Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #295
From: Digestifier <Linux-Misc-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date:     Tue, 21 Jun 94 02:13:07 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #295, Volume #2                Tue, 21 Jun 94 02:13:07 EDT

Contents:
  Connor Superstor 250Mb (Paul H. Husek)
  Re: [Q] iBCS2 does not insmod (Donald Jeff Dionne)
  Re: Video Card Reviews (Carsten Whimster)
  Re: Multiport Bored and Linux (Was: future of Unixware) (David Wright)
  Re: Latest in PC WEEK (May 30 Editorial) (Craig Milo Rogers)
  Re: future of Unixware (Thomas Sandlass)
  NETWORK--Outbound TELNET ok but Inbound TELNET fails (Houzhi S Jin)
  Linux Sites (J. K. McLoughlin)
  Re: sco motif/iBCS/Linux ?? (Brandon S. Allbery)
  Sort of solved: iBCS2 does not insmod (Harald Milz)
  Re: Multiport Bored and Linux (Was: future of Unixware) (Reginald D Hody)
  WARNING -- Linux kernel 1.1.19 (Jonathan E Brickman)
  Need to know if LINUX compatible with ReelMagic Multimedia kit (PEYAM POURBEIK)
  Re: future of Unixware (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: Wordperfect for X-Windows (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: Wordperfect for X-Windows (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: UNIVERSAL CDROM - STOP ADVERTISING ! (Robert Wolf)
  Re: What other notebooks does Linux run on well? (Robert Wolf)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: phh358@pepper.albany.edu (Paul H. Husek)
Subject: Connor Superstor 250Mb
Date: 20 Jun 1994 16:06:42 GMT

Hi,

        Could someone  point me in the  right  direction to  using the
Connor Superstor 250  Mb  tape drive (it  hooks  on the floppy cable).
Thanks very much.


Paul Husek


------------------------------

From: jeff@ee.ryerson.ca (Donald Jeff Dionne)
Subject: Re: [Q] iBCS2 does not insmod
Date: 20 Jun 1994 22:05:08 GMT

Harald Milz (hm@seneca.ix.de) wrote:
: I tried to play around with the iBCS2 emulator. As mentioned in the
: README, I'd expect to flawlessly run iBCS2 with 1.1.15 or later. However,
: all kernels from 1.1.15 to 1.1.19 didn't work with iBCS2 because insmod 
: complained about two symbols not being defined:

: root@seneca: /usr/src/ibcs> insmod iBCS 
: _strcmp undefined
: _file_systems undefined

: Oops. What have I missed?


I got 1.1.19 to work fine.  *After* patching the kernel up to 1.1.19 (not
1.1.20, that's broke...) just untar the ibcs package in the linux directory
and build.  

Took me a few tries, I had a few kernel panics last week, and strange things
began to hapen after that... like internal compiler errors galore, and patch
putting files in the totally *WRONG* directories.  I assumed the filesystem
was damaged beond e2fschk's reapair, and re-installed off CD.  All's fine
now, built first time, no files in the wrong place.

: 1.1.20 breaks the compilation of iBCS2, BTW, because three members of struct
: task_struct are missing in sched.h. This is the part of patch20.gz which 
: causes this:

: @@ -252,12 +253,11 @@
:         unsigned long flags;    /* per process flags, defined below */
:         int errno;
:         int debugreg[8];  /* Hardware debugging registers */
: -       asmlinkage void (*lcall7)(struct pt_regs *);
: +       struct exec_domain *exec_domain;
:  /* various fields */
: +       struct linux_binfmt *binfmt;
:         struct task_struct *next_task, *prev_task;
:         struct sigaction sigaction[32];
: -       unsigned long * signal_map;
: -       unsigned long * signal_invmap;

: This happens with ibcs-940526.tar.gz and ibcs-940609.tar.gz. 

: Ciao,
: hm


Yep.  Same thing here with 1.1.20

BTW... That XWordPerfect demo is SLICK!  Good work and thanks a lot to
everone that had a hand in the iBCS2 emulator.

