Summary: Unix for 386-PC (Repost and Updated)
ndeng at EULER.BERKELEY.EDU
ndeng at EULER.BERKELEY.EDU
Tue Oct 3 02:33:40 AEST 1989
All!
After I posted the summary about UNIX packages for 386 PC, people kept sending
me emails requesting about the summary and the update. Some of them lost the
summary and wanted me to repost it. Others wanted me to post on different news
groups.
Here is the updated summary consisting of 11 messages I received up to date.
Thanks to all who responded to me with their experiences/recommendations.
I tried to thank all of them personally, too, but unfortunately some mails
bounced back.
This summary will be posted on both comp.sys.ibm.pc and comp.unix.wizards.
So if you missed it on a group, you could still have a chance. :-)
This file is about 800 lines long.
ndeng at euler.berkeley.edu
================================================================================
davidsen at crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
| ---- The "completeness" of the package: (i.e., Does this package include
| all necessary tools which can be found in a mainframe unix system like
| 4.xBSD or VMS/Ultrix, like cc, f77, awk, grep,..., and all utilities,
| even a typesetting program like TeX or troff)
Most of the packages have the FORTRAN and troff as options. Xenix
includes some BSD programs and systems calls which make portability much
better than raw SysV.
|
| ---- The compatibility of the package with mainframe systems: can I
| compile/without recomiple to run mainframe programs?
You should be able to recompile most mainframe packages to run on any
of the 386 UNIX variants. See above for BSDisms.
|
| ---- The handling of X-Windows: does this package include all necessary
| tools to use X-windows with high resolution drivers for 1024x768
| or higher resolution monitors?
X is available for all flavors, it's changing too fast for me to keep
up. Everyone seems to agree that the INteractive is the fastest. The SCO
package is X11R2, due to update by the end of the year. Not very fast,
but seems reliable.
|
| ---- Any specific problems with a PC machine, like effectiveness of resource
| sharing (CPU, Hard disk, communication port/ethernet, printer, etc.)
| and multitasking. Also, how much overhead will the package take in the
| RAM and how much disk space have to be reserved for the package? Does
| this package include a "DOS window" and how compatible is it with
| standard DOS environment? (i.e., can I run DOS programs under this
| window? --- not just for file transfers)
The INteractive filesystem seems a bit faster than Xenix or most SysV
versions, the SCO UNIX (not Xenix) uses the fast filesystem and is a bit
faster than any of the others, particularly after the filesystem "ages"
and gets fragmented a bit.
All offer some form of DOS under UNIX. None is perfect, but I have
been able to run all my business applications under SCO VP/ix. The
version of DosMERGE (ix/386) I had was early and buggy, but it's been
enhanced since then. The SCO C compiler generates DOS code as an option.
The others don't.
|
| ---- Bugs, strong/weak points, and your comments/suggestions/recommendations
After evaluating all of the systems at work I bought Xenix for home
with my own money. It has been *very* solid. System administration is
not 100% SysV (or Berkeley) but seems to work well. The C compiler
generates code for Xenix/386, Xenix/286, Xenix/8086 and SysIII, and
MS-DOS. The SCO UNIX development set includes the ATT compiler as well,
and CodeView for a debugger.
SCO support is fair. After dealing with a number of other vendors I
think it is still the best. If you are doing serious work on the system
plan to spend the $300-400 (they have sales) for support each year.
Worth it if you're commercial, else you get 30 days, then ask the net.
________________________________________________________________
This is a judgement call... I like SCO but it's expensive. If you want
to get something reasonable for personal use, you might look into ESIX
from Everex. I have heard reasonable things about it, but the compiler,
etc, is pretty stock ATT.
---
bill davidsen (davidsen at crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called
'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see
that the world is flat!" - anon
=============================================================================
terry at eecea.eece.ksu.edu (Terry Hull) writes:
In article <8909270503.AA28536 at euler.Berkeley.EDU> you write:
>
>Hi All!
>
>I am considering to purchase a UNIX operating system for my new 386 PC
>machine. Having read all advertisements about different packages (Bell Technology UNIX 386 system V,
>Microport UNIX/386, 386/ix, SCO Xenix 386, etc, etc.), I got rather
>confused on which is the "best" one for a 386-based machine, since all of
>them claimed that their products are the best. Therefore, I decide to
>turn to the netland for help.
>Can someone who is using unix on a 386-pc machine tell me his experience about
>the good/bad points about one of the packages? Specifically, I am most
>interested in the following aspects::
Before I start, I'm biased. I use and like SCO's products.
>
> ---- The "completeness" of the package: (i.e., Does this package include
> all necessary tools which can be found in a mainframe unix system like
> 4.xBSD or VMS/Ultrix, like cc, f77, awk, grep,..., and all utilities,
> even a typesetting program like TeX or troff)
f77 and TeX, and troff for HP Lasers are available, but not included.
Sockets, TCP/IP, complete development system are all available from SCO.
>
> ---- The compatibility of the package with mainframe systems: can I
> compile/without recomiple to run mainframe programs?
I did not know VMS/Ultrix and 4.x BSD ran on mainframes. They are
really minis. These Unix implementations are SysV based and the
systems you mention are Berkeley based, so things will not port
directly. They usually can be made to run though.
>
> ---- The handling of X-Windows: does this package include all necessary
> tools to use X-windows with high resolution drivers for 1024x768
> or higher resolution monitors?
Drawback of SCO. They are shipping X11R2 with NO high res support
beyond VGA.
>
> ---- Any specific problems with a PC machine, like effectiveness of resource
> sharing (CPU, Hard disk, communication port/ethernet, printer, etc.)
> and multitasking.
Not really.
> Also, how much overhead will the package take in the
> RAM and how much disk space have to be reserved for the
> package?
You should start with at least 80 MB of disk space and 4 MB of RAM.
You will quicly need more.
> Does
> this package include a "DOS window" and how compatible is it with
> standard DOS environment? (i.e., can I run DOS programs under this
> window? --- not just for file transfers)
VP/ix is available, but obviously not all DOS programs will work with
it. Most major packages will work, but some will not.
If you have more specific questions, I will try to answer them for
you.
--
Terry Hull
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Kansas State University
Work: terry at eecea.eece.ksu.edu, rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!terry
Play: terry at tah386.manhattan.ks.us, rutgers!ksuvax1!eecea!tah386!terry
=============================================================================
ucsd!pnet01.cts.com!jca at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John C. Archambeau) wirtes:
ndeng at EULER.BERKELEY.EDU writes:
>I am considering to purchase a UNIX operating system for my new 386 PC
>machine. Having read all advertisements about different packages (Bell Technology UNIX 386 system V,
>Microport UNIX/386, 386/ix, SCO Xenix 386, etc, etc.), I got rather
>confused on which is the "best" one for a 386-based machine, since all of
>them claimed that their products are the best. Therefore, I decide to
>turn to the netland for help.
>Can someone who is using unix on a 386-pc machine tell me his experience about
>the good/bad points about one of the packages? Specifically, I am most
>interested in the following aspects::
>
> ---- The "completeness" of the package: (i.e., Does this package include
> all necessary tools which can be found in a mainframe unix system like
> 4.xBSD or VMS/Ultrix, like cc, f77, awk, grep,..., and all utilities,
> even a typesetting program like TeX or troff)
>
> ---- The compatibility of the package with mainframe systems: can I
> compile/without recomiple to run mainframe programs?
>
> ---- The handling of X-Windows: does this package include all necessary
> tools to use X-windows with high resolution drivers for 1024x768
> or higher resolution monitors?
>
> ---- Any specific problems with a PC machine, like effectiveness of resource
> sharing (CPU, Hard disk, communication port/ethernet, printer, etc.)
> and multitasking. Also, how much overhead will the package take in the
> RAM and how much disk space have to be reserved for the package? Does
> this package include a "DOS window" and how compatible is it with
> standard DOS environment? (i.e., can I run DOS programs under this
> window? --- not just for file transfers)
>
> ---- Bugs, strong/weak points, and your comments/suggestions/recommendations
The best implementation of Unix on a 386 box is SunOS 4.0.1 on a Sun 386i, but
this will only run on a Sun 386i. If you have a generic 386 box, I then
recommend SCO Xenix 386. MicroPort has gone bankrupt. I've used AT&T's on
AT&T boxes and my attitude about that is if they can't get it right on their
own machine, they sure as hell aren't going to get it right on another
machine. What you need is the full blown developer's kit, text processing
tools, etc. for SCO Xenix 386. Since both the Sun 386i and SCO Xenix use the
same DOSMerge type program which is VP/ix, it should run nicely. As for
X-Windows. I was brought up on a non-windowing environment, so I can't give
you an opinion on that with SCO Xenix 386, but if windowing is a HIGH PRIORITY
then I would strongly recommend getting a Sun 386i/250 with the SunView GKS
developer's library. I admit that you are paying over $20,000 for the system,
but the Sun's handle windowing the best. I've heard mixed opinions about
X-Windows. I will warn you about a Sun 386i if you do plan on getting on
eventually, because it is so dependant upon yellow pages, it is buggy. I have
already found several bugs in the 386i's implementation of YP. If you have
the money for a Sun 386i, get that, if not, get SCO Xenix 386 (complete
developer's toolkit, kernel, text processing system, and VP/ix) and it will
suit your needs for everything short of X-Windows which I can't give you an
opinion on since I don't use it.
Note that I have yet to see a BSD Unix implementation on a 386 other than
SunOS which is based on BSD 4.2. Everything else out there seems to be System
V based. But unless you are developing System V software, it doesn't matter
since SCO Xenix does support the C-Shell which does make everything look BSD
when it comes to the user interface.
/*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Flames: /dev/null (on my Minix partition)
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* ARPA : crash!pnet01!jca at nosc.mil
* INET : jca at pnet01.cts.com
* UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Note : My opinions are that...mine. My boss doesn't pay me enough to
* speak in the best interests of the company (yet).
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
=============================================================================
point!wek at ddsw1.mcs.com (Bill Kuykendall) writes:
>Can someone who is using unix on a 386-pc machine tell me his experience abo
ut
>the good/bad points about one of the packages? Specifically, I am most
>interested in the following aspects::
>
> ---- The "completeness" of the package: (i.e., Does this package include
> all necessary tools which can be found in a mainframe unix system li
ke
> 4.xBSD or VMS/Ultrix, like cc, f77, awk, grep,..., and all utilities
,
> even a typesetting program like TeX or troff)
I'm running Interactive Systems 2.0.1. It isn't perfect, but I like it. As
far as completeness goes, you can buy as much or as little as you like.
There are a number of bundled packages available. Everything you asked
about is available with the possible exception of F77 (or perhaps I just
havent seen it), but you should be aware that all of the common 386 unixes
are System V 3.2 -- not BSD. The only way to get BSD on a 386 is to buy it
bundled on a Sun 386i.
> ---- The compatibility of the package with mainframe systems: can I
> compile/without recomiple to run mainframe programs?
Programs that you wish to move from another architecture will have to be
recompiled. My experience has been that if an application (source of
course) has been ported to System V.2 or higher for any machine, it will
compile under 386/ix with a minimum of tweaking.
> ---- The handling of X-Windows: does this package include all necessary
> tools to use X-windows with high resolution drivers for 1024x768
> or higher resolution monitors?
I don't have the X11 module. There has been some discussion of it in
comp.unix.i386. There are 1024x768 systems that are supported, but I can't
say which, and I'm certain that all are not.
> ---- Any specific problems with a PC machine, like effectiveness of
>resource
> sharing (CPU, Hard disk, communication port/ethernet, printer, etc.)
> and multitasking. Also, how much overhead will the package take in t
he
> RAM and how much disk space have to be reserved for the package? Doe
s
> this package include a "DOS window" and how compatible is it with
> standard DOS environment? (i.e., can I run DOS programs under this
> window? --- not just for file transfers)
There are problems with the standard AT async ports and ISC's driver is the
pits. The problem with the ports can be lessened by replacing the 16450
uarts with 16550As and running a third party driver. I heartily recommend
an intelligent multiport card if you want to use high speed modems though.
There have been reported problems with TCP/IP on ethernet boards, but others
claim to have it working. The problem seems to be low throughput (on the
order of 50 bytes/sec) and I have not seen a posting with a fix.
DOS windows are accomplished via VP/ix, another module. I have it and it
works very well. It creates a virtual machine, allocates a meg of ram to it
and loads a real copy of 'DOS (3.3 optimized for vpix comes with, but you
can use any flavor you like). Use of the 20k redirector tsr to allow you to
use the unix filesystem under 'DOS is optional. You can have dedicated
honest-to-goodness DOS partitions if you like (needed for some copy
protected software) but this is also optional.
