From: Digestifier To: Linux-Activists@news-digests.mit.edu Reply-To: Linux-Activists@news-digests.mit.edu Date: Sat, 4 Apr 92 07:30:11 EST Subject: Linux-Activists Digest #16 Linux-Activists Digest #16, Volume #2 Sat, 4 Apr 92 07:30:11 EST Contents: Pascal compiler (Drew Eckhardt) Strange behavior....... (Andy I. Liaw) FDISK!!!! how to use???? (Paul Simundza) How about a 0.95b release ? (tony@vax.oxford.ac.uk) Elvis 1.5 (Harry G. Varnis) Re: How about a 0.95b release ? (Drew Eckhardt) Re: HD timeout Errors (with .95a) (Erik Fichtner) Passwd & lpt1 ?? (Blake McBride) Re: diskbackup -> broken pile (Steve@nyongwa.cam.org) Re: Fixing broken users; was "Reduce "gcc is broken" postings" (Bill Bogstad) Re: Since I haven't seen an FAQ... (Linus Benedict Torvalds) Re: Fixing broken users; was "Reduce "gcc is broken" postings" (D.Bolla) Re: taylor-uucp and smail (Ed Carp) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: drew@juliet.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt) Subject: Pascal compiler Date: 4 Apr 92 04:45:46 GMT I thought some people might be interested in this : comp.compilers (moderated) #1661 (0 + 8 more) (1) From: boucher@ncs.dnd.ca (R. Boucher) -[1] [1] Re: Optimization - newbie question Keywords: GCC, Pascal, FTP Date: Wed Apr 01 10:54:09 MST 1992 Organization: DND, Ottawa, CANADA Lines: 16 In-Reply-To: <92-04-002@comp.compilers> In article <92-04-002@comp.compilers> you commented on: >For example, the Gnu C compiler now has a Fortran front end and would >presumably also have Pascal if someone cared enough to write one. -John] Actually, a beta version of GNU pascal is available for those wishing to experiment and report problems. This is taken out of its README file: Newest (available) version of gpc is via anonymous ftp in host kampi.hut.fi in directory jtv/gnu-pascal. Robert Boucher boucher@ncs.dnd.ca ...uunet!revcan!flatout!asimov!rob A ------------------------------ From: ail8070@tamsun.tamu.edu (Andy I. Liaw) Subject: Strange behavior....... Date: 4 Apr 92 05:29:21 GMT Hi! everyone, I posted yesterday that I was having troubles getting linux 095a to install on my IDE drive. Well, today I got it to work twice, but failed at last. Can someone explain why it does this? Here's the story: I use fdisk in DRDOS to delete all partitions on my HD. Boot up linux from floppy, run 'pfdisk /dev/hda' and 'g 1001 15 17' and '1 129 0 300' and 'wq' and then sync and reboot. Then I did the installation, reboot with the floppy that uses the file system on the HD, and it worked!!! Next I bootup linux with root on floppy again, run pfdisk as before but with the partitioning: '1 4 0 680' and '2 129 681 999' then reboot and install on /dev/hda2 again, and it also worked! Bow the problem: I bootup dos from floppy and ran fdisk, made c: bootable, and transfer the system files over to c:. This time linux failed. So I bootup linux again from the floppy and go through the installation as before, linux never worked. It was ok before I made c: the bootable partition. but although i transfer the system files to c:, it fail to boot to dos until i made c: bootable from fdisk. Could this be the problem? Andy Liaw aliaw@stat.tamu.edu ------------------------------ From: ae454@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul Simundza) Subject: FDISK!!!! how to use???? Date: 4 Apr 92 05:59:32 GMT Reply-To: ae454@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Paul Simundza) I just set up a boot and root disk for linux on 2 floppies, and I want to install it on hard drive... the first step is to run Fdisk, but when I type fdisk, it looks on the floppy, and does nothing, it doesn't even look at the hard drive...does anyone know what may be wrong... I have an ARLL IDE 8o meg drive on a ps/2 also...I know the starting head and cylinder and so forth of my partition, how do I create a linux partition on those locations? -- paul simundza ------------------------------ From: tony@vax.oxford.ac.uk Subject: How about a 0.95b release ? Date: 3 Apr 92 18:43:29 GMT Dear All, Since there are patches to the .95a kernel for extended prtitions, ps support & lp support, might an (interim) .95b kernel be worth releasing ??? hmmmm... Tony _ Tony Kew, Oxford University Computing Services, (_)xford, England, U.K. ====================================================|========================= Janet:- tony@uk.ac.oxford.vax --+-- Disclaimer :- Internet:- tony%vax.oxford.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk | Who is the more foolish? Earn/Bitnet:- tony%vax.oxford.ac.uk@ukacrl | The fool, or the Phone:- +44 (0)865 273268 Fax:- +44 (0)865 273275 | man who follows him? ==================================================\=|=/======================= \|/ ------------------------------ From: hgv@herring.network.com (Harry G. Varnis) Subject: Elvis 1.5 Date: 4 Apr 92 06:36:18 GMT FYI, The 1.5 version of Elvis (vi clone) posted recently in alt.sources makes on Linux almost "right out of the box" and has a bunch of nifty new features. -- Harry Varnis +1 612 493 1042 ------------------------------ From: drew@kinglear.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt) Subject: Re: How about a 0.95b release ? Date: Sat, 4 Apr 1992 07:07:39 GMT In article <1992Apr3.194329.5299@vax.oxford.ac.uk> tony@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes: >Dear All, > Since there are patches to the .95a kernel for extended prtitions, ps >support & lp support, might an (interim) .95b kernel be worth releasing ??? > >hmmmm... > >Tony > I agree. It's easier to keep updating the kernel if the official version is close to the hacked up one, as you will have fewer conflicting patches, and they will be easier to maintain as you won't have to sort out where the SCSI patch stops and where the configuration patch begins. ------------------------------ From: techs@triton.unm.edu (Erik Fichtner) Subject: Re: HD timeout Errors (with .95a) Date: 4 Apr 92 07:23:06 GMT In article <1992Apr3.210354.25913@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> gs45@cunixb.cc.colombia.edu writes: >In article <1992Apr3.030517.29450@afterlife.ncsc.mil> sdbaker@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Stewart Baker) writes: >>Is there anyone else having problems with their disk in .95a? I have >>two IDE hard disks, a Conner 170MB as the master, and a Maxtor 120MB as >>the slave. I have / and /usr on the Conner disk, and a 10MB swap partition I was having terrible problems with Linux and the HD timeout.. it would try to read from one of my twin Seagate ST1144a 130mb IDE's and it's get stuck and miss something, reset the disk, "HD Timeout" and try again.. which it missed AGAIN.. after about 5 times, it reported a disk error and repeated the whole annoying process. the only solution was to reboot. the fix was insanely simple.. My bus speed is 12.5MHz. my IDE controller was rated at 10MHz bus speed. (although i had had troubles with it before at an 6MHz bus speed.. go figure.. cheap Chicony card. don't trust 'em..) anyway for $29.00 the local computer shop happily sold me a faster IDE controller. haven't had a problem since. -- Techs techs@triton.unm.edu Disclaimer: any inaccuracies are caused by the phase of the moon "...whaddya mean I ain't kind... Just not *your* kind!" - Megadeth ------------------------------ From: blake@netcom.com (Blake McBride) Subject: Passwd & lpt1 ?? Date: 4 Apr 92 04:11:36 GMT I'm glad 0.95a has a login, but where is the passwd program? Which dev entry may I use for my parallel ports? Thanks. -- Blake McBride Home (615) 790-8521 3020 Liberty Hills Drive Work (615) 790-1088 Franklin, TN 37064 blake@netcom.com U.S.A. ------------------------------ From: Steve@nyongwa.cam.org Subject: Re: diskbackup -> broken pile Date: 4 Apr 92 07:45:29 GMT In article zhao@unixg.ubc.ca (Jiansheng Zhao) writes: >When I tried diskbackup with compress >tar -cf - bin .. | compress |diskbackup "day one" >I always got an error message: broken pipe. What might be the problem? >I tried find | sort > list, the pipe seems working. Anyone has similar >problem (bug in compress?) Naw, I think the problem lies with diskbackup. It quits reading input when it doesn't get as much as it wants, which isn't always the end of it from a pipe. Besides which the program only puts 1030k or so on the floppy. I re-wrote the programs to work, and to use the entire disk. I'll mail it out if you want. Steve Z ------------------------------ From: wjb@cogsci.cog.jhu.edu (Bill Bogstad) Subject: Re: Fixing broken users; was "Reduce "gcc is broken" postings" Date: 4 Apr 92 06:18:37 GMT In article <1992Apr4.025953.27112@seq.uncwil.edu> cwilson@seq.uncwil.edu (c t wilson) writes: > >gcc 1.40 is quite stable for me, and probably everybody else. people need to >realize that beta means unproven and possibly buggy. I wonder what can be >done about this? As one of the people who had problems in this area, I suppose I should say something. Once I got past the initial installation of Linux on my hard disk, there really didn't seem to be any docs to help me figure out what other stuff I might need to install or which version to get. The different archive sites seemed to have different versions of the same program or sometimes more then one version on a single site. There is no canonical list of "standard" versus "beta" versions. Note, I wasn't looking for step by step instructions on how to download and install software. I've been using Unix for over a decade now and that wasn't my problem. The problem was that unless I happened to catch the posting when an author put something up for ftp, I was pretty much playing a guessing game in deciding which files to get and which to avoid. An example... I saw lots of messages about "bad" versions of both compress and tar; but I never saw a definitive message about where to get the "good" versions. When things didn't work, I had no idea whether the problem was in dearchiving a program or in the program itself. (As it turns out my problems were probably a result of problems downloading the archived file.) As for GCC specifically, GCC 1.40 may be the "standard" version, but it doesn't compile 0.95a using the unmodified sources and makefiles. Yes, now that it has been posted the change needed is apparently trivial. And it has been pointed out that it is mentioned in the FAQ file as well. On the other hand, even the FAQ file is not very clear about which compiler to use. In one place it suggests, "Choose yours". Enough of the problems. Possible solutions... A list of software with the "standard" versions and their locations. Maybe directories on the archives sites labeled "standard" and "beta" respectively. Some cleanup of the FAQ file would help as well. I've been looking at the 3/25 version and it refers to problems with older versions that are probably no longer relevant. (Yes, I'll mail in my suggestions.) Finally, I sound kind of negative above; but I'm actually quite impressed with the status of Linux. I just wish that it had been a little easier to get from the basic system to something on which I can do some real hacking. Bill Bogstad ------------------------------ From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds) Subject: Re: Since I haven't seen an FAQ... Date: 4 Apr 92 10:22:25 GMT In article <1992Apr3.190450.28708@pony.Ingres.COM> sergio@Ingres.COM (Sergio L Aponte) writes: > > Can somebody give me a two-three liner description of what is LINUX > and what hardware it runs on? Ok, this has come up so many times I'd better send out the info-sheet. The FAQ is maintained by corsini@?? and he'll send out the newest version just as soon as this newsgroup gets that far. This info-sheet is basically the old 0.12 info-sheet with very minor modifications: I've changed it slightly, but it's not completely up to date. Linus ========== LINUX INFORMATION SHEET (last updated 13 Jan 1992 (with changes by Linus 4.4.92)) 1. WHAT IS LINUX 0.95a LINUX 0.95a is a freely distributable UNIX clone. It implements a subset of System V and POSIX functionality. LINUX has been written from scratch, and therefore does not contain any AT&T or MINIX code--not in the kernel, the compiler, the utilities, or the libraries. For this reason it can be made available with complete source code by anonymous FTP. LINUX runs only on 386/486 AT-bus machines; porting to non-Intel architectures is likely to be difficult, as the kernel makes extensive use of 386 memory management and task primitives. Version 0.95a is still a beta release, but it already provides much of the functionality of a System V.3 kernel. For example, various users have been able to port programs such as bison/flex without having to modify code at all. Another indication of its maturity is that it is now possible to do LINUX kernel development using LINUX itself and freely-available programming tools. 