textfiles/messages/ALANWESTON/1994/OCEAN05_25.txt

N


Public Message (Rec)
Message # 19 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Eric Crichlow
From    : Colin Mckay
Subject : Re: kill ();
Date    : 94/05/18  18:38:00

EC> Is the syntax for OSK kill() under C the same as it is for OS9?

#include <signal.h>

int kill(pid, sigcode)
int pid;
short sigcode;

kill() is used to send a signal to a process.  Both the sending and
receiving process must have the same user number unless the sending
process' user number is that of the super user (0).

The value in sigcode is sent as a signal to the process whose ID number
is pid.  Any value can be given in sigcode.  The conventional code
numbers are defined in the <signal.h> header file.

kill() returns -1 if an error occurs and the appropriate error code is
placed in the global variable errno.

The super user can send a signal to all processes running on the system
if pid is zero.


--- Maximus-CBCS v1.02
 * Origin: Micro80 Computer Club of Ottawa BBS (1:163/306)


Public Message 
Message # 22 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : All
From    : Warren Hrach
Subject : UUCP on MM/1
Date    : 94/05/20 11:03:30

    I have been successful getting most of mine to work so far but ran
into a snag with the readnews option to 'reply' and postnews option 'a'
addnews article.
    I found my system lacking the chown module that is called during the 
news article posting to make  the file owner the superuser. The
UUCPBB20.LZH included a chown.c source but it is for the CoCo OS9.
    If anyone can tell me where I can get an OSK version or upload to my 
Fido BBS I thank you in advance.
    If I try to compile the source I have it errors out with several
errors due to the diferances between OS9 and OS9-68K.
    My E-Mail part is working fine and I am getting the comp.os.os9 news 
articles no problem, just cant reply or followup a news article.
(warren@ocnbeach.jd.com)
 
--- RiBBS v2.10        
 * Origin: Ocean Beach BBS 619-224-4878 MM1 TECH moderator (1:202/343)


Public Message (Rec)
Message # 62 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Eric Crichlow
From    : Calvin Dodge
Subject : SIGNAL HANDLING
Date    : 94/05/19  06:24:00

Quoting the OS-9 tech manual (F$Send): "If you attempt to send a signal to a
process that has an unprocessed, previous signal pending, the signal is placed
in a FIFO queue of signals for the individual process.  If the process is in
the signal intercept routine when it receives a signal, the new signal is
processed when F$RTE executes."
Note that this is for V 2.4 (and I assume later versions as well).
It is not true of V 1.2 (I also have an '86 68020 system).  I don't know when
the change was made.

--- FLAME v1.0
 * Origin: The King's Market BBS (1:104/115)


Public Message (Rec)
Message # 63 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Eric Crichlow
From    : Calvin Dodge
Subject : KILL ();
Date    : 94/05/19  06:29:00

The syntax is "kill(pid,signal)" where pid is process ID and signal is the
signal value.  It returns -1 on error and puts the error in errno.
Error codes are listed in the <signal.h> file.

--- FLAME v1.0
 * Origin: The King's Market BBS (1:104/115)


Public Message 
Message # 75 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Warren Hrach
From    : Stephen Seneker
Subject : Re: MM/1 and High Speed modems
Date    : 94/05/22 20:48:22

Warren, according to a file sent to me, long agon, all ports except /t1
support flow control.  I'm using FCom for communcations.  However, it
does not have any built in file transfer protocals.  Therefore I use
external protocals solely so as not to have to reinvent the wheel.
I mainly use Zmodem, obtained from your bbs (z68).  The problem is in
rz.  Using FCom and a serial analyzer flow control looks like it works
fine, actually it does.  I must assume that I need to get the source for 
it and modify the I/O routine as I beleive it is polled and not
interrupt driven.
 
  Will try to get a letter off to you soon on the hardware... %-)
Later...
 
--- RiBBS v2.10        
 * Origin: Ocean Beach BBS 619-224-4878 MM1 TECH moderator (1:202/343)


Public Message 
Message # 76 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Colin Mckay
From    : Stephen Seneker
Subject : Re: MM/1 and High Speed modems
Date    : 94/05/22 20:55:02

  Thanks for the hint... I will have to play with it and see what works
best!
 
