--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGU00020 Date: 12/24/95 From: BARRY HANCOCK Time: 05:57am \/To: JOHN DONOHUE (Read 10 times) Subj: UNIX training..... -= John Donohue said the following to Joshua Estell =- > JE> where I could get some "painless" experience? 8) > The easiest (if you already have a 386 or better PC) is to get one of > the UNIX clones (LINUX, FreeBSD, etc) and then buy, or borrow from your I'm like Joshua, getting more UNIX training/experience. I just saw in Border's Bookstore that there is a new book out from SAM's Publishing, called "Linux Unleashed". It sells for $50 and includes a CD which contains the latest version of Linux, plus application software (I don't know which applications) and utilities. Sounds like a very good price for the set. BTW I got my break into UNIX by selling Tandy Mod 16s and 6000s back in 82-84 then going out as a free-lancer supporting those systems. Ever since then DOS, Windows, and even Macintosh have seemed like crippled computers, even though they have some great software. Good luck to Josh. ___SyncEdit/G v1.11 [NR] --- GEcho 1.20/Pro * Origin: Blue Heron Pointe! Northville, MI * (810)380-9561 (1:2410/437) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGU00021 Date: 12/24/95 From: SAM SLADE Time: 05:17pm \/To: CHRIS PITZEL (Read 10 times) Subj: opinion on DEC OSF/1 CP> Of course, DEC OSF/1 is the more modern of the two variants of Unix, CP>but does anyone have any opinions about either of them from both a user nd CP>administrator standpoint? I've also seen some DEC AXP machines which have CP>Digital Unix loaded onto them. Is there any difference between DEC OSF/1 fo CP>AXP, and Digital Unix for AXP? If so, what are they.. Of course DEC OSF/1 is now repackaged as DEC or Digital Unix, which among other things has added a new file system... the advanced file system, which will give much quicker and reliable recovery than the standard unix file system... of course it has the expected immediate learning curve which requires one to spend a bit of time in the man pages/bookshelf which brings me to the point of all this ... and that is that I personally feel that the DEC Unix documentation on CD is VERY good... much better than what I have run into in other flavors. Alpha's are impressive systems! :-) --- QScan/PCB v1.16b / 01-0024 * Origin: (1:3407/14) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGV00000 Date: 12/25/95 From: RAY BACON Time: 11:42am \/To: ALLAN WHITWORTH (Read 10 times) Subj: How to recognize a CD Hello Allan! Wednesday December 13 1995, Allan Whitworth writes to Neeti Ray: AW> Very perceptive and correct. But I haven't even gotten to any AW> peculiarities to that system....I still haven't learned how to find a AW> directory of my floppy! I can "ls" any path on the current device /dev/ AW> but not /dev/fd0 or /dev/fd1. Chdir tells me it can't be used AW> there either. Is my (ignorance) of Unix, Linux, software or what? I AW> thought SCO, BSD, Solaris, EIX, Linux, et all were all dialects of the AW> general Unix class? Is my assumption showing? mount /dev/fd0 /mnt cd /mnt ls This should work. Don't forget to umount /dev/fd0 when finished. Ray --- GoldED 2.40+ * Origin: Cobra BBS (713)996-8762 LOD Moderator (1:106/993) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGV00001 Date: 12/24/95 From: ALLEN WITTENAUER Time: 1:44 am \/To: YOUSUF KHAN (Read 10 times) Subj: Re: Linux In a message dated 16 Dec 95 09:42:56, Yousuf Khan wrote: JP> Windows relates to DOS in a similar way that the X JP> Window System ( :-)) depends on Unix. You can't have JP> one without the other. YK> X Windows is similar for Unix, and it provides an extension to Unix's YK> API as well. As was stated earlier, the above is *NOT* a good analogy. X=!Windows as DOS=UNIX. Case in point: I've got xv running under X on the Amiga. Granted, the Amiga's a lot closer to UNIX than most other OS's on the planet, but the point being, it isn't UNIX yet I still run X on it natively with my own machine acting as my server and capable of running quite a few X apps after a quick recompile (occassionaly with some cleanup, but who doesn't?) with the Amiga version of gcc. --- DLG Pro v1.7/PDQMail v2.60 * Origin: Mental Vortex / Tucson, AZ / (1:300/311) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGV00002 Date: 12/24/95 From: ALLEN WITTENAUER Time: 1:52 am \/To: WALTER VAUGHAN (Read 10 times) Subj: Re: More folklore In a message dated 15 Dec 95 23:05:32, Walter Vaughan wrote: WV> If I remember correctly, MS owns about 15% of SCO. MS seems to treat SCO as its bastard child. If I have my history right, SCO was pretty