dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) (04/05/89)
On the topic of APR's etc. Does Apollo make patches available via anonymous ftp? If not why not. Seems this is the quickest way for people to obtain patches rather than having to call up, get patch tape, or wait for new release. Surely this would be more cost effective than ordering patch tapes. Better yet why not send the patch automatically to people who submit APR's. Maybe this is too naive, but it sure seems like ftp'able patches would make lots of unhappy users hapier quickly. (assuming the patches actually fix a problem that is :-) -dennis -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Charm oozed out his pores, |Dennis UUCP,BITNET: dvadura@water As he oiled his way around the floor. |Vadura EDU,CDN,CSNET: dvadura@waterloo ================================================================================
jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) (04/05/89)
In article <13047@watdragon.waterloo.edu> dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) writes: | On the topic of APR's etc. Does Apollo make patches available via | anonymous ftp? If not why not. Seems this is the quickest way for | people to obtain patches rather than having to call up, get patch tape, | or wait for new release. Good suggestion. In the same vein, how about lists of patches? It's nice to hear on the net "Oh, that bug was fixed with last year's patches". It would be nicer to know this before the bug bit me. -- Jim Wright jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
pha@CAEN.ENGIN.UMICH.EDU (Paul H. Anderson) (04/05/89)
In order for Apollo to allow anonymous FTP, they would have to buy a Sun. Well, to get the security they want, anyhow. Somebody mentioned the idea that Apollo should ACK APRs emailed to them - has anyone sent an APR about this? (-: Paul
sharp@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Maurice Sharp) (04/06/89)
Hiya, In article <4273b2a35.0017b5e@caen.engin.umich.edu> pha@CAEN.ENGIN.UMICH.EDU (Paul H. Anderson) writes: >Somebody mentioned the idea that Apollo should ACK APRs emailed to them - has I receieve a conformation by SMAIL for every APR that I send in. Granted, they could use email to do this, but it is better than nothing. Maurice
dente@s2.uucp (Colin Dente) (04/06/89)
In article <956@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) writes: > >Good suggestion. In the same vein, how about lists of patches? It's >nice to hear on the net "Oh, that bug was fixed with last year's patches". >It would be nicer to know this before the bug bit me. > >-- >Jim Wright >jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu What a good idea! - come on all you people in Apollo land - don't just pretend you don't read this newsgroup - 'cos we know you do! - how about a list of patches - there's no need to be ashamed of bugs when you can be proud of having fixed them (does that sound suitably encouraging?) Colin =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= | Colin Dente | JANET: ECAD@UK.AC.MAN.EE.V1 | | Dept. of Electrical Engineering | ARPA: ECAD%UK.AC.MAN.EE.V1@UKACRL.BITNET| | University of Manchester | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!man.cs.ux!s2!dente | | England | | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Anybody want to buy a Starfighter?..... Buy an acre of ground, and wait... | =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
danny@idacom.UUCP (Danny Wilson) (04/08/89)
In article <956@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu>, jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) writes: > In article <13047@watdragon.waterloo.edu> dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) writes: > > On the topic of APR's etc. Does Apollo make patches available via > > anonymous ftp? > Good suggestion. In the same vein, how about lists of patches? I think this is a GREAT idea that is long overdue. There are many cases of battling our system software both through the apollo support line and the Mentor Graphics support line (we are a mentor site) only to find that patch 987125471-123 [:-) was not installed. A list of patches distributed via this newsgroup semi-annually or even quarterly would be welcome around the world... -- Danny Wilson IDACOM Electronics danny@idacom.uucp Edmonton, Alberta alberta!idacom!danny C A N A D A
danny@idacom.UUCP (Danny Wilson) (04/08/89)
In article <4273b2a35.0017b5e@caen.engin.umich.edu>, pha@CAEN.ENGIN.UMICH.EDU (Paul H. Anderson) writes: > In order for Apollo to allow anonymous FTP, they would have to buy a Sun. > Well, to get the security they want, anyhow. Dumb question, but why would a Sun be required for this service to be provided by Apollo?? -- Danny Wilson IDACOM Electronics danny@idacom.uucp Edmonton, Alberta alberta!idacom!danny C A N A D A
dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) (04/10/89)
In article <591@idacom.UUCP> danny@idacom.UUCP (Danny Wilson) writes: >Dumb question, but why would a Sun be required for this service to >be provided by Apollo?? Because SR 10.x does not support the 'chroot' system call, and they can't implement anonymous ftp in a secure manner without it. -dennis -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90% of all the scientists that ever |Dennis UUCP,BITNET: dvadura@water lived are alive today! Surprised? |Vadura EDU,CDN,CSNET: dvadura@waterloo ================================================================================
tim@tim.UUCP (Tim Giebelhaus) (04/11/89)
In article <13047@watdragon.waterloo.edu> dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) writes: >On the topic of APR's etc. Does Apollo make patches available via >anonymous ftp? If not why not. Seems this is the quickest way for >people to obtain patches rather than having to call up, get patch tape, >or wait for new release. Currently patches are available to customers with service contracts who call in to the hot line. Because of the discussion on the net about ftp patches, there is a discussion in Apollo about whether to make patches available for ftp. There are some problems with this: 1) Would this be a valid (not for profit) use of the Internet? 2) This would make patches available to people who do not pay for service (perhaps raising the cost to those who do pay). 3) It would make patches difficult to control. That is, patches are dangerous as they are not fully tested. Installing many patches will almost surely make a system unusable. With the hot line's help, patches can be installed with care. There are other issues also. This does not mean Apollo will or will not make their patches available via ftp. It is still being discussed. There is a system which I have refered to before which will help find out what is available via patches, though. This is the new bulletin board. The bulletin board will make all sorts of information available in a more timely fashion. As I have said before, please contact your local office for more information. -- UUCP: uunet!hi-csc!apcimsp!tim ARPA: tim@apollo.com Contents of this message has nothing to do with work.
pha@CAEN.ENGIN.UMICH.EDU (Paul H. Anderson) (04/12/89)
Regarding making patches available via anonymous ftp: Even if that can't be worked out, possibly due to license problems, or whatever, it still makes lots of sense for Apollo to post known bugs and availability of patches to this newsgroup. If you ask me, this is far less an imposition, if you want to call it that, than posting new product announcements (which I like, but some may not). Just knowing where bugs are in compilers and the OS stuff can make life much, much easier. For that matter, ADUS could stand to be more active in this newsgroup, since it seems to me that it could get quite a few more submissions via email, as well as announcing available things. One last comment - recently, a querey was posted about the availability of a MSDOS disk reader/writer that runs under Aegis, rather than the DPCE or DPCC products - what became of these? Several months ago, a dos disk package was posted to the net for generic unix boxes, and although it came close to working on SR10.1, I didn't have enough time to actually make it work. This is the kind of thing that would be incredibly valuable to customers everywhere, since moving files from machine to machine via floppy is far prefereable to moving the files via kermit or expensive ethernet setups (for us tightwads, anyhow). If anyone has any patches to MTools (posted to the net middle or late last year?) - I would be very grateful if they were posted or emailed to me. The functionality is what is important, so if there are alternative programs that do the same thing, that would be good to know about, too. enough said for now... Paul Anderson CAEN
paul@DELRIO.CC.UMICH.EDU ('da Kingfish) (04/12/89)
I'll bet a large university in the midwest could make some stuff available via ftp, at least in the interim. Maybe not the total collection, but some of the more popular and recent things. If someone from apollo wants to do that, we can probably set them up. --paul
hollaar%cs.utah.edu@wasatch.utah.edu (Lee Hollaar) (04/12/89)
In article <42968c36a.001b2ef@caen.engin.umich.edu> pha@CAEN.ENGIN.UMICH.EDU (Paul H. Anderson) writes: >One last comment - recently, a query was posted about the availability >of a MSDOS disk reader/writer that runs under Aegis, rather than the >DPCE or DPCC products - what became of these? > >Paul Anderson >CAEN I have just such a program, available at a small license fee through a spinoff of the University of Utah. If you are interested, send me Email (hollaar@cs.utah.edu) or write to: Contexture, Inc. Post Office Box 8721 Salt Lake City UT 84108 Informtion was sent from the Salt Lake City Apollo sales office to all other Apollo sales offices, so you should be able to get information from them, too. Lee