--- RiBBS v2.10        
 * Origin: Ocean Beach BBS 619-224-4878 MM1 TECH moderator (1:202/343)


Public Message 
Message # 86 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Frank Wojtczak
From    : Wesley Young
Subject : Re: GENE'S ASHES!
Date    : 94/05/22  10:03:00

 The Hitchhiker's Guide reads (under the topic "Frank Wojtczak"):
 
 FW> Don't worry TMH, they DID bring back his ashes. The day it was
 FW> announced, CNN had a brief report about it, and while they wouldn`t
 FW> say WHO carried his ashes on the trip, it was stated that the ashes
 FW> WERE BROUGHT back to earth after the mission was finished.  I hope that
 FW> this eases your worries about Gene and/or Majels intents.

 FW> P.S. By the way, what's your real name?

 Thank you for telling me that his ashes came back to Earth - where they
 belong! I REALLY feel better now knowing this! :)
 (I sign-off with my real name at the end of every post! Why'd you ask?)
 (W.D. Young)

--- FastEcho 1.40
 * Origin: Arrakis BBS: "I want my emm emm wun!" (405)752-8955 (1:147/61)


Public Message 
Message # 87 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : Peter Popovich
From    : Wesley Young
Subject : Re: GENE'S ASHES!
Date    : 94/05/22  10:03:00

 The Hitchhiker's Guide reads (under the topic "Peter Popovich"):

 PP> I've heard five different reports over the net. Two specifically said
 PP> the ashes were brought back down, two more implied it. The report you
 PP> replied to was the only one to say that the ashes were left in space.
 PP> I think you can relax... ;-) 
 PP> Peter Popovich

 Thanks, Peter! I feel a lot better now! :)
 (W.D. Young)

--- FastEcho 1.40
 * Origin: Arrakis BBS: "I want my emm emm wun!" (405)752-8955 (1:147/61)


Public Message 
Message # 89 *MM1 TECH Echo*
To      : All Uucp Users
From    : Warren Hrach
Subject : UUCP busted
Date    : 94/05/23 16:24:47


   I am having trouble with my UUCP running on my MM/1 as
follows;

   If I attempt to send out mail to a regular address like ;
'bob@kc2wz.bubble.org' with cc to postmaster the postmaster
gets the msg OK but when I call 'uucico jadpc' I get the 
the following error report in my log even with -x5.
The error report as follows ; 

uucp jadpc (May etc) Handshake succussful (protocol 'g')
uucp jadpc (May 1 sec later) DEBUG--gproto: protocol started; segsize
 = 1, winsize = 7
msendfile: Send file to remote as MASTER
 jadpc (May etc 2 sec later) ERROR---msendfile: can't open '' to
send...error 215

Then it repeats the same line over again another second later.
Evidentally the result of trying to send the two 'D.' files.

    It deletes the first file after the session
but the other two 'D.jadpc0 and D.ocnbeach0' are left.
these three files are placed in my /dd/usr/spool/uucp/jadpc dir with
file attributes for the superuser 0.0
The same as it did when working before.
Another strange thing is before when I posted as user 0.1 the first file

would have the 0.0 owner and the other two 0.1. Now all three are 0.0.
    I have gone over all the files in sys/uucp and all the usr dirs and
can not find anything amiss.  The contents of the first file is ;

S D.ocnbeach0
 D.ocnbeach0
root -D.ocnbeach0
0666 root
S D.jadpc0
 X.jadpc0
root -D.jadpc0
0666 root

-Now those other filenames correspond to the ones left in the dir
/dd/usr/spool/uucp/jadpc and the owner is 0.0 and I have listed out the
files and they all look fine and same as before.
   Could it possibly be a problem with my host ? His system has been
flawless up to now and I do get E-Mail and the news articles in
comp.os.os9 consistantly.
    I am up the proverbial tree now since I can't send anything except
from my Fido system.

    I have sent an E-Mail from here advising Bob B. of this problem but
have not heard back yet.

-Warren
(warren_hrach@f343.n202.z1.fidonet.org)
(warren@ocnbeach.jd.com) [can receive only]

 
--- RiBBS v2.10        
 * Origin: Ocean Beach BBS 619-224-4878 MM1 TECH moderator (1:202/343)