ric@rioja.ifs.umich.edu (Richard Campbell) (02/28/90)
At the Washington Usenix RT/AOS4.3 bof, it was mentioned that hc2.1y was in very good shape and that it worked well with dbx. Now that we have hc2.1y, we're not exactly seeing wonderfullness on the dbx front. Should we? Or do we need to pick up a new dbx? Richard Campbell
ehrlich@cs.psu.edu (Daniel Ehrlich) (03/02/90)
In article <1990Feb27.225719.1443@terminator.cc.umich.edu> ric@rioja.ifs.umich.edu (Richard Campbell) writes:
Richard> At the Washington Usenix RT/AOS4.3 bof, it
Richard> was mentioned that hc2.1y was in very good shape
Richard> and that it worked well with dbx.
Richard> Now that we have hc2.1y, we're not exactly seeing
Richard> wonderfullness on the dbx front. Should we? Or do we
Richard> need to pick up a new dbx?
Which DBX are you using? The dbx that came with the Sep/Dec 88 release or
the one issued by Eric Brunner as patch V1.15 parts 1 through 5? The dbx
that came originaly was never very useful. The new version is archived on
the host bikini.cis.ufl.edu [128.227.224.1] in the directory
pub/ibm-rt-fixes.
--
Dan Ehrlich <ehrlich@cs.psu.edu>
Voice: +1 814 863 1142 FAX: +1 814 865 3176