Category : UNIX Files
Archive   : LIN_NEWS.ZIP
Filename : DIGEST.108

 
Output of file : DIGEST.108 contained in archive : LIN_NEWS.ZIP
p 3
Message 3:
From [email protected] Sun Mar 15 00:26:02 1992
Received: from bloom-picayune (BLOOM-PICAYUNE.MIT.EDU) by TOE.TOWSON.EDU (PMDF
#12823) id <[email protected]>; Sun, 15 Mar 1992 00:20 EST
Received: by bloom-picayune (5.57/25-eef) id AA10794; Sun,
15 Mar 92 00:00:29 -0500
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 92 00:00:14 EST
From: Digestifier
Subject: Linux-Activists Digest #108
To: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Message-Id: <9203150500.AA10794@bloom-picayune>
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
Status: RO

Linux-Activists Digest #108, Volume #1 Sun, 15 Mar 92 00:00:14 EST

Contents:
Re: Localtion of init and mount (Werner Almesberger)
Re: Localtion of init and mount (Jim Winstead Jr.)
mtools on root image (Erik Green)
Re: mtools on root image (Jim Winstead Jr.)
UUCP for linux? (Kent H Lundberg)
Re: mtools on root image (Johan W}hlin)
Keyboard.S compilation death--help! (Adam Justin Thornton)
Re: Colors in virtual consoles (Charles Hedrick)
Re: Patching the Kernel (Drew Eckhardt)
SYSV curses ([email protected])
Re: generic mtools, prev. post (David Engel)
Re: mtools on root image (David Engel)
Re: mtools on root image (Jim Winstead Jr.)
Attn: gcc 2.0 (Hongjiu Lu -- Graduate Student)
Need help creating a boot disk (Budi Rahardjo)

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

From: [email protected] (Werner Almesberger)
Subject: Re: Localtion of init and mount
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1992 21:26:47 GMT

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Jim Winstead Jr.) writes:
>- There is a nearly complete, but empty, directory tree on the
> root floppy. This conforms to the LDS Standard.

Is this necessary ? Having less directories makes it easier to spot new
files. A script should be sufficient to create an LDS tree.

I think the root FS disk will become an emergency toolbox as soon as a
more complete release (e.g. ABC) with installation tools will be out, so
why shouldn't it be kept compact ?

- Werner
--
_________________________________________________________________________
/ Werner Almesberger, ETH Zuerich, CH [email protected] /
/ IFW A44 Tel. +41 1 254 7213 [email protected] /
/_BITNET:_ALMESBER@CZHETH5A__HEPNET/CHADNET:_[20579::]57414::ALMESBERGER_/

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

From: [email protected] (Jim Winstead Jr.)
Subject: Re: Localtion of init and mount
Date: 14 Mar 92 22:46:48 GMT

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Werner Almesberger) writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Jim Winstead Jr.) writes:
>>- There is a nearly complete, but empty, directory tree on the
>> root floppy. This conforms to the LDS Standard.
>
>Is this necessary ? Having less directories makes it easier to spot new
>files. A script should be sufficient to create an LDS tree.

You're right, of course, but I hadn't thought of that. ๐Ÿ™‚ One of my
next projects is to develop a 'mktree' script that will install the
LDS standard directory tree on a file system. Suggestions are
welcomed...

>I think the root FS disk will become an emergency toolbox as soon as a
>more complete release (e.g. ABC) with installation tools will be out, so
>why shouldn't it be kept compact ?

The idea is that the root floppy should be a 'more complete release'!
The ABC release, as I understand, is more of a way of organizing and
distributing the more complete tools. Basically, it's like this:

Linux 0.95a: Boot disk by Linus, root disk by me. This will contain
the most fundamental Linux utilities necessary to make
a filesystem and be able to use it as root. This would
include /bin, a simple /etc, /dev, possibly /lib, and a
very few things from /usr/bin. Installation scripts
and installation documentation would be here too.

ABC-Release: A collection of tar files (?) that 'fill the holes' to
make a complete Linux filesystem. This would include
most of /usr/bin, the sources for most of these
utilities, and in general, the things that are not
absolutely vital to installing/recovering Linux.

If people think differently (especially the people behind the
ABC-Release!), I'd like to say this makes more sense than having
'competing' releases. We'll leave that to the BSD/386 and 386BSD
crowd. ๐Ÿ™‚ (I realize this a gross overgeneralization of the
situation with BSDI and the Jolitz release. It's just an example.)

The root floppy should still be kept reasonably compact, but the idea
is to still provide maximum functionality in minimum space....
--
Jim Winstead Jr. (CSci '95) | "Catch a fish!"
Harvey Mudd College | -Geddy Lee,
[email protected] | San Diego Sports Arena
Disclaimer: Mine, not theirs! | January 20, 1992

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

From: [email protected] (Erik Green)
Subject: mtools on root image
Date: 14 Mar 92 21:53:30 GMT


In a previous article, [email protected] (Jim Winstead)
says:
>I know how it goes. I was just pointing out that the development of
>Linux is going so rapidly, that something that is missing now will
>likely be filled in quickly. A case in point is rdev - rootdev
>appeared on the 0.95 root floppy, and within a few days someone built
>a better mousetrap that modified boot images as well. Not bad, I
>think.

I agree.

>I don't see mtools as being necessary, at all. If you want to
>transfer files from DOS to Linux, get rawrite.exe and rawrite tar
>files to diskettes, and then read those with tar under Linux. The
>only possible advantage of mtools is that it can access DOS hard drive
>partitions, but I personally wouldn't trust it to do so.

Yes, you can rawrite files from DOS to disk, and then read them with
tar. However, this gets _very_ tedious, especially if one doesn't
have multiple scratch floppies sitting around. Also, I tried explaining
how this process works to a friend of mine, and gave up after the
fifth "what? huh?".

My point is that yes, in a perfect world UNIX would have no programs
whose sole function is compatibility with DOS. However, most(all)
of the people I know who are running Linux have used a DOS system
to download the necessary disk images and files. For the root and
boot this isn't a problem, but the other files I got were stored
on DOS-format disks until I rawrited/tar'd enough of them over to
Linux to get mtools compiled. I don't know about you, but I think
most people don't happen to have access to another UNIX system with
net connections, and most new users don't have a previous installation
of Linux to help with the bootstrap. DOS systems seem to be prevalent,
and I think it would make sense to have something available (maybe
a "bootstrap" disk image?) with some mtools binaries on it to help
get those files from dos disks. After Linux is up, these binaries
could be rm'd and never used again(if that satisfies your UNIX
sensibilities ๐Ÿ™‚ :-)).

>As a result, you won't see mtools on the 0.95a root floppy. It would,

I didn't expect it to be, sorry if you misunderstood my intent.

>however, be great if someone took the time to make a mtools.tar.Z that
>came with a good README.linux and a sample devices.c, so those that
>felt a need for mtools could compile it easily. The currently
>available ones are a bit tricky to set up, and require a bit of
>guesswork in devices.c.

I'd voulunteer, but I have no system I can use at the moment. If
you can wait a month, I'll do it then.

>Then again, if someone writes a DOS file system for Linux, this
>discussion would be pointless.

Or maybe if we end up having Linux distributed on a set of UNIX-mountable
disks, as images like the boot and root.

>I'd rather see a faster file system
>for Linux, first, though, to replace the brain-dead Minix one. I need

I wholeheartedly and totally agree!!!!

Good luck getting things sorted out for 0.95a.

-Longshot

BTW: Please excuse the fact that I don't always point out exactly where
I delete things from your previous posts, and that the subject line
tends to change in my followups. I have to go through a lot of wierdness
to get things posted (I read from one server and post to another) and
things tend to fall between the cracks in my mind.


--

Erik "Longshot" Green [email protected]
This is a .signature virus scanner. Stop the .sig virus!
Disclaimer: I'm not me.

