lee@gdc.portal.com (Seng-Poh Lee, Gen DataComm, +1 203 758-1811) (03/18/91)
I see a lot of discussion about Xenix 386, ESIX, Dell and Interactive Unix, but nothing about UHC Unix R4. Doesn't anybody run this? It seems to be very competitive in price and appears to have a lot of the goodies. If anyone out there is running UHC and has some comments about it, how about starting a thread? ----- Seng-Poh Lee Work: lee@gdc.portal.com Technology Center ...!uunet!portal!gdc!lee General DataComm Ind. Inc. Home: lee%splee.uucp@hsi.com ...!uunet!hsi!splee!lee +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | T H I S S P A C E F O R R E N T | | | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
tts@ttank.ttank.com (Karl Bunch) (03/18/91)
In <7776@gdc.portal.com> lee@gdc.portal.com (Seng-Poh Lee, Gen DataComm, +1 203 758-1811) writes: >I see a lot of discussion about Xenix 386, ESIX, Dell and Interactive Unix, but >nothing about UHC Unix R4. Doesn't anybody run this? It seems to be very >competitive in price and appears to have a lot of the goodies. If anyone out >there is running UHC and has some comments about it, how about starting a >thread? I agree.. So speak up you UHC users/admins. If you're having so many problems you're embarassed to admit to running it.. Well save us all a lot of pain.. If it's working great.. Well.. Let us in on the fun! :-) Karl -- % ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- % Karl Bunch ||| UUCP: ..!uunet!zardoz!ttank!karl % Think Tank Software ||| INTERNET: karl@ttank.com % "...you'd be suprised how far a hug will go with Geordi, even Worf!" -- Riker
timj@maynhbd.UUCP (Tim Jones) (03/24/91)
Seng-Po, It might not be a good idea to dedicate a thread to only UHC, but an SVR4 thread would be a good idea. As for UHC, while we are not endorsing them officially, we use their SVR4r2.0 set for our departmental host and have had very few problems (none that have not been resolved by a phone call to UHC TS). It is extremely stable (not one PANIC: in three months of use), has a very good set of man pages (hard copy is available for additional $), full support for X11R4 with Openlook, NeWS (Sun) and Motif and is installable from tape! We've also looked at Microport's version of SVR4 and found that it is also very stable (we chose UHC as our host OS because we installed it first). It offers everything that UHC offers except X11R4 and Motif (they ship X11R3 and OL/NeWS). The support from Microport is also very good (as it usually is from smaller companies). I think that we can attribute the overall stability of the Intel SVR4 systems to Intel. While they have dropped actual end user sales of UNIX and turned over their customer base to Interactive, they are still the compatibility and compliance manager as well as the main clearing house after USL (was AT&T) turns it over for distribution. The only reason that you probably don't hear more from current SVR4 users could be because no one has admitted to compleating any type of news read/send port. I am looking at Cnews and will post results to the net as things progress. Oh yes, there are still some poorly documented differences between 3.2 and 4.0, but these things are getting better every day (literally). Tim Jones ...!uunet!maynhbd!timj The words here are my Keeper of the news -- Taker of the blame own and don't reflect Maynard Electronics, Inc. anything outside of my An Archive Company own micro perspective!
jennings@anchor.colorado.edu (Jeff Jennings) (03/25/91)
In article <10@maynhbd.UUCP> timj@maynhbd.UUCP (Tim Jones) writes: >As for UHC, while we are not endorsing them officially, we use their >SVR4r2.0 set for our departmental host and have had very few problems >(none that have not been resolved by a phone call to UHC TS). It is >extremely stable (not one PANIC: in three months of use), has a very >good set of man pages (hard copy is available for additional $), full >support for X11R4 with Openlook, NeWS (Sun) and Motif and is installable >from tape! We have 3 486 boxes running UHC where I work. It took over two weeks to finally get the distribution installed, including almost daily calls to UHC. Packages have dependencies on other pacakages being installed, but nowhere is there a list of the order to install things in. When a package fails to install, it doesn't just give up and fail to install, it generally trashes the kernel config files, requiring the entire base distribution to be reinstalled. Get the distribution on tape, we had no problems with installing that. We must have installed the system from floppies over a dozen times. Our boxes are EISA bus, with SCSI adapter cards, vga, logitech mice, 8-16 megs of memory, 100-660 megs of disk space. We tried a machine with 32 megs of memory, there is a problem with the SCSI interface (hardware? driver?) such that it trashes memory above 16 megs and the kernel panics. Our machines seemed to panic once a day or so, we replaced the clone Adaptec SCSI cards with real Adaptecs, the panic problems seemed to go away. We are still waiting for the X manuals. We got only the Open Look manuals. The X implementation seems ok, resolution is only 640x480x16 on Paradise VGA 1024 cards. They say they will have hi-res drivers for X soon. No imake program or Imake.tmpl files came with the X distribution, making it tough to compile applications. We have the machines Etherneted together, using WD boards and thin wire ethernet. No problems with NFS, TCP/IP, etc. In summary, pretty good, still a few bugs in the distribution and installation from floppies. Still not quite stable, I would say, I didn't have anything like these problems installing my ESIX system. To be fair, we had some problems installing VENIX (Interactive SVR3.2) on the same type 486 box, but we never got the trashed kernel config or the kernel panics. > >Tim Jones ...!uunet!maynhbd!timj The words here are my >Keeper of the news -- Taker of the blame own and don't reflect >Maynard Electronics, Inc. anything outside of my >An Archive Company own micro perspective! -- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Jeff Jennings University of Colorado, Boulder jennings@boulder.colorado.edu
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/27/91)
In article <10@maynhbd.UUCP> timj@maynhbd.UUCP (Tim Jones) writes: | The only reason that you probably don't hear more from current SVR4 | users could be because no one has admitted to compleating any type of | news read/send port. I am looking at Cnews and will post results to | the net as things progress. What's the big deal? Dell comes with C news on the tape, you just install it. I compiled B news and that worked, too. I am planning to try an install TMNN in the not too distant future, as soon as my feed gets better. If nothing else that may make me the only site on the net actually running that combo. The development machine is called toybox, for good reason. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (03/28/91)
jennings@anchor.colorado.edu (Jeff Jennings) writes: >In article <10@maynhbd.UUCP> timj@maynhbd.UUCP (Tim Jones) writes: >UHC. Packages have dependencies on other pacakages being installed, but >nowhere is there a list of the order to install things in. When a package >fails to install, it doesn't just give up and fail to install, it generally >trashes the kernel config files, requiring the entire base distribution to >be reinstalled. Get the distribution on tape, we had no problems with >installing that. We must have installed the system from floppies over a >dozen times. We installed UHC SVR4 from floppies twice (although I have decided we will never do it again - we'll use tape next time) with no problems either time. -- Conor P. Cahill (703)430-9247 Virtual Technologies, Inc. uunet!virtech!cpcahil 46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160 Sterling, VA 22170