ISC unix needs about 800k of ram in my configuration with a few additional
drivers loaded. For the Applications Development Platform (unix, vpix, C
compiler, source code control system, text processing workbench, tenplus
user interface, et al you'll need about 15 MB of storage for files. With 4
MB of ram you should probably allow another 10MB for swap space, at least 5MB
for /tmp and whatever is appropriate for your other needs. I wouldn't
attempt it in less than 60MB. And while ISC will run with only 2 MB of ram,
I wouldn't want less than 4MB, especially with VP/ix.
Hope this helps.
Bill Kuykendall
...ddsw1!point!wek
==============================================================================
mtxinu!nwnexus.WA.COM!tim at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Tim Anderson) writes:
a quicky here...
Microport is in the Chapter 11 Bankrupt zone, so I would stay away from them.
SCO is owned in a big way by Microsoft, so if you want to line Bill (OS/2)
Gates pockets than feel free to go with SCO.
Interactive has big box UNIX systems and they did the original port. They also
have X for lots of graphics boards (even some 1280X1024 ones). They have some
new 'open desktop (tm of SCO) killer' that has lots of good things rolled
into one. May want to look into that....
==============================================================================
madd at CS.BU.EDU (Jim Frost) writes:
In article <8909281735.AA28181 at euler.Berkeley.EDU> you write:
|Having read all advertisements about different packages (Bell Technology UNIX 386 system V,
|Microport UNIX/386, 386/ix, SCO Xenix 386, etc, etc.), I got rather
|confused on which is the "best" [...]
I've personally used ENIX (or whatever they call it now), Xenix, and
ISC 386/ix. Of them, I like ISC's package the best. Xenix is a
hybrid; many things won't react the way you expect them to. It *does*
run the fastest of all of the UNIX's in pure execution speed, but
looses to ISC in filesystem throughput, so in my experience they
basically seem to perform the same. Given the price difference
between ISC and Xenix, ISC is by far the better deal. The other
UNIX's (with the exception of Bell Technologies which I have no
opinion about) fall below both ISC and Xenix by my criterion.
|Specifically, I am most interested in the following aspects::
|
| ---- The "completeness" of the package: (i.e., Does this package include
| all necessary tools which can be found in a mainframe unix system like
| 4.xBSD or VMS/Ultrix, like cc, f77, awk, grep,..., and all utilities,
| even a typesetting program like TeX or troff)
Both Xenix and ISC give you all the generic tools, and will sell you a
development package with cc/make/etc in it and a documentation package
with nroff/troff. The latter is pretty expensive in both cases.
The 'cc' in the Xenix package seems to be written by Microsoft; it had
all the strangenesses that I associate with Microsoft compilers (ie it
was flaky). The 'cc' in 386/ix is the one AT&T uses in SysV/386 and
is usable, although some things will break the optimizer (eg GNU emacs
fns.c).
| ---- The compatibility of the package with mainframe systems: can I
| compile/without recomiple to run mainframe programs?
If it's a SysV program, you ought to be able to just compile it on
either 386/ix or Xenix to get it to work, with some exceptions that
are noted in the documentation where the library routines/system calls
don't quite match up to spec. If it's a shell script, expect it to
work under 386/ix but not to work under Xenix -- their shells,
particularly csh, are remarkably braindead and many utilities don't
work quite the same as they would under SysV.
| ---- The handling of X-Windows: does this package include all necessary
| tools to use X-windows with high resolution drivers for 1024x768
| or higher resolution monitors?
If you need X, 386/ix is your only choice. They have the best X
server for the 386 which I have ever used, supporting approximately 42
different displays. Get a three-button mouse, though. I've seen Bell
Tech running X, but that was awhile ago and with special hardware so I
don't know how well it works or what their package provides.
| ---- Any specific problems with a PC machine, like effectiveness of resource
| sharing (CPU, Hard disk, communication port/ethernet, printer, etc.)
| and multitasking. Also, how much overhead will the package take in the
| RAM and how much disk space have to be reserved for the package? Does
| this package include a "DOS window" and how compatible is it with
| standard DOS environment? (i.e., can I run DOS programs under this
| window? --- not just for file transfers). Is there any compatibility
| problem with a 386 PC (I mean, a clone using AT bus and Pheonix BIOS)?
This is a big question. As for resource sharing (general
performance), each has their ups and downs. Xenix wins hands down on
minimum required RAM and fixed disk, although I found its treatment of
larger disks to be very naive, not even handling separate root and
/usr partitions well. You'll still want at least an 80Mb disk to do
development and X under either system, although I'm squeezing by with
65mb under 386/ix (barely).
Both systems have (or have the option of having) MS-DOS run as a task
under UNIX. They work reasonably well unless you want heavy I/O
throughput (eg running a communications program). I believe they're
both based on VP/ix so they'll both behave similarly.
| ---- Cost for the package (Basic system and complete package), and cost
| of technical support (Does the company offer good technical support
| or their phone lines are always busy?).
As I said, 386/ix is a lot cheaper than Xenix. In fact, everything is
a lot cheaper than Xenix. You can up your hardware to run 386/ix for
less money than it would take to buy the same Xenix package. All of
them will cost you more than $1500 for a full development system with
X windows at discounted prices. The 386/ix workstation developer
package retails for $1999 (this has everything but nroff/troff) but
may be had for about $1600 if you look around. If you intend to do
VAR work, you should call Interactive since they have a fairly
attractive program for new VARs.
As for technical support, I never called SCO so I have no opinion.
I've had mixed results from ISC -- sometimes the tech people just
don't know, although opinions from them from the net seem to be
incredibly accurate and timely. They were always helpful even if
occasionally stumped (my circumstances were pretty bizarre, though --
I only called them when *I* was stumped).
| ---- Bugs, strong/weak points, and your comments/suggestions/recommendations.
| Also, is the package very easy to install so I only need to buy a "box"
| and install myself, or I'd better to ask the company to install the
| package for me?
Neither Xenix nor 386/ix is particularly difficult to install if you
have UNIX adminstration experience. If you don't, they're still
pretty easy to install if you don't try to customize anything. Xenix
breaks down immediately if you customize, 386/ix is far better but
still not as good as it might be. 386/ix's manuals seemed to be
better on many counts and they follow SysV/386 so you can get non-ISC
manuals and expect them to be pretty accurate.
If you have any other questions or require clarifications, feel free
to write to me at the address below.
jim frost
software tool & die
madd at std.com
============================================================================
ucsd!pnet01.cts.com!jca at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (John C. Archambeau) writes:
It would probably be better if you install it yourself since you will probably
be maintaining the beast it's being run on. Installing *nix based software
is more or less the same. Load it in from floppies or tape. A bit of
advice, get as big of a hard drive as you can afford with 28ms or faster
average seek time.
/*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Flames: /dev/null (on my Minix partition)
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* ARPA : crash!pnet01!jca at nosc.mil
* INET : jca at pnet01.cts.com
* UUCP : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Note : My opinions are that...mine. My boss doesn't pay me enough to
* speak in the best interests of the company (yet).
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
==============================================================================
From: ames!apt.UUCP!brian at cad.Berkeley.EDU (Brian Litzinger) writes:
> I am considering to purchase a UNIX operating system for my new 386 PC
> machine. Having read all advertisements about different packages
> (Bell Technology UNIX 386 system V,
> Microport UNIX/386, 386/ix, SCO Xenix 386, etc, etc.), I got rather
> confused on which is the "best" one for a 386-based machine, since all of
> them claimed that their products are the best. Therefore, I decide to
> turn to the netland for help.
> Can someone who is using unix on a 386-pc machine tell me his experience about
> the good/bad points about one of the packages?
We are a reseller of UNIX based products. We were resellers of Microport,
are resellers of Interactive, and should soon be resellers of ESIX, and
SCO.
We have evaluated Microport, Interactive, and Xenix 2.2. We will soon
be evaluating SCO UNIX, and ESIX.
We like Interactive the best.
I should point out that our evaluation are based on performance, not price.
> Specifically, I am most
> interested in the following aspects::
>
> ---- The "completeness" of the package: (i.e., Does this package include
> all necessary tools which can be found in a mainframe unix system like
> 4.xBSD or VMS/Ultrix, like cc, f77, awk, grep,..., and all utilities,
> even a typesetting program like TeX or troff)
No f77, but I don't think any of them have f77. The typesetting is optional.
Everything else is there.
>
> ---- The compatibility of the package with mainframe systems: can I
> compile/without recomiple to run mainframe programs?
I don't think I understand this question.
> ---- The handling of X-Windows: does this package include all necessary
> tools to use X-windows with high resolution drivers for 1024x768
> or higher resolution monitors?
Is an option. Supports VGA's up to 1024x768 and a bunch of 1280x1024
custom boards such as Microfield and Matrox.
> ---- Any specific problems with a PC machine, like effectiveness of
> resource sharing (CPU, Hard disk, communication port/ethernet,
> printer, etc.) and multitasking.
I'm not sure I understand the question. Everything seems to work fine.
> Also, how much overhead will the package take in the
> RAM and how much disk space have to be reserved for the package?
With all the options you will need a minimum of 4Mb. The Basic system will
run in 2Mb. The minimum disk space is 40Mb, however, you'd realistically
want to have a minimum of 60Mb, and 80Mb would be comfortable.
> Does this package include a "DOS window" and how compatible is it with
> standard DOS environment? (i.e., can I run DOS programs under this
> window? --- not just for file transfers). Is there any compatibility
> problem with a 386 PC (I mean, a clone using AT bus and Pheonix BIOS)?
DOS under UNIX is an option. You can have as many DOS windows as you wish.
You can run just about any application that
isn't totally reckless. For example, the DOS chkdsk command doesn't work.
However, things like Lotus, XtPro, Masm, Microsoft C & AutoCAD seem to
work fine.
>
> ---- Cost for the package (Basic system and complete package), and cost
> of technical support (Does the company offer good technical support
> or their phone lines are always busy?).
PRODUCT 2 Users Multi-user
Basic UNIX V.3.2 349 695
Software Development System 695 695
Text processing workbench 195 345
DOS under UNIX 395 795
TCP/IP & NFS 595 795
X11 Developers Package 795 795
There are discounts for buying things in certain combinations.
I don't think technical support costs anything from Interactive, but I
might be wrong. We get ours for free, but end-user's might have to
pay something. We support our customers directly so they come to us
with problems not Interactive. When we do call Interactive the support
is very good. They don't know if we are an end-user or reseller till
after they answer so I'd say most people don't have trouble getting
through.
> ---- Bugs, strong/weak points, and your comments/suggestions/recommendations.
There are two bugs outstanding. One, the 1024x768 for Tseng based VGA cards
does not work correctly in color mode, and two, their is a small bug in the
NFS they licensed from Lachman Associates, however, the NFS bug has not
been a problem.
> Also, is the package very easy to install so I only need to buy a "box"
> and install myself, or I'd better to ask the company to install the
> package for me?
The packages are easy to install. Just keep sticking the diskettes in. However
it can take a long time. When you buy clone equipment their are always
compatibility risks, so you might find the system fails to install
because this or that doesn't work, or this or that wasn't configured
correctly. Having to re-install several times while the bugs are worked
out can be very time consuming.
> ndeng at euler.berkeley.edu
I should point out that we are not generally in the business of selling
UNIX software. Our main business is selling our 386 PC based workstations
and servers. Since you already have you machine you won't be interested
in our stuff, but I thought you'd appreciate the benefit of our time spent
evaluating UNIX software for ourselves.
If you are in the future interested in purchasing complete workstations
or servers just email me and I'll send you information.
<> Brian Litzinger @ APT Technology Inc., San Jose, CA
<> UUCP: {apple,sun,pyramid}!daver!apt!brian brian at apt.UUCP
<> VOICE: 408 370 9077 FAX: 408 370 9291
===========================================================================
From: talarian!scott at uunet.uu.net (Scott Weitzenkamp) writes:
I have a BellTech 386 25MHz workstation with the BellTech System
V/386 3.2 Unix. BellTech claims to use the same binaries as AT&T. I
bought from them because they were local (Fremont, CA). Since then
they have been bought by Intel, and all the tech support people have
been moved to Oregon (so much for fast turnaround time!!!). I can
understand some upheaval, but now I have a HELL of a time getting any
support. My sales rep never returns my calls.
For completeness, vanilla System V leaves a lot to be desired, when
compared to SunOS or Ultrix. No TCP/IP, no NFS, no YP, no job control
in csh, etc. The MIT X11 source will not compile out of the box. The
X11 I have is also from BellTech (it's AT&T's XWIN product plus a
BellTech driver for my Blit graphics card and monitor). It's not
speedy, and its "old" (based on MIT X11 Release 2, not Release 3).
I will probably be getting an Ethernet card soon, and it looks like
it will cost about $1500 to add Ethernet, TCP/IP, and NFS. I've seen
two TCP/IP/NFS packages available: Lachman and Streamlined. Lachman
seems to have a superior product.
