david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) (11/18/90)
Hello, I have been looking at some of the low end 386sx machines. I would like to buy one for working at home. All of the ones that I have seen have IDE hard drives. I have never used IDE controllers or hard drives. Will SCO Unix/Xenix run ok on one of these machines? While I am here. Does anyone know a good DOS terminal program that will pass function keys, arrow keys, and Alt-key combinations. If you know of any PD software that would do this please let me know where I can get it. (no ftp available) Or, if it is a commercial product where can I buy it and how much does it cost? Thanks in advance -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Hoopes Tallgras Technologies Inc. uunet!talgras!david 11100 W 82nd St. Voice: (913) 492-6002 x323 Lenexa, Ks 66214
jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) (11/20/90)
david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) writes: >Hello, > I have been looking at some of the low end 386sx machines. I would >like to buy one for working at home. All of the ones that I have seen have >IDE hard drives. I have never used IDE controllers or hard drives. Will >SCO Unix/Xenix run ok on one of these machines? IDE should work just fine. I've had no problem with using IDE with Novell. I plan on upgrading my system's hard drive configuration from a small 40 Mb and a 10 Mb ST506 MFM to a Conner CP-3204F. If there is a problem with IDE, it certainly would surprise me. // JCA /* **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* ** Flames : /dev/null | Small memory model only for ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil | Unix? Get the (*bleep*) out ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com | of here! ** UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* */
jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) (11/21/90)
jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: >david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) writes: >>Hello, >> I have been looking at some of the low end 386sx machines. I would >>like to buy one for working at home. All of the ones that I have seen have >>IDE hard drives. I have never used IDE controllers or hard drives. Will >>SCO Unix/Xenix run ok on one of these machines? >IDE should work just fine. I've had no problem with using IDE with Novell. I >plan on upgrading my system's hard drive configuration from a small 40 Mb and >a 10 Mb ST506 MFM to a Conner CP-3204F. If there is a problem with IDE, it >certainly would surprise me. It does not suprise me that a Novell user would assume that SCO would behave just like Novell. :-) It depends on at least 4 variables: the motherboard, controller, drive, and version of SCO. I can tell you from personal experience that there are many combinations of these 4 variables that do *not* work together. Some will. Find a reputable dealer, and/or someone who has a reliable system configured. NOTE, reliable does not mean, "will it boot". I will also point out that in the latest version of Xenix System V/386 that we got from SCO *today*, there are no supported IDE devices listed. Your milage WILL vary. Before everyone sends mail asking for my personal compatibility list... It is very simple, pay a little more and buy name brands from reliable people that service the *nix business. Frequent the elcheapo back pages of magazine x selling made who knows where bargain basement boards and you will get what you pay for. -- Do not suffer the company of fools. | home jan@bagend 404-434-1335 Buddha | known_universe!gatech!bagend!jan
alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) (11/21/90)
jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes: >jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: >>david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) writes: >>>Hello, >>> I have been looking at some of the low end 386sx machines. I would >>>like to buy one for working at home. All of the ones that I have seen have >>>IDE hard drives. I have never used IDE controllers or hard drives. Will >>>SCO Unix/Xenix run ok on one of these machines? >>IDE should work just fine. >It depends on at least 4 variables: the motherboard, controller, drive, and >version of SCO. I can tell you from personal experience that there are many >combinations of these 4 variables that do *not* work together. Some will. >I will also point out that in the latest version of Xenix System V/386 that >we got from SCO *today*, there are no supported IDE devices listed. I speak from experience... You would do well to avoid XENIX and IDE drives. I have a system with just this configuration--and it will lock up every 6 to 8 hours unpredictably with the hard-disk access light on. It is dependent on the controller, but even more dependent on the hard-disk (which, since IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, is the real controller in these things). The drive is a Conner CP-3104, the 100Mbyte Conner drive that Dell and Compaq use at great length; my spies at SCO say this drive is not completely emulating the WD-1010 and -2020 controllers, the only two IDE controllers they "officially" support. (I've never heard of 'em--the only Western Digital controllers I know of in IDE that are current stock items are the WD-140, -240, and -440; but again, that's the board that plugs into the computer, not the controller which is on the drive.) Note also that Dell, Compaq and Northgate push UNIX on their products big time, and that same use IDE. It's not clear to me what *nix they're using, though. I have a fix from SCO which I've yet to apply; currently the customer is running Just Fine with a ST-4096 and a WD-1006. They'll get their extra 20 megs soon, I just don't know how... ....Short end: if you want to experiment, use IDE. If you want stability, use something else. Alex -- Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3
shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (11/22/90)
david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) writes: > While I am here. Does anyone know a good DOS terminal program that will >pass function keys, arrow keys, and Alt-key combinations. If you know of any >PD software that would do this please let me know where I can get it. (no ftp >available) Or, if it is a commercial product where can I buy it and how >much does it cost? Well, we've successfully used ProComm Plus (usually in vt102 mode). The termcap or terminfo used on the host should include definitions for all appropriate keys. PC Plus also includes a keyboard mapping facility, in the event you want to add to or modify the default key map.
jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) (11/22/90)
jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes: >jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes: > >>david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) writes: >>>Hello, >>> I have been looking at some of the low end 386sx machines. I would >>>like to buy one for working at home. All of the ones that I have seen have >>>IDE hard drives. I have never used IDE controllers or hard drives. Will >>>SCO Unix/Xenix run ok on one of these machines? > >>IDE should work just fine. I've had no problem with using IDE with Novell. I >>plan on upgrading my system's hard drive configuration from a small 40 Mb and >>a 10 Mb ST506 MFM to a Conner CP-3204F. If there is a problem with IDE, it >>certainly would surprise me. > >It does not suprise me that a Novell user would assume that SCO would behave >just like Novell. :-) Actually, I've found in my experience that a lot more things work with *nix in general than Novell. >It depends on at least 4 variables: the motherboard, controller, drive, and >version of SCO. I can tell you from personal experience that there are many >combinations of these 4 variables that do *not* work together. Some will. > >Find a reputable dealer, and/or someone who has a reliable system configured. >NOTE, reliable does not mean, "will it boot". > >I will also point out that in the latest version of Xenix System V/386 that >we got from SCO *today*, there are no supported IDE devices listed. All of ALR's machines are certified by SCO and Novell. ALR is really big on IDE. Of course, ALR is a major name brand. One of the things one might look for is a system with a motherboard that is Novell and SCO certified. A lot of motherboards out there have an IDE port on them. Also keep in mind that IDE generally looks like an ST412/506 controller and drive. But of course, as I've always said, there are exceptions to the rule. Find a dealer that will guarantee that SCO Xenix will run on their machine with an IDE drive on it. // JCA /* **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* ** Flames : /dev/null | Small memory model only for ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil | Unix? Get the (*bleep*) out ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com | of here! ** UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca **--------------------------------------------------------------------------* */
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (11/23/90)
In article <1990Nov21.093114.15468@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: | You would do well to avoid XENIX and IDE drives. I have a system with | just this configuration--and it will lock up every 6 to 8 hours | unpredictably with the hard-disk access light on. Do you have SLS xnx133 installed? While billed as a fix for the WD1007, it also fixes lockup problems with a number of other controllers (WD1006, for instance), and may be useful in your case. Since it's free you have nothing to lose putting it in. -- 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
alan@mq.com (Alan H. Mintz) (11/24/90)
> >david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes) writes: > >>Hello, > >> I have been looking at some of the low end 386sx machines. I would > >>like to buy one for working at home. All of the ones that I have seen have > >>IDE hard drives. I have never used IDE controllers or hard drives. Will > >>SCO Unix/Xenix run ok on one of these machines? The IDE controllers (and drives) in Dell 386/486 systems work fine under SCO XENIX 386 2.3.2. -- < Alan H. Mintz | Voice +1 714 980 1034 > < Micro-Quick Systems, Inc. | FAX +1 714 944 3995 > < 10384 Hillside Road | ...!uunet!mq!alan > < Alta Loma, CA 91701 USA | alan@MQ.COM >
alan@mq.com (Alan H. Mintz) (11/24/90)
In article <1990Nov21.093114.15468@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us>, alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: > > You would do well to avoid XENIX and IDE drives. I have a system with > just this configuration--and it will lock up every 6 to 8 hours > unpredictably with the hard-disk access light on. It is dependent on > the controller, but even more dependent on the hard-disk (which, since > IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, is the real controller in > these things). The drive is a Conner CP-3104, the 100Mbyte Conner drive > that Dell and Compaq use at great length; my spies at SCO say this drive > is not completely emulating the WD-1010 and -2020 controllers, the only > two IDE controllers they "officially" support. To clarify my earlier post, we have experienced no trouble with Dell IDE machines employing the Maxtor 190Mb drive under SCO XENIX 386. > Note also that Dell, Compaq and Northgate push UNIX on their products > big time, and that same use IDE. It's not clear to me what *nix they're > using, though. Dell UNIX SVR3 is an ISC port. I understand SVR4 was completely in-house. -- < Alan H. Mintz | Voice +1 714 980 1034 > < Micro-Quick Systems, Inc. | FAX +1 714 944 3995 > < 10384 Hillside Road | ...!uunet!mq!alan > < Alta Loma, CA 91701 USA | alan@MQ.COM >