: -- 
: Harald Milz                             office: hm@ix.de
: iX Multiuser Multitasking Magazine      home:   hm@seneca.ix.de
: Opinions are mine, not my employer's -- the answer is Forty-two

Jeff@EE.Ryerson.Ca

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video
From: bcrwhims@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Carsten Whimster)
Subject: Re: Video Card Reviews
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 02:34:19 GMT

In article <2u4mj1$mdc@news.ccit.arizona.edu>,
Shane Jensen <jensen@dorothy.as.arizona.edu> wrote:
>I'm looking for recent reviews(or opinions) on PCI video cards.
>I want a card that is capable of 24 bit color and high refresh 
>rates.  In the majority of magazines I have looked at, their
>reviews are, not surprisingly, directed more toward the lower cost
>cards.  I have been looking at cards in the $400-$600 dollar
>range, and have ended up partial to the PCI #9GXE lv12, but 
>this is an uninformed opinion right now.  
>
>I would be grateful if you could direct me toward performance reviews
>on the video cards or offer personal opinions on your favorite card
>(and if possible, how it works with Linux).
>
>I would be using it with the Viewsonic V17 17" monitor, running Linux,
>on a Pentium 100Mhz.

The brand-new ATI graphics Turbo (is that the name?) has up to
1280x1024x16.7mil resolution, and is supposedly very nice and fast (64
bit), but I don't imagine that there are drivers out for Linux yet?
-- 
===================================================================
  Carsten Whimster              --- EDM/2 Associate Editor
  bcrwhims@uwaterloo.ca         --- EDM/2 Book Review columnist
===================================================================

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.unix.unixware
From: dmw@prism1.prism1.com (David Wright)
Subject: Re: Multiport Bored and Linux (Was: future of Unixware)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 19:59:35 GMT

>>>>> "EL" == Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.on.ca> writes:

  EL> IMO, the reason is that they figure someone who's about to spend >$10K
  EL> on their database engine and 4GL, isn't going to piss around arguing
  EL> that the OS cost $1500. When you add training, peripherals, wiring,
  EL> networking, system design, customization, administration and maintenance,
  EL> the difference between the cost of installing (unsupported by the DB
  EL> vendor) Linux or (supported) UnixWare is insignificant.

        Except that it might not be a matter of cost to the end-user, but
rather the people supporting the system. We have traditionally been an SCO shop
(going back to Xenix 286). We sell a LOT of 2-3 user systems into a highly
vertical market. Guess what? That is the majority of SCO's business. Many
times a price difference of even $500 can mean the difference between closing a
deal and losing one. Just because the customer may be paying like $20k for
our software doesn't mean they won't care about paying an extra $500-$1k for
something they know nothing about (they never fiddle with Unix itself, only
our software running under it).

        So all SCO buys me is the ability to get versions of WordPerfect, Lotus
1-2-3, and occasionally DBase IV that run native. But to get that I have to
pay an outragious $1k+, as well as additional costs for networking or X
windows support.

        For Linux I can pay NOTHING and get just as good hardware support
(after all, since I spec the hardware, I don't have to support goofy odd-ball
hardware), included development system, network support, and X windows on
each system. This DRASTICALLY increases the LCD installation, and would make
it feasible for me to start working on X versions of our software.

        So it really is irrelevant whether the end-user sees the price
difference or not (in our case they wouldn't appreciate it anyway), WE see
it, and Linux would allow us to provide a better system to our customers
with no additional expense on our part.


                                                        Dave

--
  ____________________________________________________________________________
 |        /\ /          | Prism Computer Applications        |  David Wright  |
 |      -/--\--         | 14650 Detroit Ave, Suite LL40      | dmw@Prism1.COM |
 |      /____\          | Lakewood, OH 44107  USA            |  216-228-1400  |

------------------------------

From: rogers@drax.isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Subject: Re: Latest in PC WEEK (May 30 Editorial)
Date: 20 Jun 1994 11:57:42 -0700

[Disclaimer:  I am not a lawyer.  The following message represents
my opinions and does not offer legal advice.]

In article <1145@blox.se> bj0rn@blox.se (Bjorn Ekwall) writes:
>If I distribute a whole kernel, "enhanced" or not, as a single binary,
>or in parts, in the form of object files, is of no consequence, since I am
>distributing a kernel in both cases.

