Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #569
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:     Sun, 7 Aug 94 18:13:08 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #569, Volume #2                 Sun, 7 Aug 94 18:13:08 EDT

Contents:
  Re: Which serial board? (Adam Roach)
  Re: Ftape/modules proplem (Bjorn Ekwall)
  Re: Adaptec 2842 SCSI controller with Linux? (Christopher M. May)
  Re: 486DX66 and Linux (Ian McCloghrie)
  Best CDROM / sound card for Linux (David A. Vohwinkel)
  Re: Multi-threaded linux-kernel (Matt Welsh)
  Re: Multi-threaded linux-kernel (Matt Welsh)
  Re: 486DX66 and Linux (Gustaf Neumann)
  ViewSonic4 monitor --HELP!!! (Kenneth R Whittaker)
  Re: PCI Video card comparison test ? (Daniel Garcia)
  Re: Doom on SGI -- wow! (Philip Brown)
  Re: Doom on SGI -- wow! (Jason V Robertson)
  new version of hdparm.c anywhere? (Jason V Robertson)
  Re: Commercial Software available for Linux (was: WABI vs. SoftWindows?) (ACC Corp.)
  Re: Coherent & Linux (Was : A Truly Unbiased Opinion) (RW)

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

From: adam@spam.tamu.edu (Adam Roach)
Subject: Re: Which serial board?
Date: 7 Aug 1994 17:22:06 GMT

In article <Cu5Myn.H6K@seneca.ix.de>, Harald Milz <hm@seneca.ix.de> wrote:

>AFAIK, there's no driver for the Digiboard, however Digi operates an aFTP
>server where they once claimed to hold Linux drivers. 

Does anyone know how to contact Digiboard or the address of this FTP site?


-- 

===========================================================================
    Adam Roach  ---  adamr@tamu.edu  ---  PGP 2.6 Public Key Available
================= WWW URL: http://ftp.tamu.edu/~abr8030 ===================

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

From: bj0rn@blox.se (Bjorn Ekwall)
Subject: Re: Ftape/modules proplem
Date: 7 Aug 94 17:56:44 GMT

Art Hutchison (hutch@netaxs.com) wrote:
 > Kernel 1.1.38
 > ftape-1.13b.tar.gz
 > modules-0.1-0.99pl9A.tar.gz

 >     I recompile the modules under 1.1.38 but when I try insmod hello.o I get
 > Kernel symbol problem - nksyms <=0 : -1
 >     Any ideas- of course I can't get ftape to work until this is solved -
 > When I try insmod ftape.o I get
 > _init undefined

The support for loadable modules in kernels from 1.1.23 an onwards
requires gcc 2.5.8, both for the kernel and for "insmod".
From the sound of it you are probably using gcc 2.4.5 or something
like that.

If you want to be able to use all the new features available with
the new support for loadable modules, you should also get the new
package "modules.tar.gz". This package is available from the same
place you got your kernel.

Good luck

Bjorn Ekwall == bj0rn@blox.se

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

From: cmay@titan.ucs.umass.edu (Christopher M. May)
Subject: Re: Adaptec 2842 SCSI controller with Linux?
Date: 5 Aug 1994 18:44:10 GMT

Nicolas Gauvin (CT64@music.mus.polymtl.ca) wrote:
: I would like to know if the Adaptec 2842 VLB SCSI controller is
: supported under Linux. Thanks in advance.

: Nicolas Gauvin
: ct64@music.mus.polymtl.ca

Currently, the 2742 (EISA) driver is in pre-release testing
right now.  The 27,28, and 2942 cards (I believe) all use the same
chip, and all use very similar drivers.  Similar, but not identical.

The author of the driver does not own a 2842, or 2942 card. 

Maybe you can band together with other 2842 owners, and lend/procure
a board to the author of the driver.  Sorry I don't have his name
on hand, but I believe he put a call out for beta testers in the
development newsgroup a little while ago.