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

From: [email protected] (Jim Winstead Jr.)
Subject: Re: mtools on root image
Date: 14 Mar 92 23:57:08 GMT

In article [email protected] (Erik Green) writes:
>
>In a previous article, [email protected] (Jim Winstead)
>says:
>>I don't see mtools as being necessary, at all.
>
>Yes, you can rawrite files from DOS to disk, and then read them with
>tar. However, this gets _very_ tedious, especially if one doesn't
>have multiple scratch floppies sitting around. Also, I tried explaining
>how this process works to a friend of mine, and gave up after the
>fifth "what? huh?".

How is this less tedious than having to copy files to a spare DOS
floppy, and then using the 'bare-bones' mtools that you proposed to
read them? That just adds another, unnecessary step... All one
really needs to do is this:

- get the tar.Z or tar file.
- rawrite the file to floppy
- 'tar zxvf /dev/floppy0'

>My point is that yes, in a perfect world UNIX would have no programs
>whose sole function is compatibility with DOS. However, most(all)

In a perfect world, DOS wouldn't exist. ๐Ÿ™‚

>of the people I know who are running Linux have used a DOS system
>to download the necessary disk images and files. For the root and
>boot this isn't a problem, but the other files I got were stored
>on DOS-format disks until I rawrited/tar'd enough of them over to
>Linux to get mtools compiled. I don't know about you, but I think

That was the mistake. The 'other' files (gcc at least, I presume)
should have been rawritten to floppies in the first place. How is
that any more difficult than copying them to a DOS-format disk?

>could be rm'd and never used again(if that satisfies your UNIX
>sensibilities ๐Ÿ™‚ :-)).

Not really, what happens if they nuke the root partition? I've come
close to doing that several times. (And I won't mention how many
times I've wiped out whole directories by accident. ๐Ÿ™‚

>>however, be great if someone took the time to make a mtools.tar.Z that
>>came with a good README.linux and a sample devices.c
>
>I'd voulunteer, but I have no system I can use at the moment. If
>you can wait a month, I'll do it then.

I'm all for it. I don't use mtools, though, so it's not something I'm
really worried about.

>>Then again, if someone writes a DOS file system for Linux, this
>>discussion would be pointless.
>
>Or maybe if we end up having Linux distributed on a set of UNIX-mountable
>disks, as images like the boot and root.

That would be nice, but that could also be worked around by doing
something that the GNU Hurd is doing - make tar a filesystem. That
way mounting a rawritten tarred floppy is the same as mounting any
other partition (providing it is not compressed, unless the filesystem
did that as well).

>Good luck getting things sorted out for 0.95a.

Thanks, things are falling into place nicely with all the suggestions
I've gotten. I'm sure it won't thrill everyone, but it should provide
a good base to work from in finding a suitable way to distribute Linux
v1.0 and beyond.

>BTW: Please excuse the fact that I don't always point out exactly where
>I delete things from your previous posts, and that the subject line
>tends to change in my followups.

Subject changing is good... It keeps the subject more informative.
As for quotes, well, they're just there to jog the other person's
memory... I do a good deal of quote-slashing myself.
--
Jim Winstead Jr. (CSci '95) | "Catch a fish!"
Harvey Mudd College | -Geddy Lee,
[email protected] | San Diego Sports Arena
Disclaimer: Mine, not theirs! | January 20, 1992

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

From: [email protected] (Kent H Lundberg)
Subject: UUCP for linux?
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1992 02:41:27 GMT


What kind of mail facilities does linux have? Any?

Is anyone working on UUCP for linux? Just mail and perhaps some
simple file transfer (i am not looking for news). This would be
invaluable to me...

Is there such a project? What's its status?

--> Kent Lundberg [email protected]








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

From: [email protected] (Johan W}hlin)
Subject: Re: mtools on root image
Date: 15 Mar 92 02:26:39 GMT

A few extra notes on rawrite+tar vs mcopy.

The only program of the mtools you actually _need_ is mcopy.

Using rawrite+tar requires formating the diskette between times. It
also requires every file being <= 1.44M.

The way I use mcopy is to copy files from my DOS-partition onto my
Linux-part. That way you don't need any extra diskettes, no worrying
about File Sizes.

If it comes to tar _or_ mcopy, tar is of course the choice.

BUT mcopy (and mdir) is my _main_ tool for communicating with the outside
world. I think the same goes for several others.