        It is of extreme consequence (if I've followed the
circumstances under discussion).  Agregating two independent (in the
sense of copyright law) files, one of which is GPLed and the other
not, is permitted under GPL2.  It is not until you actually mix the
two to form a jointly derived work (the enhanced kernel) that you may
have created something which cannot be further redistributed under the
terms of GPL2.  The independent-of-the-GPL parent of the jointly
derived work is specifically not constrained by GPL2.

>The only way I can legally do this
>is by abiding to the GPL, i.e. in one way or another supply the source
>to the recipient, and granting the recipient the same rights that I have
>according to the GPL.

        GPL2 requires you to supply source for anything derived from a
GPLed source.  It does not require that you supply source for anything
that is independent (in the sense of copyright law) of a GPLed source
(and it is gracious enough to say so).

        A loadable device driver may "depend upon" the kernel in the
computer programming sense, while remaining completely independent of
the kernel in the copyright law sense.  The crux of the argument is
that use (in the computer programming sense) of an interface does not
necessarily constitute incorporation (in the copyright sense) of any
of the source that implements the interface.  If this constraint is
satisfied, GPL2 allows sourceless distributions of the loadable device
driver under discussion, even on the same media as the GPLed kernel,
so long as the combined work created by actually linking the two is
not distributed.

        Requiring the end user to perform the link abides by the GPL;
the timing is crucial.  A detailed analysis, with references to specific
paragraphs of GPL2, is available upon request.

                                        Craig Milo Rogers

------------------------------

From: thomas@edgar.tynet.sub.org (Thomas Sandlass)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.unixware
Subject: Re: future of Unixware
Date: 14 Jun 1994 12:22:18 +0200

In article <Cr3Epw.6pB@nist.gov>,
Bob Bagwill <bagwill@sst.ncsl.nist.gov> wrote:
> [..]
>My impression is that people buy UNIXware to support an application,
>while people get Linux to play with UNIX.  I wouldn't be surprise
>if an organization learned about UNIX from Linux, then bought
>UNIXware for the support.

This is what the German Telekom actually does ;)
And I know people giving courses on UNIX who use PCs with Linux
as demo machines.
--
____________________                         __o
 / /_ _  ____ _   _                        _`\<,_  Sometimes YOU are the bug!
/ / /(_)/ / /(_\_/  @ Edgar.TyNet.sub.org (_)/ (_)         -- Dire Straits
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

------------------------------

From: HZJ@ECL.PSU.EDU (Houzhi S Jin)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: NETWORK--Outbound TELNET ok but Inbound TELNET fails
Date: 21 Jun 1994 00:02:35 GMT

Hi, I am still having this problem (i.e., outbound TELNET or FTP works
fine but the inbound TELNET or FTP fails.  The inbound TELNET or FTP
will work for a few minutes after each outbound network access.)  I
saw a few other people posted message saying thwy had the same problem.
Have you guys solved this problem yet?  If so, what is the solution?


Thanks for any help.

Arthur


------------------------------

From: ssumclok@reading.ac.uk (J. K. McLoughlin)
Subject: Linux Sites
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 16:43:13 GMT

Could someone please let me know where I can obtain a copy of
Linux for use on my Laptop PC.  Is Linux the best Unix-type OS for
PC's or is there a better one available (ie thru FTP/ Telnet ...)

Thanks for any help.

Kevin.


------------------------------

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: sco motif/iBCS/Linux ??
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 22:00:24 GMT

In article <cyrillvCrpDFw.F3L@netcom.com>, cyrillv@netcom.com (Cyrill Vatomsky) says:
+---------------
| I have SCO installed on my second drive and it has motif. Is it
| possible to use it for Linux, maybe vie iBCS? Sorry, my question
| can be outrageously naive, but I do not know much about unices, 
| just starting learning.
+------------->8

Motif *programs* stand a good chance of working; development stands a good
chance of *not* working.  The alternative libc is still in development and not
yet quite complete (the current copy speaks of several unimplemented stdio
internal routines which I know are used by fopen(); that bodes not well).