I sure wish I could have bought a DECstation 2100 :-)
Scott Weitzenkamp
Talarian Corporation
scott at talarian.uu.net
uunet!talarian!scott
---
Scott Weitzenkamp UUCP: uunet!talarian!scott
Talarian Corporation ARPA: scott at talarian.uu.net
"Welcome to the late show, starring NULL and void" -- Men At Work
Mail responses, and I'll summarize to the net.
==========================================================================
From: david at tanelorn (David Sullivan)
I have some information for your list:
First some general information. As far as I know, all of the major vendors
sell DWB 2.0 as an unbundled package. Also, I don't know of any problems
in porting SYSV software from mainframes to the micros (at the source level).
I don't think that f77 is standard on any 386 version of unix, since when I
asked for it from Microport, they said it wasn't on the AT&T tape.
Microport filed for chapter 11 protection several months ago. For this alone
I would remove it from consideration (unless you got a good deal). I am
using there version 3.0e right now and am considering a change for the
following reasons:
1) it doesn't come with SCSI support (although there is a PD driver
for the ST01, and rumors of a uport one)
2) no X-windows support
3) TCP/IP, NFS support is expensive (third party only)
4) some problems with serial drivers (all of them have these)
5) only SYSVR3, not 3.2
6) problems with streaming tapes (can't change tapes, etc.)
Other than that I have been fairly happy over the last couple of years, I
have replaced some utilities with PD ones (yacc with bison, cc with gcc,
mail with mush/smail, etc.)
I understand that Bell Tech has been bought by Intel. It appears that at
the present time they are not shipping any new product.
Some other places you might look are: Toshiba's TP/ix (which they said
was their own port), Dell (which is Interactive's), and Everex's ESIX
which I'm sure someone will tell you about.
I would appreciate a summary of the information you get.
Thanks,
David Sullivan
david at tanelorn.uucp
{tektronix|hp-pcd}!orstcs!tanelorn!david
=============================================================================
From: Ksoll%DB0TUZ01.BITNET (Wolfgang Ksoll) writes:
the Computer Center of Tech. Univ. of Berlin (West), Germany, has been
a mainframe-based site (CDC Cyber) with a lot of PC's. Today we are
migrating to a workstation-based, ethernet-connected and server-assisted
enviroment with UNIX-Operating System.
Since late 1988 we have been using Unix on 386-Boxes. On the one hand
we have a 386i Roadrunner with Sun-OS 4.0. This works fine, but I think
this is not what you are looking for. You can buy hard- and software
only from Sun Mic. On PS/2 Model 70 and 80 we have seen for a weekend
that AIX works. But IBM supports only Microchannel-Unix.
Our mainstream goes to 386-AT Boxes, preferring Far-East-motherboards,
running Interactives's 386/ix, actually Version 2.0.2 (Sys V/386 R 3.2).
Hardware platforms:
16 and 20 MHz 80386-DX, 80387-20, 4 or 8 MB 70ns RAM, MFM and SCSI-Hard-
diskcontrollers (SCSI: Adaptec 1542A) (RLL made to much trouble),
80 MB Seagate 4096 HD or 150 or 300 MB SCSI-Drives (Micropolis), 125 MB
Tapestreamer (Archive), 5,25 and 3,5 inch FD, ser. and par. ports,
VGA-Adaptors (Orchid-Designer, Pro-Designer, others), WD8003E-Ethernet-
Adptors, Microsoft-Bus-Mouse.
Pricing for 386/ix ranges from 1,500 to 6,000 Deutschmarks (~750-3,000 $).
We usually buy a license for 1-2 users for about 4,000 DM including the
following:
- Operating System (kernel and some utilities)
- TCP/IP (telnet, ftp, r-stuff)
- NFS (server and client)
- X11 (X-windows 11.3 for Hercules, EGA, VGA, and some 800*600 + 1024*768)
- Software Development System (as, cc, ld, make, sccs, but no f77 and ps)
- Text Processing Workbench (nroff, troff, but not Tex)
- VP/ix (MS-DOS 3.3)
Today we have seven boxes running 386/ix (the Univ. of Bremen has some 80).
Serious problems:
- last week I tested a Siemens PC3-D, which failed to boot with a TCP/IP-
kernel (but Bremen runs PC3-T with TCP/IP)
- a NIXDORF PC had problems with its motherboard when the Upgrade from version
1.0.6 to 2.0.1 came. We had to change the motherboard.
- Adaptec 1542a SCSI-controller has DMA-problems (depends on combination
controller-motherboard, some work, some don't).