--

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


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

From: ianm@apprentice.qualcomm.com (Ian McCloghrie)
Subject: Re: 486DX66 and Linux
Date: 7 Aug 94 18:14:54 GMT

>: >   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.

Kernel compilation speed, while a CPU-intensive task, tends to be IO
bound on most systems.  Adding more memory will significantly decrease
the comilation speed (if only because all the .c and .h files are in
the cache -- turn off /sbin/update, and it'll write all the .o's to
cache as well, and run *really* fast).

--
____
\bi/  Ian McCloghrie      | FLUG:  FurryMUCK Linux User's Group
 \/   email: ian@ucsd.edu | Card Carrying Member, UCSD Secret Islandia Club
GCS (!)d-(--) p c++ l++(+++) u+ e- m+ s+/+ n+(-) h- f+ !g w+ t+ r y*

The above represents my personal opinions and not necessarily those
of my employer, Qualcomm Inc.

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

From: vohwi-d@acsu.buffalo.edu (David A. Vohwinkel)
Subject: Best CDROM / sound card for Linux
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 18:18:33 GMT

Sorry to waste bandwidth on these stupid questions... but..

I would like some opinions about CDROMS and sound cards. I see that the 
Mitsumi CDROM and interface card is going for around $150. Dos anyone have
this CDROM? Does it work with Linux? I have a AD1542b scsi card and would 
like to go SCSI.. and I saw the Plextel DM3028 internal SCSI-2 for $245. 
That was my second choice... But if the Mitsumi is supported I guess it
would be alot cheaper... any thoughts?

And what is a good sound card to use with Linux? I have seen that the new
kernels have different sound support. Do they take advantage of any of the
sound cards advanced features?



        Thanks

-- 
  David A Vohwinkel        
Unix Consulting   ^ ^     vohwi-d@acsu.buffalo.edu
  & Operations    0 0    @ The State University of New York at Buffalo   
==============oOO=(_)=OOo====================================================

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

From: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Multi-threaded linux-kernel
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 18:06:59 GMT

In article <321blr$nu5@Times.Stanford.EDU> lm@stanford.edu (Larry McVoy) writes:
>Does this sort of announcement worry others as much as it worries me?
>This sounds like the development is being (going to be) done in a
>vacuum without giving others a chance to comment on the design.  I
>like seeing Linux get the _useful_ features of other OS implementations
>but I sure don't want Linux to get extensively rewacked without being 
>convinced it is for the better.

You're absolutely right. But no need to worry---if the multithreaded
kernel works, it works, and people will use it. If not, it will be
ignored. This is similar to what happened with the SLS "modular" kernel 
extensions.

>Another way to ask the question - do the core group of kernel hackers

I would argue that the original "core group" has less overall influence
than they did, say, a year ago. As Linux becomes more widespread, so do
the development efforts associated with it. It's only natural to expect
"offshoots" of the "official" kernel to emerge.

There's really no way to consolodate the many kernel development
efforts. The Linux kernel has no "core team". In some respects,
this is unfortunate, but there's not much we can do about it.

One thing that does bother me is the use of the name "linux" to refer
to these "offshoot" kernels. I believe that Mr. Bouwmeester's 
posting mentioned that his kernel would be known as Linux Viper---or,
"Linux 2.0". The former is fine, the latter is not. "Linux" alone should 
refer only to Linus' standard kernel. Other kernels (such as FvK's
Linux Pro, and so on) should use different naming conventions---only to
reduce confusion.

M. Welsh

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

From: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Multi-threaded linux-kernel
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 18:08:53 GMT

In article <321rq1$sau@nkosi.well.com> gonzo@magnet.mednet.net (Patrick J. Volkerding) writes:
>Something else that I'm surprised no one has commented on is that this new 
>kernel is allegedly going to be released "for non-commercial use." I 
>don't think this type of restriction is allowed, since any kernel derived 
>from Linux would be subject to the GPL.