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
Friends don't let friends load Windows NT.              Linux iBCS2 emulation

------------------------------

From: hm@seneca.ix.de (Harald Milz)
Subject: Sort of solved: iBCS2 does not insmod
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 17:00:44 GMT
Reply-To: hm@seneca.ix.de

Harald Milz (hm@seneca.ix.de) wrote:
: > I tried to play around with the iBCS2 emulator. As mentioned in the
: > README, I'd expect to flawlessly run iBCS2 with 1.1.15 or later. However,
: > all kernels from 1.1.15 to 1.1.19 didn't work with iBCS2 because insmod 
: > complained about two symbols not being defined:

After gasping around a little, I found a real *ugly* hack which makes 
ibcs-940609.tar.gz work with 1.1.19. I'm running SCO 3.2.4 binaries of
wc, vi, find, xargs and xv3.00 (!). But: the hack is *so* ugly that I 
can't believe that this is the correct thing to do:

--- /usr/src/linux/kernel/ksyms.c.1.1.19        Mon Jun 20 16:51:21 1994
+++ /usr/src/linux/kernel/ksyms.c       Mon Jun 20 17:28:12 1994
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
 extern int do_signal(unsigned long oldmask, struct pt_regs * regs);
 
 extern void (* iABI_hook)(struct pt_regs * regs);
+extern struct file_system_type * file_systems;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_INET
 extern int register_netdev(struct device *);
@@ -152,6 +153,7 @@
        X(dev_tint),
        X(irq2dev_map),
 #endif
+       X(file_systems),
 };
 
 int symbol_table_size = sizeof (symbol_table) / sizeof (symbol_table[0]);

============================= snip =============================

--- /usr/src/linux/fs/super.c.1.1.19    Mon Jun 20 17:35:21 1994
+++ /usr/src/linux/fs/super.c   Mon Jun 20 17:35:21 1994
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
 /* this is initialized in init/main.c */
 dev_t ROOT_DEV = 0;
 
-static struct file_system_type * file_systems = NULL;
+/*static*/ struct file_system_type * file_systems = NULL;
 
 int register_filesystem(struct file_system_type * fs)
 {

============================= snip =============================

--- /usr/src/ibcs/sysfs.c.old   Mon Jun 20 16:29:08 1994
+++ /usr/src/ibcs/sysfs.c       Mon Jun 20 17:22:57 1994
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
 #include <linux/ptrace.h>
 #include <linux/config.h>
 #include <linux/fcntl.h>
+#include <linux/string.h>
 
 #include <asm/segment.h>
 #include <asm/system.h>
@@ -29,7 +30,6 @@
 #ifdef IBCS_TRACE
 #include <ibcs/trace.h>
 #endif
-
 
 /* Declared in linux/fs/filesystems.c.
  * We rely on the table of filesystems being statically allocate as an

============================= snip =============================

Particularly the super.c patch really gives me a headache: can it be correct
to omit the "static"? When declared static, the symbol cannot be exported. 
I'm running the patched kernel right now. Seems as if sometimes the 
keyboard operation freezes for a couple of seconds (didn't do this before
with 1.1.19), i.e. there's no reaction when typing. 

Any comment from those who run iBCS2?


-- 
Harald Milz                             office: hm@ix.de
iX Multiuser Multitasking Magazine      home:   hm@seneca.ix.de
Opinions are mine, not my employer's -- the answer is Forty-two


------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.unix.unixware
From: hodyrd@newton.ccs.tuns.ca (Reginald D Hody)
Subject: Re: Multiport Bored and Linux (Was: future of Unixware)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 15:42:41 GMT

> >Rick Richardson <rick@digibd.digibd.com> wrote:
> >>[bits deleted]
> >>I estimate the size of the PC multiport
> >>serial market at $200M, or about 2 million ports/year.  70% of
> >>that is Unix (all flavors), or 1.4 million ports/year.  I don't
> >>[bits deleted]
> >>    -Linux 0%               0 ports/year

Bill Vermillion (bill@bilver.oau.org) wrote:
> Why don't you want to develop under SCO.  It was there with
> it's Xenix long before the Bell ->ISC -> Kodak -> SUn (did I
> get that right), there before Dell, before MicroPort, and has
> survived where Dell didn't.  At least they have a long term
> stability going for them. 

I had an SCO system (1985-1990) with 2X4 port D*g*boards. I had
nothing but trouble with them (or it may have been SCO). Sometimes
they wouldn't configure, sometimes disobey signals, IOW- hell on
earth. Before you flame me, let me say that it was an incredibly
simple problem: the SCO box was a central server for 8 Numeric Control
machines (mills, lathes, etc), up and downloading NC programs to them
(max. rate 2400bd). The programs were transferred to/from the SCO box by
other boxes using kermit over the built in serial lines. Over a six
year period the SCO-80286-D*g*port combe cost me 1000-2000 hours of
wasted work. (BTW: I got the developers XENIX eventually; expensive,
but no help)

The arguments I went through before getting SCO were exactly Bill's, I
came to the same conclusion, and I was WRONG!!!
--

                                        reg
(hodyrd@tuns.ca)

PS: I find Rick's estimate of no multiport boards sold for Linux
incredible, and I might just have to get some, install them and test
them so we can get a 1 or 2 in that column.
-- 

                                        reg
(hodyrd@tuns.ca)

------------------------------

From: brickman@world.std.com (Jonathan E Brickman)
Subject: WARNING -- Linux kernel 1.1.19
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 04:56:45 GMT

WARNING -- when I did a 'make zdisk' for LInux kernel 1.1.19, then booted
off the disk, it KILLED MY LINUX PARTITION!!!!!  On bootup from the floppy and
then every time off my hard disk (LILO on the hard disk worked, luckily, 
allowing me to call msdos), I got a fsck error, saying something like
"maximum number of partitions" etc., then a really scary error saying
fsck error -- reboot IMMEDIATELY! with lots of asterisks.  No linux
prompt at all -- required hard-boot.  Luckily I've got a tape drive with
all the important stuff...but I've still got to re-download a and ap 
(Slackware) in DOS :(...
||Jonathan E. Brickman
brickman@world.std.com


------------------------------

From: 8809787l@levels.unisa.edu.au (PEYAM POURBEIK)
Subject: Need to know if LINUX compatible with ReelMagic Multimedia kit
Date: 21 Jun 94 12:04:27 +0930

Could any one tell me if the soundcard and CD-ROM drive provided in the
"ReelMagic" multimedia ( includes video play back etc ) and also the new
"SoundBlaster Digital Edge 3X" kit which contains the SB-16 SCSI-II with
the NEC 3X spin CD-ROM are compatible with Current versions of LINUX.

Thank you for your help.

( Please email me at 8809787L@LV.LEVELS.UNISA.EDU.AU )

With Highest Regards,
peyam


------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.unix.unixware
From: mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: future of Unixware
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 22:19:02 GMT

mah@ka4ybr.com (Mark A. Horton KA4YBR) writes:

>: If I had to buy a Unix for work, I would probably go SCO like
>: everyone else. When it comes to standards, "de facto" beats "de
>: jure" every time.

>       I must have missed something here... I didn't see a review
>       of SCO in your post.  I use SCO for my clients.  It is 
>       an all-around generally accepted solution.
>[...]  rather impressive.  As far as reliability, I have NEVER
>       in almost two years of running Linux, had a crash that
>       was attributable to either system or user code.  I wish
>       I could say that about my SCO 3.2.4/ODT systems, my SunOS 4.1.3,
>       my Solaris-2.3, and my AIX (ok... cheap shot.) systems.

Hmmm, I have been using Linux on two small machines for about 1.5 years
and have had a few crashes.  During that time, our work Altos 15000, running
SCO ODT MPX, supporting 100 users, running 24 hours a day, has not
crashed even once.   Obviously experiences will vary.

-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis    | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Sys.Administrator|  Computer Services   | mark@taylor.infi.net           |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

------------------------------

From: mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: Wordperfect for X-Windows
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 22:21:04 GMT

iiitac@uk.ac.swan.pyr (Alan Cox) writes:

>In article <1994Jun18.040135.28691@escape.widomaker.com> shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (Shannon Hendrix) writes:

>>* old software that is no longer sold should be given to the public 
>>  domain.  Locking old code away or destroying it is STUPID

>Its not stupid. For most jobs the old stuff is far smaller faster and better.
     ^^^^
Are you agreeing with him or disagreeing with him?
-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis    | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Sys.Administrator|  Computer Services   | mark@taylor.infi.net           |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

------------------------------

From: mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: Wordperfect for X-Windows
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 22:23:17 GMT

bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:

>In article <1994Jun20.125700.25931@taylor.infi.net>, mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis) says:
>+---------------
>| bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
>| >In article <1994Jun20.033921.21976@taylor.infi.net>, mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis) says:
>| >| Agreed.  And it DOES happen. Look at SCO-PRO.
>| 
>| >Not a fair example; if SCO released it, Lotus would throw a fit.  :-(
>| 
>| more multi-user, supports real administration, etc.  Why didn't Lotus somehow
>| GET the code from SCO and *LEARN*?
>+------------->8

>If Lotus didn't believe in litigation instead of innovation, SCO Professional
>would still exist today.  :-(

That is **QUITE** true.  Well, we have OUR legal, unlimited user license
for SCO-PRO here, I have scores of users who use it.  We ain't never not
going to let it out of our hands :)
>++Brandon
>-- 
>Brandon S. Allbery        kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
>Friends don't let friends load Windows NT.             Linux iBCS2 emulation
-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis    | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Sys.Administrator|  Computer Services   | mark@taylor.infi.net           |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

------------------------------

From: acc-corp@tigger.jvnc.net (Robert Wolf)
Subject: Re: UNIVERSAL CDROM - STOP ADVERTISING !
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 03:40:09 GMT

In Article <I6C1kukh1SoA066yn@shore.net>, bjb@shore.net (Beverly J. Brown)
wrote:
>In article <2u1hlo$ovl@sun.cais.com>, Tim Bass wrote:
>> A policeman I'm not, but UNIVERSAL CDROM uses almost every opportunity
>> to plug it's service.  I recommend that if it continues we completely
>> agree not to use their services.

>In defense of Universal I believe they posted articles in response to 
>questions about availability of certain Linux CD's. They were merely letting 
>those who asked know that they had them. I don't think they overstepped 
>their bounds here at all.>
>
>(I'm not affiliated with Unicversal CDROM in any way. I just thought you 
>weren't being fair.)

The problem is that Universal is the only reseller of CD's doing this. 
There are several hundred CD vendors (including ourselves) who could post
similar "we have it, just call 1 800 lots-a-cds" type posting everytime a CD
is mentioned on the net.  Which would create a LOT of postings of marginal
value to most readers.

This is why a bias against advertising has developed on the net.  

As for being unfair, it is only the complaints (flames) of the newsgroup
readers that will keep those of us with a commercial interest in posting to
the net from going beyond generally accepted behaviour.

Bob.

ACC Bookstores - home of the PC Unix - Linux Catalog.
bob@acc-corp.com

------------------------------

From: acc-corp@tigger.jvnc.net (Robert Wolf)
Subject: Re: What other notebooks does Linux run on well?
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 03:47:38 GMT

In Article <GTAYLOR.94Jun13160704@god.ext.tufts.edu>,
gtaylor@god.ext.tufts.edu (Grant Taylor) wrote:
>A friend of mine is interested in getting Linux up on a notebook.
>I've read the Hardware-HOWTO, and its notebook section is kind of
>sketchy, and none of them looks like the sort he wants to buy.

You could try SIO Technology of New York City.

They have a line of very impressive high end laptops that they sell running
most PC Unixes that run on 486 chips including Solaris SCO and (of course)
Linux.

You can reach them at:
(212) 473-6910  or  sales@siotech.com

I saw them at the X World show in NYC in April, and they advertise in New
York UNIX magazine.  

Bob.

------------------------------


** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **

The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:

    Internet: Linux-Misc-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:

    Internet: Linux-Misc@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
    nic.funet.fi				pub/OS/Linux
    tsx-11.mit.edu				pub/linux
    sunsite.unc.edu				pub/Linux

End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