Operating System:
- It is very near to SysV/386 from AT&T. It is binary-compatible to the
Xenix-circus. We tested it with 1985 Informix-version.
I think it is binary-compatible to the other SysV/386 implementations
(SCO, Eurix, etc.). Not tested.
- One of us had been taught system administrating for Cray's Unicos. We could
use the reference manuals for 386/ix.
- It is not compatible to Sun-OS and AIX. It is difficult to port programs
on system programming level from or to a BSD-environment.
- We had no problems with our AMI-BIOS in version 2.0.2
TCP/IP:
- We mostly use WD8003 ethernet-adaptor (3Com and Interlan also tested).
Performance is good on a single user workstation.
- Telnet, FTP and SMTP work fine. Minor problems: /bin/mail from 2.0.2
does not work, we use it from 2.0.1. The anonymous ftp works not as
described in BSD-Manual (which is shipped with 386/ix).
With ftp we get transfer speeds up to 100-120 kBytes/s (WD8003E).
- We would appreciate if Interactive supports some intelligent ethernet-
adaptors to get some load away from server-CPU's. But they won't do
in future.
NFS:
- We are looking forward to plan PC-environments with PC-NFS and 386/ix-
servers instead of Novell, Banyan, PC-Network, 3-Com etc.
- Yellow pages have just arrived, but we will not use them.
- We do a lot of workstation testing. Usually I export whole disk via
NFS and import it on a 386/ix machine, where I can screen the disk
with DOS-utilities (Xtree). That's much better than a cd-ls-cat-orgy.
X11:
- The X-server supports 26 display cards including some 1024*768, but
we use 800*600 resolution only.
- Some utilities are missing (xpr), but I had no problem to talk with
HP-UX, DEC-Windows, Cray-Unicos, SUN-OS, Sony-NEWS, AIX.
- Xlib seems to do what it should.
- I have used my machine as a NFS-Server to bring the MIT-stuff to a Sun 3/50.
Software Development System:
- cc, as, lint, sdb, make etc. do what they should.
- BTW: awk, grep, vi and so on also.
Text processing workbench:
- We don't use nroff, troff and so on.
But you need it for viewing manual-pages from other systems.
The man-macros work.
- BTW: For most products there is no online documentation available.
There are some help, glossary and usage utilities (AT&T's choice), but
noone supports them.
VP/ix:
- AutoCad 10.0, SPSS-PC 3.0, MS-Fortran 4.01, MASM, Turbo-C 2.0, Tubo-Pascal,
NCSA-Telnet (on a second ethernet board), Informix are some products of
those we saw running well on VP/ix. If no graphics are involved you can
run it in the background, in the foreground, under X-windows vt100-emulation
or where ever you want. Take 2 MB RAM for every session and you can calculate
your limits.
- Interrupt-driven communication via serial port fails at 9600 baud, so you
have problems to run Terminal-Emulations or plotters at that speed.
We reduced to 2400 baud for out mainframe-connection.
- Wordperfect 5.0 I could not get to live.
Fortran:
- Don't flame me, we need it.
- extra costs, not from Interactive but LPI available. They have a whole
family of languages for 386/ix. The Fortran-compiler has some minor
bugs but also a lot of features (LOGICAL*1 with arithmetic operations,
VAX/VMS-extensions and so on).
- They do not support sdb for source-code debugging. You have to purchase
their own source code debugger. We did not.
- We paid 1,800 DM for a single-CPU-license. Too much.
- It's ANSI-Fortran77.
Support:
- We have two German resellers, but this second hand information is not
in time. They don't send us bug reports or product announcements.
I would appreciate to reach Interactive by email, but I failed up to
now.
General:
Interactive's 386/ix seems to be a useful implementation of UNIX. They
give you most of the things you would expect. There are a lot of minor bugs
but what you get comes in time and not in annoucements.
We have managed it to get some stable UNIX-Platforms for everyday work
with saving all the stuff from MS-DOS-world and getting Xenix-platforms.
We would look also to SCO but they don't have released NFS yet. EURIX to
need some time to get complete and stable.
I think that you got some interesting answers from the net. Please forward
or summarize!
Cheers,
Wolfgang Ksoll Computer Center, Techn. Univ. of Berlin (West), Germany
Bitnet: Ksoll at db0tuz01.bitnet
============================================================================
That's the end of the summary.
More information about the Comp.unix.wizards
mailing list