jenkins@devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Steve Jenkins) (06/14/90)
Before scheduling our 5.0 upgrade, we would be very interested in hearing any experiences with it, good, bad, or indifferent. Thanks. -- Steve Jenkins N6UNI jenkins@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (818) 354-0162 Articles to: concurrent@soma.bcm.tmc.edu or uunet!soma.bcm.tmc.edu!concurrent Administrative stuff: concurrent-request@soma.bcm.tmc.edu Stan Barber, Moderator
bob@morningstar.com (Bob Sutterfield) (08/27/90)
In article <1127@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> stevev@chemstor.uoregon.edu (Steve VanDevender) writes:
There aren't any particularly obvious advantages to the upgrade
either, aside from lots of small bugfixes. The new Ethernet
software (which we haven't received yet) looks much nicer, since it
includes support for the Internet name resolver...
This was where we saw our biggest benefit. We run a Class B network
number with Class C subnetting (137.175.s.h with netmask ffffff00).
Under RTU 4.x we had to run a proxy ARP daemon on a nearby Sun to keep
the RTU machines' ARP caches fooled into using the correct gateway
(one of the RTU machines, in fact) to our IP-over-X.25 network. Now
with proper subnet support it all just works.
Yes, availability of the DNS stuff is nice, and we use it and depend
on it. But for basic functionality, you can't beat a working netmask.
Oh yeah, the C compiler seems a little better, too. It chokes less
often on code that runs on everything else. I find myself needing to
use the GNU C compiler less often.
Articles to: concurrent@soma.bcm.tmc.edu or uunet!soma.bcm.tmc.edu!concurrent
Administrative stuff: concurrent-request@soma.bcm.tmc.edu
Stan Barber, Moderatorleo@uunet.uu.net (08/27/90)
stevev@chemstor.uoregon.edu (Steve VanDevender) writes: >In article <1068@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> jenkins@devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Steve Jenkins) writes: > Before scheduling our 5.0 upgrade, we would be very interested in > hearing any experiences with it, good, bad, or indifferent. >Clearly, the problems we encountered in the upgrade were trivial. >There aren't any particularly obvious advantages to the upgrade >either, aside from lots of small bugfixes. The new Ethernet >software (which we haven't received yet) looks much nicer, since >it includes support for the Internet name resolver and even the >nameserver daemon (which most people won't need to run), so if >have a nearby nameserver you won't have to keep host tables any >more. We found a BIG difference with X11 when we upgraded... It worked! Previously, we had all sorts of problems with "file table overflow" and not being able to rlogin. Under 5.0, X is actually usable! Now, if they would just finish the X11R4 port... Anybody know how to get the application keypad to produce escape codes instead of numbers when running xterm? Concurrent wasn't any help - they said to wait for the xcterm that comes with Motif! -- Leo leo@aai.com leo%aai@uunet.uu.net ...uunet!aai!leo -- Leo leo@aai.com leo%aai@uunet.uu.net ...uunet!aai!leo Articles to: concurrent@soma.bcm.tmc.edu or uunet!soma.bcm.tmc.edu!concurrent Administrative stuff: concurrent-request@soma.bcm.tmc.edu Stan Barber, Moderator