Regards,
Johan

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

From: [email protected] (Adam Justin Thornton)
Subject: Keyboard.S compilation death--help!
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1992 02:46:51 GMT

I'm trying to recompile my kernel, using gcc2.0 for the c compiler and the
as, as86, et al. on tsx-11 for the rest. I'm using a Gateway 2000 385/25
with RLL disks.

In make, I get

(cd kernel/chr_drv; make)
as86 -o keyboard.o keyboard.S
divide error: 0000
EIP: 000F:0000139E
EFLAGS: 00010206
ESP: 0017:03BFFE48
fs: 0010
base: 2C000000, limit )4000000
stack: 00016500 00165EB 03BFFE68 000012A%
pid: 289, process nr: 11
F7 36 89 06 eb cf 80 3d 04 e2
*** Signal 11
Stop.
*** Error code 1


Divide error? Huh? Does anyone know what's gone wrong?
This occurs, btw, on the vanilla keyboard.S, with no patches applied.

Adam
--
"This howling in the distance, it's a captivating sound/ Can't tell if it's
ecstasy or pain." | These aren't Rice's opinions, just mine, thank God.
"Cat on a tin roof, dogs in a pile. Nothing left to do but ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ :-)"
>Radio Free Preterition from Pig Bodine and the Whole Sick Crew | 64,928<

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

From: [email protected] (Charles Hedrick)
Subject: Re: Colors in virtual consoles
Date: 15 Mar 92 02:48:58 GMT

[email protected] (Ben Combee) writes:

>My question is: are the
>colors currently in the LINUX 0.95 kernel the final ones?

They should be. 0.12 simply used the bits as an EGA attribute byte.
This resulted in a non-standard color scheme. 0.95 uses a mapping
table. The codes now have the same values as in kermit and the ANSI
escape sequences in other OS's I've used. Since the new values are
consistent with the rest of the world, I wouldn't think Linus would
have any reason to change them again...

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

From: [email protected] (Drew Eckhardt)
Subject: Re: Patching the Kernel
Date: 15 Mar 92 03:07:55 GMT

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:
>
>Everytime I try to compile the 0.95 Linux source and boot up, my entire
>keyboard is redefined (with the exception of all the letter keys).
>Do I have a bad keyboard.S or something????

This should be, or is on the FAQ. The stock binary distribution is for US
keyboards, the stock source distribution for finnish. Go into keyboard.S,
and change the KBD_ whatever to KBD_US, so you get a "normal" keyboard.

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

From: [email protected]
Subject: SYSV curses
Reply-To: [email protected]
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1992 03:17:16 GMT

I see from Michael Hamiliton's compiling hethack that he used SYSV
curses. Is there a version availble for ftp? I used PC-curses for
compiling nethack under MINIX. I believe BSD curses is the present
standard? for Linux --- of course hethackers need color which SYSV and
PC-cursese provide with char and attrib. Will Linux continue to use BSD
curses?

John

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

From: [email protected] (David Engel)
Subject: Re: generic mtools, prev. post
Date: 15 Mar 92 04:15:47 GMT

[email protected] (Jim Winstead Jr.) writes:
: files to diskettes, and then read those with tar under Linux. The
: only possible advantage of mtools is that it can access DOS hard drive
: partitions, but I personally wouldn't trust it to do so.

I've been using mtools to reliably transfer files back and forth between
my Linux and DOS partitions for quite some time.

-David

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

From: [email protected] (David Engel)
Subject: Re: mtools on root image
Date: 15 Mar 92 04:21:44 GMT

[email protected] (Johan W}hlin) writes:
: The only program of the mtools you actually _need_ is mcopy.
: ...
: BUT mcopy (and mdir) is my _main_ tool for communicating with the outside
: world. I think the same goes for several others.

Same here! BTW, mcopy uses mread/mwrite to do the actual copying.

-David

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

From: [email protected] (Jim Winstead Jr.)
Subject: Re: mtools on root image
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1992 04:25:33 GMT

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Johan W}hlin) writes:
>The only program of the mtools you actually _need_ is mcopy.

