headers
J.Scott | 1 Oct 2002 05:10

Re: Strangeness on 3/80 Serial.

Yep, that was it.  You spend too many hours trying to hack something 
together and forget stupid things like turning off the modem echo.  8-)

Thanks,

-S-

On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 05:56  PM, Bruce Anderson wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 10:51 AM, J.Scott Kasten <mailto:skasten <at> qx.net>
> wrote:
>> pppd
>> refuses to connect due to a "serial loopback" condition.
>
>
>
> If you have a modem connected to this port try adding E0 to
> the end of your modems AT string and retry.
>
>
>
>
>
> " Stamp out root logins .  .  .  . su "   --Bruce Anderson
>  This message was created and sent using Cyberdog 2.0, MacOS 8.6,
>  awk, sendmail, sh and NetBSD a free Multi-Platform OS.
>  NetBSD runs on  44 different system architectures featuring 16
>  distinct families of CPUs.   http://www.netbsd.org/
>
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Rick Kelly | 1 Oct 2002 06:57

Sun 3/80 and 4 meg chips


Is anyone here using 4 meg chips in a 3/80? I have one with 16 1meg simms
running SunOS 4.1.1. I'd like to convert it to NetBSD with more memory if
I can. Also, I have one memory chip that gets parity errors every now and
then.

--

-- 
Rick Kelly  rmk <at> rmkhome.com  www.rmkhome.com
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Chuck Silvers | 1 Oct 2002 09:49
Favicon

Re: Sun 3/80 and 4 meg chips

my sun3/80 runs fine with 16 4MB simms (which the old sun hardware faq
claims you can't do, hah).

-Chuck

On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 10:57:35PM -0600, Rick Kelly wrote:
> 
> Is anyone here using 4 meg chips in a 3/80? I have one with 16 1meg simms
> running SunOS 4.1.1. I'd like to convert it to NetBSD with more memory if
> I can. Also, I have one memory chip that gets parity errors every now and
> then.
> 
> -- 
> Rick Kelly  rmk <at> rmkhome.com  www.rmkhome.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
thobe | 1 Oct 2002 12:10
Favicon

Re: Sun 3/80 and 4 meg chips

>Is anyone here using 4 meg chips in a 3/80? I have one with 16 1meg simms
>running SunOS 4.1.1. I'd like to convert it to NetBSD with more memory if
>I can. Also, I have one memory chip that gets parity errors every now and
>then.

The latest models will take 16 4-meg SIMMs.  There is a hay wire on top
of the board connecting up one of the memory lines on these models.
Earlier models may take 4-meg SIMMs but are limited to some amount such
as 38 megs (guess from memory).  The PROM revision is an issue, too,
with only the last couple of revisions supporting the 4-meg SIMMs.

If you are lucky, you can just plug in the SIMMs.  Otherwise, you'll
have to do some preparatory hardware modifications.  There is a
description on Heiko Krupp's Sun 3 web site of how to upgrade your
board.  There is also an image of the newest BOOT PROM.

Good luck.

--

-- 
Rick Kelly  rmk <at> rmkhome.com  www.rmkhome.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
| 4 Oct 2002 16:41
Favicon

Sun3 port packet filter problems.

OK guys, I'm stuck here...

I'm trying to get ipf/ipnat, etc... to work, but so far no luck.

I built a kernel with options GATEWAY, PFIL_HOOKS, and pseudo-devices ipfilter, bpfilter.

I have verified that I am running the kernel that I built, and the build directory shows the object files from
the ip_filter/nat/etc...  So that stuff appears to have been built.

The were no control device nodes in /dev, and MAKEDEV has no ipl entry.  So I looked at the i386 binary distro to
get the MAJOR, MINORs for everything.  I created devices ipauth, ipl, ipnat, ipstate with MAJOR=44, and
MINORs = 0 - 3.

Tried ipf util and ipnat util, "open not supported on device" "ioctl on bad file descriptor", and various
other complaints.

OK, tried looking in the code to see if maybe Sun3 arch issues a different major.  I found a #define CDEV_MAJOR
79 in ip_fil.h, but it does not appear to be used.  I tried recreating the devices with MAJOR=79 just in case,
but same problem.

I cannot find the MAJOR registration in the code.  What is the proper MAJOR number for Sun3, is it still 44 like
i386?  If so, then why do I get the invalid node complaints from the utilities?

Obviously, I'm missing something here....Any help or suggestions appreciated.

Thanks,

-S-
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
| 4 Oct 2002 20:44
Favicon

SOLVED - Packet filtering problem.

I finally found the arch/sun3/sun3/conf.c file with the devnode entries and there is no initialization
entry for the ipf framework.

I'll fix that and anything else I find wrong this weekend and get a patch together.

Thanks,

-S-
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jason R Thorpe | 4 Oct 2002 23:20

Free stuff in San Francisco

2 Sun 3/60s, condition unknown.  One is probably not working, but
is good for parts.  The other one may in fact work.  One of them
has a cg4 framebuffer in the P4 slot.

I also have a couple of old Sun mono displays.  I do not know if these
are working or not, but I would guess they're good for parts only.

Anyway, they are free for the taking, but you have to come pick them up.
On October 18th, I'll be calling the junk hauling service to get rid of
them, so that's your deadline :-)

Contact me privately if interested.

--

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej <at> wasabisystems.com>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
J.Scott | 20 Oct 2002 00:56

[PATCH]-Fixes for ipfilter.

Hi guys,

I promised some patches to get ipfilter working on sun3 arch.  
Attatched is a tarball with two minor patches and a readme.  It's only 
1K so I hope no-one screams too loud that I sent a patch to the list.

Hoping someone can incorporate this into the sun3 tree.  All that was 
needed was to make dev nodes for it and allocate a major number and put 
the hook in the arch conf.c and it seems to work ok.  I'm natting, 
routing, etc...

-Scott-
Attachment (ipfilter_patches.tgz): application/x-gzip, 1058 bytes
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Greg A. Woods | 20 Oct 2002 01:53
X-Face
Favicon

Re: [PATCH]-Fixes for ipfilter.

[ On Saturday, October 19, 2002 at 18:56:40 (-0400), J.Scott Kasten wrote: ]
> Subject: [PATCH]-Fixes for ipfilter.
>
> It's only 
> 1K so I hope no-one screams too loud that I sent a patch to the list.

I'm glad you sent it to the list, BUT:

Just FYI because of the MIME base-64 encoding it blew up to 2,242 bytes
with mail headers and your short note.  It's rarely, if ever, necessary
to post these kinds of things as MIME-attached compressed tar files.

As a "shar" file it would only have been 2,377 bytes and would then have
been readable from even the most trivial text-based mail reader, so the
whole message would only have been about 3,100 bytes or so, and not much
more even if you'd still used MIME to attach the text shar file, or if
you'd used MIME to individually attach the three text files as plain
text.

I think the extra 600-1000 bytes would have been well worth it so that
your patch would have been directly readable and usable from any mail
reader.

--

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;            <g.a.woods <at> ieee.org>;           <woods <at> robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods <at> planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods <at> weird.com>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane