Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #562
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:     Sat, 6 Aug 94 17:13:12 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #562, Volume #2                 Sat, 6 Aug 94 17:13:12 EDT

Contents:
  Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows? (Chris Bitmead)
  Re: TCP w/o an ethernet card? (Hans-Georg von Zezschwitz)
  Linux Journal 5 subscription date (Phil Hughes)
  486DX66 and Linux (Van Dao Mai)
  Re: Cirrus Logic is a good choice? (Van Dao Mai)
  Re: Good drives (Christopher M. May)
  Re: Coherent & Linux (Was : A Truly Unbiased Opinion) (Per Abrahamsen)
  Re: PPP vs. SLIP vs. PLIP
  Re: source of TCP/IP (was I hope this wont ignite a major flame ...) (Matthew Dillon)
  Unixware binary and Linux (Hien Pham)
  Re: Linux book(s) (Eric Youngdale)

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

From: chrisb@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Chris Bitmead)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps
Subject: Re: WABI vs. SoftWindows?
Date: 5 Aug 1994 10:08:33 +1000

tjrc1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Tim Cutts) writes:

>mark@taylor.infi.net (Mark A. Davis) writes:

>>tjrc1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Tim Cutts) writes:

>>>If a Windows user thinks 'how do I do this?' they can just click on
>>>that friendly word 'Help' in the menu.  Then a Unix newbie thinks the
>>>same, and sees:

>>>/home/fred$ 

>>>Hmm.  Well, let's try to get some help...

>>>/home/fred$ help
>>>help: not found
>>>/home/fred$

>>>If the shell is bash, they might get the absurdly terse syntax help
>>>for the common commands, I admit.

>>Well, if you were on SCO ODT Unix, you would click on the help icon
>>and get a hypertext manual.  If you were on Solaris, you would do the
>>same with Answerbook.............

>None of these are standard parts of Unix, and are not available for
>non-X users.

Neither is hypertext available for Non-MSWindows users, so what?

>>> This mentions info, so our newbie
>>>tries it, and gets a screenful of garbage because their TERM variable
>>>(which they've never heard of), is set to a default that their
>>>terminal can't cope with.

>>What is a beginner doing using a terminal?  I doubt they would even get
>>the port settings or wiring correct.  A better example would probably
>>involve the console.

>The Cambridge University Central Unix Service is a four-machine NFS
>connected monster running SunOS 4.1.3 on three machines and Solaris on
>the fourth.  We have something on the order of 10,000 users across the
>university.  Each machine currently has about 70 users logged on.  The
>vast majority of these are using PCs or Macs as vt100 terminals,
>although there are a lot of users on old BBC Micros which used to be
>terminals onto the IBM Mainframe we have.  X users are distinctly in
>the minority, and almost no-one sees a Unix box console, so for this
>organisation the text terminal is indeed what everyone sees for the
>first time.

So does this somehow imply that MSWindows is better. Try replacing the
SunOS machine with an MSWindows machine, and see how far you get, with 70
users trying to login!

>>>There you go.  All this takes 10 minutes of the help desks time, and
>>>would have been completely unnecessary in DOS, Windows, Mac or OS/2.

>>Too true, because in those "more primative" OS's, multi-user and terminal
>>connections are NOT POSSIBLE!

>Agreed, but Windows and DOS bothh have intuitive hypertext help
>systems.  Unix does not.

>>>Wait until you have worked on a Help Desk (which I have), and see what
>>>the users think is most complicated.  I had to give help on DOS,
>>>Windows, Mac, SunOS, and MVS while I had that job.

>>"Hello, I just screwed up my config.sys and autoexec.bat for the 1,000th
>> time.  Since we have no security under MS-"DOS", would you please WALK
>> doen here and fix it for me again"

>Our PC Network boots of the server.  USers can't play with such files.

While we're talking about support issues, supporting Dos or windows
machines is a nightmare. But when a user rings up with an obscure problem
in unix you just say "no problem, I'll just dial in and check it out".
Dictating instructions to users over the phone is a nightmare. Oh, and if
the program in question is a Gui program, still no problem, I can run that
over the phone line too.

>>>Hell, even MVS on our IBM 3084 mainframe is more intuitive than Unix.
>>>At least users could type HELP PDS and get a whole load of stuff
>>>about Partitioned Data Sets, and the XPDS command.

>>shell> cd /usr/bin
>>shell> ln man help
>>shell> help PDS
>>shell> man: pds not found
>>shell> help term

>>term(M)

>>Conventional names for terminals......

>Most people in my research group (molecular biologists) find Unix man
>pages about as much help as a poke in the eye.  I have to agree, to a
>certain extent.

You're obviously using the wrong sort of unix software for your purposes.
Try getting some Motif applications.