You're right, Patrick. The new kernel must be placed under the GPL.

Anyone concerned about this should mail L.H.A.Bouwmeester@research.ptt.nl.


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

From: neumann@watson.ibm.com (Gustaf Neumann)
Subject: Re: 486DX66 and Linux
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 18:39:41 GMT

In article <321fig$ntj@blackbird.db.erau.edu> from [7 Aug 1994 02:06:08 GMT]
 andrew@amelia.db.erau.edu (Andrew Anderson)  wrote:
 |> My Pentium 66 will do it in about 13 minutes.  Very nice, considering
 |> that my old 386-33 w/ 4Megs RAM would take between 4 and 6 *HOURS*.
 
 Pentium 90, 32 MB, running a couple of xterms and a term connection,
 TCP/IP+soundcard configured, running the "final make command" 
 (after make dep and make clean): 7:10 Minutes elapsed time
 
 -gustaf
--
Gustaf Neumann                     neumann@watson.ibm.com
Postdoctoral/Visiting Scientist    Tel: (914) 784 7086
IBM T.J.Watson Research Center, P.O.Box 704
Yorktown Heights, New York 10598


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

From: krw@sprint.uccs.edu.uccs.edu (Kenneth R Whittaker)
Subject: ViewSonic4 monitor --HELP!!!
Date: 7 Aug 1994 19:08:54 GMT

I have a ViewSonic 4 superVGA monitor.  I CAN'T FIND THE HARDWARE DATA
ON IT!!  If you are running xwindows on this monitor, could you please
post the data I need to run mine in xwin?  I'm afraid that PerfectView 
went completely software now, no more monitors.

I can't find the chipset technology on my card either.  It is a 16bit
PerfectView card (I bought it in '90).  

Any help on the setup?  The documentation is rather terse.  No help in 
it at all.

Thanks in advance :)
--
****************************************************************
*  Kenneth R. Whittaker          INTERNET: krw@sprint.uccs.edu *
****************************************************************

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

From: kender@spawn.erinet.com (Daniel Garcia)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: PCI Video card comparison test ?
Date: 7 Aug 1994 19:20:24 GMT
Reply-To: kender@eri.erinet.com

Slaving away in a dark room, michaelw@desaster.student.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Will) produced:
>cma@sxb.bsf.alcatel.fr (Claude MARTIN) writes:
>>2. Which of the following chipsets would be the best
>>   for my previous given configuration :
>>      - Tseng Labs ET400/W32
>Not supported in accelerated mode as far as I know.

Well - actually, there is a w32 accelerated driver in the works, and a
working driver for X11R6 was just released - i haven't gotten it yet, 
since i'm still on R5 (and haven't had the time to mess w/R6).  Also,
I use a tseng et4000/w32 based card w/two megs of ram and i love it.

D

-- 
 Daniel Garcia - kender@[eri.erinet.com|esu.edu] - Soon to be PhD Student.
UseLinuxReadMoreThinkALotFightClipperBelieveWritePlayMusicOpenHeartsLiveBreath
LoveThinkFeelListenActReasonWatchLearnRideFlySpeakWinFightRiseSingShoutCryDie
<A HREF=http://www.esu.edu/~kender">My Homepage</A> 

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

From: philb@cats.ucsc.edu (Philip Brown)
Subject: Re: Doom on SGI -- wow!
Date: 7 Aug 1994 20:15:38 GMT


In article <31reir$f54@clarknet.clark.net>, Marc Fraioli <mjf@clark.net> wrote:
>In article psh@crl3.crl.com,  jpatrick@crl.com (J. Heather Patrick) writes:
>>WHAT?! It's using portable X calls?
>>Why the heck isn't there going to be a sparc version then?
>>Ahhhhrrggggg....
>>
>I thought there was going to be a SPARC version.  And several other
>RISC/Unix versions too.  I seem to remember DEC Alpha/OSF1 for one.