2. LINUX features - System call compatible with a subset of System V and POSIX - Full multiprogramming (multiple programs can run at once) - Memory paging with copy-on-write - Demand loading of executables - Page sharing of executables - Virtual memory: swapping to disk when out of RAM - POSIX job control - virtual consoles - pty's - some 387-emulation - ANSI compliant C compiler (gcc) - A complete set of compiler writing tools (bison as yacc-replacement, flex as lex replacement) - The GNU 'Bourne again' shell (bash) (as well as 'ash', 'rc' etc) - Micro emacs - most utilities you need for development (cat, cp, kermit, ls, make, etc.) - Over 200 library procedures (atoi, fork, malloc, read, stdio, etc.) - Currently 6 national keyboards: Finnish/US/German/French/British/Danish - Full source code (in C) for the OS is freely distributable - Full source code of the tools can be gotten from many anonymous ftp sites (Almost the entire suite of GNU programs has been ported to Linux.) - Runs in protected mode on 386 and above - Support for extended memory up to 16M on 386 and above - RS-232 serial line support with terminal emulation, kermit, zmodem, etc. - Supports the real time clock 3. HARDWARE REQUIRED - A 386 or 486 machine with an AT-bus. (EISA will probably work, also, but you will need an AT-bus hard disk controller.) Both DX and SX processors will work. - A hard disk implementing the standard AT hard disk interface -- for example, an IDE drive. In addition, some SCSI drives are supported with additional kernel patches. - A high-density disk drive--either 5.25" (1.2MB) or 3.5" (1.44MB). - At least 2 megabytes of RAM. (LINUX will boot in 2 Mb. To use gcc 4 MB is a good idea.) - Any video card of the following: Hercules,CGA,EGA,VGA In addition, LINUX supports - Up to four serial lines (2 active at a time) - A real time clock 4. PARTIAL LIST OF UTILITIES INCLUDED IN OR AVAILABLE FOR LINUX 0.95a - The MTOOLS package (reading/writing to DOS filesystems) - The complete GNU filetools (ls, cat, cp, mv, ...) - The GNU C and C++ compiler with GNU assembler, linker, ar, ... - bison - flex - rcs - pmake (BSD 4.3 Reno/BSD 4.4 make) - kermit - Micro emacs - less - mkfs - fsck - mount/umount - TeX, dvips - and lots more... 5. LINUX BINARIES The LINUX binaries and sources are available at several different anonymous FTP sites. The biggest are: nic.funet.fi:/pub/OS/Linux tsx-11.mit.edu:/pub/linux 6. LEGAL STATUS OF LINUX Although LINUX is supplied with the complete source code, it is copyrighted software. Unlike MINIX, however, it is available for free, provided you obey to the rules specified in the LINUX copyright. Linux is (C) Linus Torvalds, but the copyright is the GNU copyleft: get a copy of the copyleft at your nearest ftp-archive.. 7. NEWS ABOUT LINUX There are now two newsgroups devoted to linux articles: an older alt.os.linux and the new comp.os.linux group. The alt-group will be phased out as the comp-group gets a wider propagation. Additionally, there are a couple of mailing-lists: linux-activists@niksula.hut.fi is the original mailing-list, and it now supports sub-threads (notably the gcc-2 beta-testing list). There is also a linux-standards mailing list as well as a newsgroup-service for those that can get mail but are unable to read the newsgroups. For the current status of LINUX, do a "finger torvalds@kruuna.helsinki.fi". 8. FUTURE PLANS Work is underway on LINUX version 1.0, which will close some of the gaps in the present implementation. Various people are currently working on: - A more complete virtual filesystem layer - STREAMS - Interprocess communication - IEEE POSIX P1003.1 / P1003.2 compatibility - more complete SCSI support If you want to help, mail the various activists or post to the newsgroups. ------------------------------ From: db1@ukc.ac.uk (D.Bolla) Subject: Re: Fixing broken users; was "Reduce "gcc is broken" postings" Date: 4 Apr 92 11:41:06 GMT Reply-To: db1@ukc.ac.uk (Damiano Bolla) In article <04.04.92.011837.225@cogsci.cog.jhu.edu> wjb@cogsci.cog.jhu.edu (Bill Bogstad) writes: >In article <1992Apr4.025953.27112@seq.uncwil.edu> cwilson@seq.uncwil.edu (c >t wilson) writes: >>gcc 