independent when Xenix initially came out... then MS bought a big majority chunk of it, re-released Xenix with a lot more bells and whistles... it didn't sell so they sold off a section of their SCO stock... new owners release the OpenZYX series and suddenly MS gets interested again... --- DLG Pro v1.7/PDQMail v2.60 * Origin: Mental Vortex / Tucson, AZ / (1:300/311) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGV00003 Date: 12/24/95 From: ALLEN WITTENAUER Time: 1:55 am \/To: WALTER VAUGHAN (Read 10 times) Subj: Re: Sun reliablity In a message dated 15 Dec 95 23:26:44, Walter Vaughan wrote: WV> My current IP has 10 sun boxes a 1 SCO unix box (a news-server), and WV> several times a week a machine or two is down a day for something WV> broken.. so there may be no mail or no ftp or no DNS or no WV> telnetting. WV> Any Sun mavens want to comment? While I'm not a full Sun admin, I've assisted several times over the past few years. My experiences tell me that SunOS and Solaris are just a tad more fragile than SCO, primarily because they have *A LOT* more flexibility in what they can do. [Case in point: have you tried replacing the resolver code in your SCO box recently? ] Hardware-wise, the lab I used to work in had around 20 Sun's that really had little-to-no downtime... but, lately, seems like the new machines that the uni are buying have a higher failure rate. If I had a choice on SCO vs. SunOS/Solaris... I'd take the Sun, simply because of the extra power of the OS itself. [Granted, I haven't used the newer SCO releases, but, until they fix that damn filesystem...] Of course, if I could have anything... I'd pick an AlphaServer. If ya'll get a chance, you *have* to play under Digital UNIX. It is _truly_ impressive. A Mach-based kernel running on a Alpha AXP simply blows your mind away. --- DLG Pro v1.7/PDQMail v2.60 * Origin: Mental Vortex / Tucson, AZ / (1:300/311) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGV00004 Date: 12/22/95 From: JOHN POLTORAK Time: 01:32pm \/To: LAWRENCE GARVIN (Read 10 times) Subj: Boot partitions Hello Lawrence! Sunday December 17 1995, Lawrence Garvin writes to Barry Pearce: LG> Barry Pearce said in a message to John Poltorak: BP>> Hi John, >> Is there any way of creating a seperate 'minimal' Unix boot >> partition? I can have a usable OS/2 boot partion in 2MB of disk >> space, and would feel much safer if I had something similar >> under Unix. BP>> um...not that im aware of..... LG> Well, it -could- be done, but it would take an enormous amount of time and LG> manual effort to create a stripped down root filesystem, then you'd need LG> to cpio or tar it to a tape, manually rebuild the root partition to LG> the minimal size necessary, boot from a floppy, and tar/cpio the archive LG> back to the root partition. LG> And the critical question is what to strip and what not to strip. :) I'm really surprised that there isn't a well established procedure for doing this already in place. What happens if someone has accidentally reformatted your hard disk and you need to restore a system from tape? With OS/2, I can boot from a single floppy, access a tape across a network, and restore from that. It's all relatively easy to set up too. There must be something equivalent for Unix.... Maybe I can do a remote boot of Unix over a network. Have you any experience of this? John ---------------------------------- mailto://jpolt@bradnet.demon.co.uk --- * Origin: (2:250/313) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 176 UNIX Ref: CGV00005 Date: 12/23/95 From: JOHN POLTORAK Time: 08:21am \/To: YOUSUF KHAN (Read 10 times) Subj: Linux Wednesday December 20 1995, Yousuf Khan writes to Will Burrow: YK> Come on, posturing aside, all the companies (IBM & MS) that produced these YK> operating systems were the main developers of DOS in the past, I'm not sure if IBM has ever been a developer of DOS. Come to think of it, MS didn't develop it originally. I think Bill Gates nicked it off some small company in Seattle. YK> and it is YK> quite obvious that these operating systems were designed first and YK> foremost as upgrades to DOS. There is no direct influence from Unix, but YK> there is a direct influence from DOS. Whatever influences came from Unix YK> came in the form of ideas taken from it, not source code. You will see DOS YK> source code in all of these operating systems. There is DOS code in OS/2, but only in so far as DOS mode is concerned. The base OS was built from scratch using its own API which consists of around 1000 different calls. John ---------------------------------- mailto://jpolt@bradnet.demon.co.uk --- * Origin: (2:250/313)