I thought that, too. Then I heard something later where it was stated
that only SGI, OS/2, WInG, and POSSIBLY Linux were going to be done at
this point.

-- 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Brown, author of "kdrill", and "xmandel"
Out in the cruel world... Hire me! Hire me!
philb@cats.ucsc.edu philb@soda.berkeley.edu

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

From: jr7877@eehpx14 (Jason V Robertson)
Subject: Re: Doom on SGI -- wow!
Date: 7 Aug 1994 20:34:16 GMT

In article <323fda$nqf@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> philb@cats.ucsc.edu (Philip Brown) writes:
>
>In article <31reir$f54@clarknet.clark.net>, Marc Fraioli <mjf@clark.net> wrote:
>>In article psh@crl3.crl.com,  jpatrick@crl.com (J. Heather Patrick) writes:
>>>WHAT?! It's using portable X calls?
>>>Why the heck isn't there going to be a sparc version then?
>>>Ahhhhrrggggg....
>>>
>>I thought there was going to be a SPARC version.  And several other
>>RISC/Unix versions too.  I seem to remember DEC Alpha/OSF1 for one.
>
>I thought that, too. Then I heard something later where it was stated
>that only SGI, OS/2, WInG, and POSSIBLY Linux were going to be done at
>this point.

I don't think there is any "possibly" about it.  I bet a Linux version will
be done by the end of this year.  The guy from ID that is working on it makes
it seem that he is just working out bugs in the sound and maybe some misc.
bugs elsewhere.  But _I_ said that, he didn't.  So I guess it could be 6 
months before it is done.
-- 
Kwesthion:  When did BET buy out FOX?
Funk Dat.

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

From: jr7877@eehpx14 (Jason V Robertson)
Subject: new version of hdparm.c anywhere?
Date: 7 Aug 1994 20:36:24 GMT

Is this new version of hdparm.c that will work with 1.1.39+ actually out there
anywhere?  I checked tsx-11 in the ALPHA/IDE-performance directory and only 
saw the ide performance driver v2.0 (older).  Is it just slow in getting put
up?
-- 
Kwesthion:  When did BET buy out FOX?
Funk Dat.

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

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps
From: info@acc-corp.com (ACC Corp.)
Subject: Re: Commercial Software available for Linux (was: WABI vs. SoftWindows?)
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 20:46:16 GMT

In Article <1994Aug4.091844.5544@desaster.student.uni-tuebingen.de>,
michaelw@desaster.student.uni-tuebingen.de (Michael Will) wrote:
>Enough of all this gibberish...
>
>...why not make a list with all available commercial software for linux?
>


... or just leave it to commercial outfits to produce the list and then get
a copy from them:

- The Linux Journal (linux@fylz.com) runs reviews and advertisements for
much of the commercial software available under Linux.  They offer a "free"
sample copy, subscriptions are only $19 per year in the US.

- We,  ACC Bookstores, produce a free "PC Unix and Linux Catalog" which
lists a lot of the commercial software that is being actively marketed on
the Linux OS.


Cheers,  Bob.

ACC Bookstores
"Home of the PC UNIX - Linux Catalog"
1 (800) 546-7274
info@acc-corp.com

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.coherent
From: rw@rwsys.wimsey.bc.ca (RW)
Subject: Re: Coherent & Linux (Was : A Truly Unbiased Opinion)
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 20:16:06 GMT

Dan Pop (danpop@cernapo.cern.ch) wrote:
: In <9408042225.16@rmkhome.com> rmk@rmkhome.com (Rick Kelly) writes:

: >David Willmore (willmore@iastate.edu) wrote:
: >: rmk@rmkhome.com (Rick Kelly) writes:
: >
: >: You call yourself a sysadmin? ;)  NFS export the darn drive and mount
: >: it on the target machine.  The tape solution is much more complex.
: >
: >But first explain to the people on the machines that have CD-ROM drives
: >that they can't use AnswerBook or all the other millions of doc sets
: >that are now on CD-ROM.