krowitz@RICHTER.MIT.EDU (David Krowitz) (04/13/89)
There really isn't much of a problem getting patches in my experience. Once I know what I want, our field service office usually gets me the patch tape within one day. I see no need for the patches themselves to be online -- 24 hour service is just fine -- however, putting a list of what patches are available online would be very useful. Most users have no idea what patches are currently available and which problems they fix. If we had an online list of patches to consult, we wouldn't waste so much time trying to solve bugs for which there is already a fix. -- David Krowitz krowitz@richter.mit.edu (18.83.0.109) krowitz%richter@eddie.mit.edu krowitz%richter@athena.mit.edu krowitz%richter.mit.edu@mitvma.bitnet (in order of decreasing preference)
dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) (04/13/89)
In article <331@tim.UUCP> tim@tim.UUCP (Tim Giebelhaus) writes: >... >1) Would this be a valid (not for profit) use of the Internet? As long as Apollo does not charge for them I do not see how this is an inappropriate use of the internet. [A related discussion has been recently held in comp.ibm.pc.d (i think that's the group) concerning the issue of posting shareware binaries, and binaries that illicit money from their users in various ways. There the discussion seemed to go in favour of posting such binaries if the moderator perceived them to be of general benefit to the user community at large ] Since we are not advocating posting of patches, rather just making them available for people to ftp them from Apollo, this situation is a little different but still similar. My point is that making the patches available is a service to the Apollo users at large that is generally perceived (in my opinion) as beneficial since it makes their Apollo equipment more usable as bugs get fixed. >2) This would make patches available to people who do not pay for > service (perhaps raising the cost to those who do pay). You've hit a sore spot with me. I believe in a supplier standing by their product. To me this means that if you release SR10.x and you ask me to pay money to get that release, I should get patches to that release free of charge (perhaps this is too naive a view on my part, but hey, when an automaker makes a car, and recalls it because the brakes are faulty, ALL SUCH CARS ARE FIXED FREE OF CHARGE TO THE OWNER!). This does not mean that I should get the next OS release free of charge, but patches to the current release that I paid for should be free. Apollo is free to create a new release at any time, and thereby pay for the next set of patches. >3) It would make patches difficult to control. That is, patches > are dangerous as they are not fully tested. Installing many God I hope not! If I get a patch from Apollo I expect it to work, and fix the problem, not create a new one! If there is danger of a patch not working, then DON'T ISSUE IT! >There are other issues also. This does not mean Apollo will or >will not make their patches available via ftp. It is still >being discussed. > >There is a system which I have refered to before which will help >find out what is available via patches, though. This is the >new bulletin board. The bulletin board will make all sorts of >information available in a more timely fashion. As I have said >before, please contact your local office for more information. Convenience is also an important. The fact is that the internet is convenient to use, easy to access, and I don't need a modem, all I need is my thin ether connector. If I had to call a BBS from my office I can't do it, since I don't have a modem, and even if I did, our phone switch does not like modems (much!). The internet is far, far, far more conveninent to access patches, and to know what is broken. -anyway, I have a squash game :-) -dennis -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90% of all the scientists that ever |Dennis UUCP,BITNET: dvadura@water lived are alive today! Surprised? |Vadura EDU,CDN,CSNET: dvadura@waterloo ================================================================================
tim@tim.UUCP (Tim Giebelhaus) (04/17/89)