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

From: 1zezschw@rzdspc2.informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Hans-Georg von Zezschwitz)
Subject: Re: TCP w/o an ethernet card?
Date: 5 Aug 94 19:39:25 GMT

debruijn@cs.utwente.nl (S.G. de Bruijn) writes:

>Ivan (ivan@djomolungma.Eng.Sun.COM) wrote:
>: I figuerd as long as I use 'localhost' as an inet
>: address I can go a ways, but all I get is "network not reachable", 
>: even from "ping 127.0.0.1". 'route' complains of the same hence,
>: the router table is empty. I checked my kernle configuration and
>: it seems to have everything neccessary.

>Maybe you should install the dummy ethernet driver in the kernel?
>It is asked in make config of the kernel

And more questions:

1. Have you got the line:

# For loopbacking.
127.0.0.1       localhost

            ...in your /etc/hosts  - file ?

2. Does your /etc/rc.d/rc.inet1-file contain lines like this and
is the /etc/rc.d/rc.inet1-file called?

ROUTE=/sbin/route
IFCONFIG=/sbin/ifconfig

# Attach the loopback device.
$IFCONFIG lo 127.0.0.1
$ROUTE add -net 127.0.0.0

This tells the system that there is a loopback device (IFCONFIG) and
that localhost is attached to it (or better: 127.0.0.0)

Best wishes,


Georg

==============================================================================
H. Georg v.Zezschwitz             eMail:  zeschwitz@uke.uni-hamburg.de
Muenzstr. 10                              1zezschw@informatik.uni-hamburg.de
20097 Hamburg          THE DAY YOU BRING
Voice: +49 40 2369342     OUT LINUX FOR WINDOWS I'LL BELIEVE IN YOU, BILL

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

From: fyl@eskimo.com (Phil Hughes)
Subject: Linux Journal 5 subscription date
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 1994 15:21:58 GMT

Linux Journal #5 (September) is at the printer.  The last day to get your
subscription in to get this issue is August 10.  (A complete blurb about
this was posted to c.o.l.a about a week ago but rumor has it that Lars'
mail is down so I wanted to make sure people knew about this deadline.)

The c.o.l.a. article will have a complete table of contents.  The TOC is
also on sunsite.unc.edu.  Highpoints include an artice on EZ for the
Programmer, Emacs: Friend or Foe by Matt Welsh, an Introduction to Mtools
and what I consider the best piece written to show your boss that Linux is
real.  This is an article on what the Roger Maris Cancer Center is doing
with Linux.  Not a technical article, just a piece that shows that Linux
can be a reliable cost-effective solution to a problem.

To subscribe, contact SSC using one of the following methods:
   e-mail: subs@ssc.com
   Phone: (206) 527-3385
   Fax: (206) 527-2806
   Mail:  Linux Journal
          P.O. Box 85867
          Seattle, WA 98145-1867  USA

Methods of payment include Visa, MasterCard, AmEx and checks in local
currency drawn on local banks (for example, a German check in Marks drawn
on a German bank).
Subscriptions are $19/year US, $24/year North America, $29/year elsewhere.
The magazine is 48 (or more -- October will be 64 ) pages, stitched, glossy
with real info in it.

The other popular question is back issues.  We have copies of all of them
except #1 available for $4 each (surface mail, $6 airmail).  Due to
popular demand we have made photocopies of #1 available for $6 each.
-- 
Phil Hughes, Publisher, Linux Journal (206) 524-8338
usually phil@fylz.com, sometimes fyl@eskimo.com

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

From: mai@vietgate.apana.org.au (Van Dao Mai)
Subject: 486DX66 and Linux
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 13:02:10 GMT

Folks,
   I recently upgraded to a 486DX-66 motherboard with 16M RAM (72 pins 
type). I recompile the kernel of Linux 1.1.35. The speed was impressive.
It takes 16 minutes in real time to compile the 5M of source codes.
   Working on the machine feel like working on a sparc 2 station. The 
only bit that is obviously slower is the hard disk access on the 
Western Digital 420M IDE.
   Can anyone tell me how long it takes to compile the kernel on DX-66
machines (and higher like DX4-100 or pentium)? It seems that the DX-66
is about 4 times the speed of a 386DX-40 with a math. co-processor.

Cheers,

Wollongong Australia


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

From: mai@vietgate.apana.org.au (Van Dao Mai)
Subject: Re: Cirrus Logic is a good choice?
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 13:16:44 GMT

: I have a 5428 and its been great to me.  All the drivers I've used for Linux,
: Windows, Vpic, etc are great.  Though the 5428 is now available for about
: $90 w/ 1MB.. the 5434 are getting cheap!  
<<< It is so easy to get good stuffs in the US. Here in Australia, most 
things are low end in the shops. I have not even found a good card after 
looking for a while. All they have are junks coming from Taiwan and China
(I mean the good stuffs are probably exported to the US market).


: A buddy of mine who has one of the Spider 5434 boards say that if you get it 
: with 2MB, it does memory interleaving.  To give you an idea of its speed, he
: said it runs 1024x768x24bit as fast as the 5428 did in 256 colors!!
: Then on top of that.. you can change resolutions on the fly!
<<< I am still convinced that Cirrus Logic and Trident 9xxx chipsets are 
best for crisp looking graphics at high resolution 1024x768 or above. 
However the speed is a problem. Most Cirrus Logic card I found here in 
Australia is designed to be cheap. They cannot run at resolution higher 
than 1024x768 in non-interlaced mode.
    If any one know of a CL-5428 or CL-5434 card that definitely run 
1280x1024 at flicker free resfresh rate, please let me know the name of 
the card and the company making it.


Cheers,

Van Dao Mai
Wollongong Australia

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

From: cmay@titan.ucs.umass.edu (Christopher M. May)
Subject: Re: Good drives
Date: 6 Aug 1994 18:19:19 GMT

RYAN  Colin Patrick (ryan@ecf.toronto.edu) wrote:
: I'm looking to by a good fast 540 meg drive for my linux box. I've heard that
: the WD , and Seagates are quality, although the seagates are slow. I'm curius
: about the MAxtors. Are they any good. They are priced very competitivly right
: now( not just grey market) and would like some opinions.

The best drives I know of are Fujitsu.  They make a 540.  5 year warr.
and fast spindle rate.
--

-Chris May, Computer Science, University of MA, Amherst
-       Technical Assistant, P.C. Maintenance Lab


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

From: abraham@iesd.auc.dk (Per Abrahamsen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.coherent
Subject: Re: Coherent & Linux (Was : A Truly Unbiased Opinion)
Date: 06 Aug 1994 18:06:00 GMT

>>>>> "RW" == RW  <rw@rwsys.wimsey.bc.ca> writes:

RW> How??? By spending their time doing it. Why?? Because there

Ofte because that is what they are paid to do.

RW> is a shortage of paying jobs that allow them to do what
RW> they love to do.... But why is that??? 

I wonder how many people are paid for doing Linux support compared to
Coherent support.

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

From: willett@myhost.subdomain.domain ()
Subject: Re: PPP vs. SLIP vs. PLIP
Date: 5 Aug 1994 23:28:09 GMT

Adrian Mancini (amancini@bmerh263.bnr.ca) wrote:

: I'm wondering what the pros and contras are of those 4 network protocols,
: assuming that the two computers I like to connect are next to each other.
:  

Assuming that the computers are right next to each other, I suggest PLIP 
because it is much faster than PPP or SLIP.  PPP and SLIP are limited to 
the spead of the comm ports(if 16450UART then 19200baud or 38400baud~=4KBs; 
with 1650UART 115Kbaud~=17KBs), while PLIP over the parallel ports is 30KBs.

The greater speed with PLIP does come at a price, in more CPU 
time, but plipconfig in the new net-tools may have helped.  On my 
dx2/66 with 16mb, I can run alot of X applications, and still not see 
significant degrade of performance because of plip.

Functionally, I think they are all equivalent; they all hook up to PC's 
alot cheaper then ether(plip is almost as fast as ether on a bogged down net).
My laptop can be on the internet via plip in seconds by executing a script.

Ease of install: I think PPP and PLIP are easier to install than SLIP.  
I think PLIP is even easier than PPP, except for the cable.  PPP & SLIP can 
use just about any run of the mill NULL-MODEM, but PLIP requires a 
laplink parallel type cable which is not as abundant.  If you have access 
to a soldering iron, you can make a PLIP cable following the pin outs in 
/usr/src/linux/drivers/net/plip.c or you can purchase a laplink parallel cable.

I recomend PLIP; if you don't use PLIP, then use PPP

Ev

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

From: dillon@apollo.west.oic.com (Matthew Dillon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: source of TCP/IP (was I hope this wont ignite a major flame ...)
Date: 4 Aug 1994 15:02:52 -0700

:In <31pc9l$ctp@oscar.agcs.com> robertsw@agcs.com (Wallace Roberts) writes:
:
:>hpeyerl@sidney.novatel.ca (Herb Peyerl) writes:
:
:>      [ ...snip happens... ]
:
:>>I've tried reading Linux networking code. At least some of the device 
:>>drivers and each of the ones I looked at gave me a brain hemorrage...
:>>
:>>This is an example of some of the Linux device-drivers I've seen:
:>>
:>>        short error = rx_status & 0x3C00;
:>>        outw(inw(ioaddr + 0x0A) | 0x00C0, ioaddr + 0x0A);
:>>
:>>As far as I can tell; Linux Ethernet device-drivers were written in
:>>Write-Only-C.  There are no comments in the surrounding code that in any
:>>way indicates exactly what "0x3c00", "0x0a", "0x00c0" actually mean. To
:>>people without docs (usually these are the people who are trying to fix
:>>the code) the above is completely meaningless.
:
:>if you're writing (or fixing) a device driver, you are expected to have
:>the h/w manuals handy.  comments are unnecessary if you have the device
:>manual & understand the h/w.  this is the expected level of competence
:>for a programmer writing or fixing a device driver.
:
:In other words: real hackers don't need comments, because they can
:figure it out from the magic numbers.
:
:Yup, that's a real strong argument.  Sheesh!  Even Microsoft writes
:their code better than that... (Yes, I do know.)
:
:-- 
:- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
: Michael L. VanLoon                 Iowa State University Computation Center
:    michaelv@iastate.edu                    Project Vincent Systems Staff
:  Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free Un*x for PC/Mac/Amiga/etc.
:- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    I agree with the original poster.  It's bad enough that some people do not
    comment their code *at all*, not even the esoteric magic.  But what really
    gets up my goat are the bug fixes... someone fixes a bug, doesn't bother 
    to comment either the fix or the reason why it was screwed up in the 
    first place, and 6 months later someone else unfixes it (repeating the 
    same mistake that caused the bug in the first place).  At least *I* 
    took a little time to comment what the frig the TCP states really meant 
    in inet/tcp.c (linux)!  Don't anyone dare delete them!

    But if you are really looking for something to gnaw on, how about the
    comments at the head of any source file?  You take just about any major
    distribution and what you get are two pages worth of copyright information
    at the beginning of EACH source file, and not ONE IOTA describing what 
    the hell the purpose of the source file is!  It would be nice if people 
    put a reasonable comment at the top of their source files :-)

                                                -Matt

-- 

    Matthew Dillon              dillon@apollo.west.oic.com
    1005 Apollo Way             ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    Incline Village, NV. 89451  Obvious Implementations Corporation
    USA                         Sandel-Avery Engineering
    [always include a portion of the original email in any response!]


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

From: hienpham@csulb.edu (Hien Pham)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Unixware binary and Linux
Date: 5 Aug 1994 23:34:22 GMT

  Hi everyone,

  Can anyoune tell me if Linux can run UnixWare (Novell ) binaries.  I 
  purchased Motif 1.2 for Unixware (my old OS) and I was wondering if I can
  use it Linux.  Thanks ahead for the advice. 
-- 
  %  Henry Pham    %%%  Jet Propulsion Laboratory                        %
  % Senior Software%%%  4800 Oak Grove Drive                            %
  %    Engineer    %%%  Pasadena,  CA 91109                              %
  %                %%%  E-Mail: hienpham@beach.csulb.edu                 %

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

From: ericy@cais.cais.com (Eric Youngdale)
Subject: Re: Linux book(s)
Date: 5 Aug 1994 22:39:49 GMT

In article <CtrtKn.4rJH@austin.ibm.com>,
Michael Rogero Brown (Sys Admin) <michaelb@hobbie.bocaraton.ibm.com> wrote:
>[I'm not quite a Linux user myself yet, but I want to post this anyway :) ]
>
>I recently got the latest Springer-Verlag catalog (S-V is a large publisher
>of science books, including computer science).  In it they list a new
>book that is to be published soon (if not already):
>
>Linux- from PC to Workstation  by Thomas Uhl and Stefan Strobel
>(238P, softcover, $39 tentitive, ISBN 0-387-58077-8)

        I was not expecting to see it appear for a couple more months.

>I thought it suprising that a fairly major CS publisher is already putting
>out a book on Linux.  According to the blurp, the book coveres the
>concepts and features of Linux, the features and services of the Internet
>that made possible the rapid development and distribution of Linux, and an
>overview of the wide range of apps available for it.

        The thing that is not at all obvious in the English speaking world
is that Linux is much more popular in Germany than it is here. One of the
large computer magazines (iX) has been running roughly one article a month
about Linux lately, and I have glanced over articles by Linus, Drew (about
the PCI), Bob Amstadt and others.  Sadly (for English-only speakers), iX
is in German. 

>Has anyone seen it?

        Yes, but I only saw the German version.  I caught a glimpse of 
the page proofs of the English version, but I decided to wait until it 
was bound before attempting to read it.  Thomas was saying that it would 
proably appear in the stores sometime in the fall.

        One interesting note:  I was walking down the main street in 
Heidelberg (a tourist area), and came across a computer bookstore.
In the front display window, visible from the street, were 3 books about 
linux, and there was also the Yggdrasil cdrom on display.  The book that
Thomas and Stefan wrote was one of those books.

        It sounds like in 6 months or a year that there will be plenty of 
English books available in the stores, so I guess we just have to be 
patient.

-Eric

-- 
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep.  But I have promises to keep,
And lines to code before I sleep, And lines to code before I sleep."

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


** 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
******************************