Are you sure about this? I was under the impression that mcopy was
merely a front-end for mread and mwrite. If that's the case, you've
got 130k of binaries right there. Leave out mwrite, and you've still
got about 70k.

>Using rawrite+tar requires formating the diskette between times. It
>also requires every file being <= 1.44M.

Does it? I've been successful tarring directly to the same floppy
many times, and that's basically the same operation...

Note that the 1.44 limit also applies to writing a file to a DOS
floppy and using mcopy to get it from there.

>The way I use mcopy is to copy files from my DOS-partition onto my
>Linux-part. That way you don't need any extra diskettes, no worrying
>about File Sizes.

How do you distribute a pre-compiled mtools that can handle all the
different partitions people have?

>If it comes to tar _or_ mcopy, tar is of course the choice.

We're definitely agreed there.

>BUT mcopy (and mdir) is my _main_ tool for communicating with the outside
>world. I think the same goes for several others.

I understand that, although I do tend to lose sight of it sometimes.
It's easy to start thinking everyone uses kermit under Linux to get
all their stuff to the computer....

--
Jim Winstead Jr. (CSci '95) | "Catch a fish!"
Harvey Mudd College | -Geddy Lee,
[email protected] | San Diego Sports Arena
Disclaimer: Mine, not theirs! | January 20, 1992

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

From: [email protected] (Hongjiu Lu -- Graduate Student)
Subject: Attn: gcc 2.0
Reply-To: [email protected] (Hongjiu Lu -- Graduate Student)
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1992 04:42:16 GMT

Hi,

Gcc 2.0 is still in the alpha testing. IT MAY NEED A 387 OR 0.95 KERNEL
TO RUN. DO NOT WASTE TIME IF YOU ARE USING 0.12 AND NO 387.

BTW, it has the shared libs.

H.J.
--
School of EECS Internet: [email protected]
Washington State University BITNET: [email protected]
Pullman, WA 99164 Phone: (509) 335-6470 (O)
USA (509) 334-6315 (H)

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

From: [email protected] (Budi Rahardjo)
Subject: Need help creating a boot disk
Date: 15 Mar 92 04:22:00 GMT

I've decided to try linux am having a problem creating a boot disk.
- downloaded rawrite.exe and bootimage (0.12 and 0.95)
- use rawrite to create boot disk, it say disk has 9 sectors
(I am using 360K disk on my XT to do this)
- Boot the disk on my 386SX
- It says "Loading" and displays a whole bunch of :
0000
CX:0006
DX:0000
@X:0404
AX:020A
.... on and on and on ....

This happened with 0.12 and 0.95. FYI my system is a Gateway 386SX/16,
no math co, if that matters. Any help appreciated.

-- budi
--
Budi Rahardjo

Electrical Engineering - University of Manitoba - 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: [email protected]

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

Internet: [email protected]

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 0.12, released on Jan 14, 1992

End of Linux-Activists Digest
******************************

& quit    d 3
& p
No applicable messages
& q
midget.towson.edu> ls -l
total 1005
-rw------- 1 tree 7775 Mar 14 10:59 RELNOTES-0.12
drwxr-x--x 2 tree 512 Feb 26 19:34 bin
-rw------- 1 tree 3212 Mar 14 16:51 newgcc.FAQ
-rw------- 1 tree 191135 Mar 14 16:45 pcomm12.tar.Z
-rw------- 1 tree 667625 Mar 14 10:55 rootimage-0.12.Z
-rw------- 1 tree 121587 Mar 14 16:42 uemacs-linux.tar.Z
midget.towson.edu>

  3 Responses to “Category : UNIX Files
Archive   : LIN_NEWS.ZIP
Filename : DIGEST.108

  1. Very nice! Thank you for this wonderful archive. I wonder why I found it only now. Long live the BBS file archives!

  2. This is so awesome! ๐Ÿ˜€ I’d be cool if you could download an entire archive of this at once, though.

  3. But one thing that puzzles me is the “mtswslnkmcjklsdlsbdmMICROSOFT” string. There is an article about it here. It is definitely worth a read: http://www.os2museum.com/wp/mtswslnk/