: Using your scheme, which implies taking away the drive, doesn't fix
: this problem, does it?
: >
: >It's finding a free drive that's the problem.  And the majority of the
: >CD drives are on DOS/WINDOWS machines where thet seem to be a necessity
: >these days.

: And you wrote, some days ago, that a CD-ROM is needed only to install
: Linux on a PC, so its price should be included in the Linux's installation
: price :-)
: >
: >: With a remote tape drive: (remember, if the CDROM drive is going
: >: to be remote, the tape drive has to be too.  hell, CDROM drives are
: >: so much cheaper than tape drives, they're probably more common.)
: >
: >Every UNIX box has a tape drive.

: You must be kidding, aren't you? Less than 10% of the Unix workstations
: I've seen have a tape drive. If you have the Unix boxes connected to a
: LAN, you don't need a tape drive on each machine.

: Dan
: --
: Dan Pop 
: CERN, CN Division
: Email: danpop@cernapo.cern.ch
: Mail:  CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland

I bought a CD-ROM in order to install linux from one of the CD-ROM
packages. It was not expensive. It cost me about the same amount
of money that I paid for a tape deck (qic style). It had come to 
the point for me that I have to pay about $50 in telecom charges
each time I want to download a distribution. The CR-ROM kit has
a lot more stuff on it than the distributions I've been getting,
but it did have the financial effect of driving the installed cost
of linux up to about $250 CAN. I did not print out the doc files
as that appeared to be another $50 to $100 in supplies cost.

As a side effect, I also obtained a copy of NetBSD on the CD
(which I already had) and I've been able to use the cd drive
with coherent. What I would like to see on the cd distributions
is bootable-from-cd versions of both linux and one of the
free bsd's. The NetBSD on the cd was in the same little archive
chunks that are used to download it. This was a Trans-Ameritech
cd. It would be great if there were a way to run the things
without consuming much hard-drive space. I like to collect
operating systems, and hack around with them, but I don't
have the disk space to keep all of them installed at the
same time.

I still think Coherent is a better deal because I got it for 
$99 including printed docs, installation distribution and 
unlimited support by phone or email. There were crash problems
in 4.2.5 and in 4.0 there was slow disk io. Both of those things
have been resolved quite well by 4.2.10. 

There is a VAR scheme available for Coherent that yields good 
discounts on volume buys, and even better prices for integrators
who wish to modify things such that the integrator rather than
MWC does the support. There is some kind of source code license
available, but I don't know the costs of it. 

They aren't running a charity over at Mark Williams, and because 
they do provide unlimited support, they have great incentive 
to build an os that _can_ be supported at the prices they charge. 
I think that this is where freely distributable code diverges
in goals from something like Coherent. Someone adding a feature
to Linux doesn't have to be concerned with paying people to
support the new feature. This gives great room for creativity
to developers. A feature added to Coherent must be robust and
fluently documented or it will risk blowing away their  
technical support people. As a hacker producing freeware, I
can (and do) release software that is not yet robust and with
docs that take great determination to read. 

I don't know all the scuttle-butt about what goes on inside
companies like Mark Williams, but I do know they are trying
to feed their kids without gouging anyone... and that they
hit a serious hole in the road this past winter/spring. I
wondered if the company would survive, but they have clearly 
recovered. I recall that micro-soft went through a similar
problem with one its releases of dos.

I understand that unixware is under pressure due to what
is offered by linux. Eventually, linux will create some heat
on the over-priced operating systems as well the Gates
empire. This is good. The entire industry will 'shape-up'.

--Randy

========= rw@rwsys.wimsey.bc.ca =====================
Coherent Support  -   Programming  -  Administration
(604) 581-0518                   Surrey , BC  Canada
=====================================================

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


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