic networking utilities the one and only supported uucp for all machines. Surely supporting multiple uucp incarnations must be more expensive than one? Bill wtm@impulse.UUCP