root@crash.cts.com (Bill Blue) (11/25/90)
In <1990Nov21.093114.15468@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: }I speak from experience... }You would do well to avoid XENIX and IDE drives. I have a system with }just this configuration--and it will lock up every 6 to 8 hours }unpredictably with the hard-disk access light on. It is dependent on }the controller, but even more dependent on the hard-disk (which, since }IDE stands for Integrated Drive Electronics, is the real controller in }these things). The drive is a Conner CP-3104, the 100Mbyte Conner drive }that Dell and Compaq use at great length; my spies at SCO say this drive }is not completely emulating the WD-1010 and -2020 controllers, the only }two IDE controllers they "officially" support. (I've never heard of }'em--the only Western Digital controllers I know of in IDE that are }current stock items are the WD-140, -240, and -440; but again, that's }the board that plugs into the computer, not the controller which is on }the drive.) I too speak from experience. The problem with IDE drives and Xenix is not the drive or the controller ON the drive. It is with the adapter card that plugs into the motherboard and connects to the drive. Some of the adapter boards are very sensitive to the buss timings of the motherboard. They will do anything from refuse to boot Xenix altogether to occasional lockups and other strange behavior. It is the adapter, NOT the drive. Adapters that I have found work consistently in a wide variety of motherboards are by Priam and Conner. Using good adapter boards, I have installed quite a number of Xenix systems on IDE drives with no problems. In fact I use a Conner CP3104 on one of my test systems day in and day out. IDE drives are basically RLL and you can expect the same general performance and data throughput as you would with any other quality RLL drive/controller combination. --Bill
jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) (11/25/90)
In article <5857@crash.cts.com> root@crash.cts.com (Bill Blue) writes: >I too speak from experience. The problem with IDE drives and Xenix is >not the drive or the controller ON the drive. It is with the adapter >card that plugs into the motherboard and connects to the drive. Some >of the adapter boards are very sensitive to the buss timings of the >motherboard. They will do anything from refuse to boot Xenix >altogether to occasional lockups and other strange behavior. It is >the adapter, NOT the drive. Adapters that I have found work >consistently in a wide variety of motherboards are by Priam and Conner. I cannot remember having any problems using Conner boards, but I religiously avoid noname, made in the Far East motherboards. The worst problems I have had with Xenix and IDE drives were using motherboards with *builtin* IDE controllers. In these cases, SCO could not be made to recognize that there was a drive/controller in the system. Total blank. These same combinations ran fine with vanilla 3.2 from AT&T. -- Do not suffer the company of fools. | home jan@bagend 404-434-1335 Buddha | known_universe!gatech!bagend!jan
aris@tabbs.UUCP (Aris Stathakis) (11/25/90)
In <1990Nov21.093114.15468@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: >jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes: >I speak from experience... So do I... >You would do well to avoid XENIX and IDE drives. I have a system with >just this configuration--and it will lock up every 6 to 8 hours >unpredictably with the hard-disk access light on. I have had the totally opposite experience. When using AST Premium 386 machines with the IDE controller on the motherboard, the system (using SCO UNIX 3.2.2) absolutley FLIES. The transfer rate is really good (though I haven't benchmarked it - you can notice the difference). >....Short end: if you want to experiment, use IDE. If you want >stability, use something else. I can't speak for other manufacturers, but the AST on-board IDE controller is brilliant. I would reccoment it any time above MFM/RLL/ESDI (maybe not SCSI though.. :-) Aris -- Aris Stathakis | Bang: ..!uunet!ddsw1!olsa99!tabbs!aris or aris@tabbs.UUCP - - - What garlic is to food, insanity is to art. -
alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) (11/27/90)
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) writes: >In article <1990Nov21.093114.15468@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: >| You would do well to avoid XENIX and IDE drives. I have a system with >| just this configuration--and it will lock up every 6 to 8 hours >| unpredictably with the hard-disk access light on. > Do you have SLS xnx133 installed? While billed as a fix for the >WD1007, it also fixes lockup problems with a number of other controllers >(WD1006, for instance), and may be useful in your case. Since it's free >you have nothing to lose putting it in. I got it from a kind system engineer/support guy at SCO. I have not yet tested it to destruction (the system's running with an 80 Mbyte MFM; goot enough til we get this stomped). He also sent me a script which continuously reads/writes to the drive, to test it with. I must say, once you get past the daunting call-in system, and the reputation for off-putting in system support, SCO can be reasonably nice. Admittedly, I don't like the "30 days free support" fooraw; who can say how much support they `should' give you, though? Alex -- Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3
alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) (11/27/90)
root@crash.cts.com (Bill Blue) writes: >In <1990Nov21.093114.15468@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: >I too speak from experience. The problem with IDE drives and Xenix is >not the drive or the controller ON the drive. It is with the adapter >card that plugs into the motherboard and connects to the drive. I'll have to come down on the other side of this one, Bill. The Conner people I've talked to, the SCO people, the third-parties who've send me info on this--everyone else agrees that it's the drive, and almost the drive alone, that determine the gotchas in most systems. The adapter board's important for *some BIOSes*, no question. Don't run an IDE drive with an AMI BIOS dated before 12/15/89; AMI did a major fix of their drive-handling code. Previously, you'd have to use the "Conner Compatibility jumper" on that adapter board--in other words, set for IRQ14 buffered--to keep from getting oddball drive not ready errors. This cures that. Conner themselves, though not directly, admit that the 3104 has a problem with asserting data-ready before it really was. This may be fixed in latest release, but who can tell from firmware? At the moment, what I have is a repeatable crash. Yes, it gets worse when I switch IDE adapter boards--from the ``no name'' Taiwan to the ``brand name'' Western Digital. Yes, that's right: the WD-240 is WORSE than Joe's Taiwan Clone & Bottle Company. Both crash in 6<x<24 hours. >Using good adapter boards, I have installed quite a number of Xenix >systems on IDE drives with no problems. In fact I use a Conner CP3104 >on one of my test systems day in and day out. IDE drives are >basically RLL and you can expect the same general performance and data >throughput as you would with any other quality RLL drive/controller >combination. Well, "basically RLL" is a major misnomer. You've seen my postings for long enough to know that I wouldn't use an RLL ANYTHING in a production machine--too risky. But, we all know that the embedded controllers on very advanced drives used embedded servo-tracking to `watch over' the data's viability: they do a good job of ensuring you'll get back what you put on. Using an RLL controller & drive is putting 15 pounds into a 10 pound sock, and I don't think it's reliable enough. My 2 quatloos' worth. Glad you get it working: perhaps this SLS 133 will fix me up, too. Alex -- Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3
shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) (11/28/90)
aris@tabbs.UUCP (Aris Stathakis) writes: >I can't speak for other manufacturers, but the AST on-board IDE >controller is brilliant. I would reccoment it any time above >MFM/RLL/ESDI (maybe not SCSI though.. :-) Preliminary evaluation of our own AST 386/33 with a CMS 120 MB IDE show less than "brilliant" performance. Indeed, both the Norton SI and Columbia TESTDISK benchmarks show this combination running slower than my NEC 386/20 (nothing special, by the way) running a WD1006V and CDC 94205-51 MFM. That holds whether I have software cache (Microsoft's SmartDrive) enabled or disabled.