1.40 is quite stable for me, and probably everybody else. people need to >>realize that beta means unproven and possibly buggy. I wonder what can be >>done about this? People should test GCC2.1 and MAKE CLEAR to everybody else that it is a BETA. ( Or alpha ). The ports should be compilable using GCC1.40.... > As one of the people who had problems in this area, I suppose I >should say something. Once I got past the initial installation of Linux on >my hard disk, there really didn't seem to be any docs to help me figure out >what other stuff I might need to install or which version to get. The >different archive sites seemed to have different versions of the same >program or sometimes more then one version on a single site. There is no >canonical list of "standard" versus "beta" versions. My idea is: Create one subtree for each NEW version of linux. Put in the new subtree ONLY the NEW stuff and put it where it should be. ( as defined in the standard directoryes ). NOTE: I am NOT asking to make symlinks to the OLD stuff. The current release contains ONLY NEW stuff. Old stuff can be found in the old release subtree. This will NOT create duplicate of programs. It will make easier for everybody to understand what is new and what is OLD. > Note, I wasn't looking for step by step instructions on how to >download and install software. I've been using Unix for over a decade now >and that wasn't my problem. The problem was that unless I happened to catch >the posting when an author put something up for ftp, I was pretty much >playing a guessing game in deciding which files to get and which to avoid. See above :-) > An example... I saw lots of messages about "bad" versions of both >compress and tar; but I never saw a definitive message about where to get >the "good" versions. When things didn't work, I had no idea whether the >problem was in dearchiving a program or in the program itself. (As it turns >out my problems were probably a result of problems downloading the archived >file.) You vant the latest release of a program ? Just look in the latest release subtree if you find it ! If you can't look in the previous one.... ( at least you know that the program will work with the OLD release :-) ) > As for GCC specifically, GCC 1.40 may be the "standard" version, but >it doesn't compile 0.95a using the unmodified sources and makefiles. Yes, >now that it has been posted the change needed is apparently trivial. And it >has been pointed out that it is mentioned in the FAQ file as well. On the >other hand, even the FAQ file is not very clear about which compiler to >use. In one place it suggests, "Choose yours". Ok, What about GCC2.1 being OFFICIAL with the release 1.0 of Linux ? > Enough of the problems. Possible solutions... A list of software >with the "standard" versions and their locations. Maybe directories on the >archives sites labeled "standard" and "beta" respectively. Some cleanup of Do you like my idea ? >the FAQ file would help as well. I've been looking at the 3/25 version and >it refers to problems with older versions that are probably no longer >relevant. (Yes, I'll mail in my suggestions.) Amazing how linux is changing...... > Finally, I sound kind of negative above; but I'm actually quite >impressed with the status of Linux. I just wish that it had been a little >easier to get from the basic system to something on which I can do some real >hacking. Yup, with a better organization you can achieve this without extra work. Damiano ------------------------------ From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) Subject: Re: taylor-uucp and smail Date: 4 Apr 92 04:26:29 GMT I'm very close on the beta 1.03 release. Look for it this weekend... -- Ed Carp N7EKG/6 erc@khijol.UUCP erc@apple.com Cupertino, CA 408/252-5947 -- Absolutely unabashed Gates McFadden groupie! -- ------------------------------ ** 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-Activists-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux) via: Internet: Linux-Activists@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 tupac-amaru.informatik.rwth-aachen.de pub/msdos/replace The current version of Linux is 0.95a released on March 17, 1992 End of Linux-Activists Digest ******************************