In article <13266@watdragon.waterloo.edu> dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) writes: >>2) This would make patches available to people who do not pay for >> service (perhaps raising the cost to those who do pay). >You've hit a sore spot with me. I believe in a supplier standing by >their product. To me this means that if you release SR10.x and you ask >me to pay money to get that release, I should get patches to that release >free of charge (perhaps this is too naive a view on my part, but hey, when >an automaker makes a car, and recalls it because the brakes are faulty, >ALL SUCH CARS ARE FIXED FREE OF CHARGE TO THE OWNER!). This does not >mean that I should get the next OS release free of charge, but patches to >the current release that I paid for should be free. Well, Apollo could increase the cost of each release so that the cost of patches and phone support was included in the release, but is that what people really want. I would not suggest seperating the phone support from the patch support except for very experienced customers. I am no policy maker for Apollo in any case, though. I may be wrong about this, but for car recalls, isn't it true that recalls only happen for safty problems? >>3) It would make patches difficult to control. That is, patches >> are dangerous as they are not fully tested. Installing many >God I hope not! If I get a patch from Apollo I expect it to work, and fix >the problem, not create a new one! If there is danger of a patch not >working, then DON'T ISSUE IT! Now this is just the definition of a patch. Apollo takes all their patches puts them together, tests them, and distributes them in a maintenance release (though other stuff will probably be in the release too). So if you want fully tested stuff, you wait for the release which fixes your problem. If you can't wait for the testing of the fix for you problem, you install the patch. This is why I would want the hot line involved with the release of patches. They can work with the customer to explain any known side effects and work with the customer if there are any new side effects which crop up. -- UUCP: uunet!hi-csc!apcimsp!tim ARPA: tim@apollo.com Contents of this message has nothing to do with work.
conliffe@caen.engin.umich.edu (Darryl C. Conliffe) (04/19/89)
Tim, I believe most systems people have a simular blind spot with respect to the concept of patches and updates. To the systems developers, "its fixed in the next release, due out sometime in 6 to 9 months" is a satisfactory response. They know what is involved, what resources they have, and how the release blends with other marketing activities of the company. The consumer, however, quite often finds the problem as a fault in the originally delivered product, which was hidden from the potential buyer, but could have been well known to the developer well before the sale. It is a representation of some "misrepresentation", albeit common in the industry. Nevertheless, it is at a minimum frustrating; oftimes, costly to the ignorant consumer. Furthermore, "6 to 9 months" can be 20 to 25% of the development cycle of an entire automobile; many of your industrial customers cannot afford to wait that long. I know you try to avoid roadblocking customers, but problems with a system can be catastopic and abrupt (you're down), or mildly debilitating. It is the former that creates a drag on the progress of a customer, making us less productive. To link productivity with economic survival may sound a little harsh, but its real. The upshot is that while other vendors have their problems too, all of us lose if we don't attempt to do our best. (This is not a dig, but a case for considering the priority of customer support.) I have always assumed that "patches" were a company's attempt to bridge the gap between advertised and actual performance, fixing things that were "fixable" without a whole new release. Developers have no idea how maddening it is to work on a problem with your system for hours and/or days, only to find that it is a known fault in the system. To really piss someone off, make the problem one that was fixed two patch tapes ago, if the operator knew 1. the patch existed, and 2. it was available. Even then, calls to the hotline do not result in patch tape shipments; you have to be talking to just the right individual who is willing to send you the tape. I believe software maintenance is a chargeable service that helps me identify my or your problems with the software, and that may lead to enhancements to the software. Bugs, especially those known when the software is shipped, represent incomplete work on the part of the supplier. They may be completed later in the field via patches. Of course, not everyone will need the repair before the next release, so a public list of patches does not give away a chargeable service, but merely demonstrates a company's commitment to Quality and Customer Support. LONG LIVE A RECOGNIZABLE APOLLO. If you consider support in this vein, you probably will. -- ___________________ Darryl C. Conliffe conliffe@caen.engin.umich.edu (313) 721-6069 -------------------