🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <371@cti.cti.UUCP> eric@cti.UUCP (Eric Black) writes:
>Several weeks ago I posted an article asking for recommendations,
>experiences, horror stories, miraculous tales, and otherwise
>trying to get information about Eunice and The Wollongong
>Group.  Unfortunately, at about the same time my uucp connectivity
>was changing.  I received no replies, and have seen zero traffic
>in this newsgroup as well.  Hopefully the shifting sands of
>uucp connections caused the numerous replies to go into the
>bit bucket (does it have a little shovel?).
>
>Anyway, once again I would like to ask for your impressions
>of Eunice (especially Release 4.2, which of course is derived
>from 4.1bsd), if you ran into any problems other than subtle
>ones caused by depending on particular underlying assumptions
>which aren't handled well (such as hard links & reference counts).
>I am also MORE than merely interested in your experiences with
>The Wollongong Group itself, their technical support and
>responsiveness (or lack of it).

    4.2 works fairly well, compared to what I saw in 4.1. If you
    can, read the manual that they send along with it, several times.
    VMS is bizarre, Unix is simple so that makes Eunice Simply bizarre.
    It's a wierd feeling in that environment. I don't know about links
    yet, but if you have any other questions, just ask away and I'll see
    what I can do.

    But again as long as you have it set up right, (that might be the
    entire problem, you may never get it right!!) it works. I support
    two sites, and we are working on getting a third.

>
>At this point, I don't even know if anybody out there even
>reads this newsgroup any more.  I sure would like to get information
>from a source OTHER than the list of hand-picked customer
>references from TWG.
>

    I read it, and I certainly am not hand picked .


    I posted here, just in case we can get more discussions going ....

mark
-- 
    {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards
    UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706

In article <756@hropus.UUCP> jin@hropus.UUCP (Jerry Natowitz) writes:
>We are running VMS V3.7 with Release 3.2 of Eunice.  Our site management
>want to upgrade to VMS V4.3 and whatever the latest version of
>Eunice is.  My questions are:
>
>1) Will the old Eunice run under VMS V4.3?

No, it won't.

>2) What problems will we encounter with the new Eunice?

You want Eunice version 4.2 (nothing to do with 4.2bsd; it still
looks like 4.1bsd).  It works pretty well, considering it's Eunice
(the 4.1 Eunice release was so buggy that it was unusable).  The
filename hashing scheme has changed.  

Both your Eunice and VMS users may encounter problems because
when a program with SYSPRV privilege creates a file, it's owned
by the owner of the directory the file is created in.  This causes
some problems for Eunice mail (a mailbox will suddenly become
owned by the SYSTEM account, if a user deletes some, but not
all, of his/her mail) and other privileged utilities.

UUCP works, sort of.  I find that uuxqt hangs up a lot and I have
to run it by hand occasionally to get mail and news delivered.
uucico itself has no problems talking to "epimass", a Masscomp 5600
running (roughly) 4.2bsd UUCP.

Oh yes, news.  I did the Eunice 2.11 news implementation, which is
part of the standard distribution.  Check out Appendix C of the
news installation guide, now being distributed on mod.sources.
A beta version is up and running on site "epicen" (I still have to
bring up the "official" version and see if it still runs).  It
will not run on the old (version 3.x VMS) Eunice.  There may still
be some problems with it; if anyone installs it on a Eunice system
and has problems I'd like to hear about it.



>
>I act as a consultant to the site management, I do not support the software
>nor do I even use Eunice (I prefer VMS).
>-- 
>     Jerry Natowitz (HASA - A division)
>     Bell Labs
>     HR 2A-214
>     201-615-5178 (no CORNET yet)
>     ihnp4!houxm!hropus!jin (official)
>     ihnp4!opus!jin         (better)


-- 
- Joe Buck 	{hplabs,ihnp4}!oliveb!epimass!jbuck
  Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, California

In article <2092@homxb.UUCP> ceh@homxb.UUCP (C.HAILEY) writes:
>	One footnote: Eunice 4.2 on a VAX outperforms Berkley 4.2!

You must be joking.  Try "ls -l" on a large directory, and take a long
coffee break on Eunice (of course, this isn't nearly as bad as it was
under Eunice 3.x with lots of hashnamed files in the directory).  Or try
doing a task with lots of forks and execs.  It takes VMS tens or even
hundreds of times as long as Unix to read a directory or create a new
process.  

If you're talking about number-crunching though, the time should be
exactly the same as for 4.1bsd, since the same C compiler (essentially) is
used and you're running the same machine instructions.  

>	Yes!  Eunice is an odd world, I wish there was more info in
>	this group.

Since news 2.11 will run on Eunice, maybe that will increase this group's
traffic a bit (Chip Rosenthal at Intel got 2.10.2 news to run on Eunice v3.2,
but his code was never widely distributed).  


-- 
- Joe Buck 	{hplabs,ihnp4}!oliveb!epimass!jbuck
  Entropic Processing, Inc., Cupertino, California