Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6? - SCO

This is a discussion on Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6? - SCO ; I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

  1. Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).

    When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K

    Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?

    I'm lost.

    Thanks!

    jf

  2. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    > I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    > off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    > ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    > have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    >
    > When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K
    >
    > Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    > can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?
    >
    > I'm lost.
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > jf


    Does the antique drive have *ANY* networking on its OS? Can you transfer the
    data over the network, via rcp or tar over an rlogin or somehting?

  3. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    On Fri, Feb 29, 2008, jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    >I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    >off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    >ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    >have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).


    What is SCO 3.0??? Perhaps you mean Xenix something or other?

    If you want to see Xenix drives on OSR 5.0.x, you need to first
    run ``mkdev xenix'' to enable Xenix file systems.

    >When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K
    >
    >Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    >can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?
    >


    After running ``mkdev xenix'' with a full rebuild of all devices,
    you then have to run ``mkdev hd'' twice, the first time to enable
    the additional drive, the second time to run divvy to create
    device names for the partitions in the Xenix slice (SCO is more
    like FreeBSD in the way it handles disk partitioning than like
    Linux).

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676

    Windows is a computer virus with a user interface!!

  4. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    wrote:

    > I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    > off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    > ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    > have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    >
    > When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K
    >
    > Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    > can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?
    >
    > I'm lost.


    Boot the old machine, run:

    # dparam /dev/rhd00 `dparam /dev/rhd00`

    Shut down, insert drive into OSR506 box, see if it plays any better.

    The command "stamps" the drive's partition table with the geometry being
    used by the kernel on the old system. Without such a stamp, the kernel
    figures out a geometry every time it boots. Many factors go into the
    calculation, and the results can come out different on a different
    machine. If you stamp the results onto the partition table, the other
    machine will no longer have to guess & calculate, it'll just use the
    right geometry.

    >Bela<


  5. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    > I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    > off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    > ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    > have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    >
    > When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K


    Left unsaid is what type drive do you have in the 5.0.6 box?

    If it is SCSI, then you've a problem as SCO booted from a SCSI drive
    will not mount an IDE drive. You can boot from IDE and mount a
    SCSI drive as long as the SCSI controller is configured into the
    kernel (mkdev hd the first time).

    If this is a SCSI vs IDE problem, then you should be able to set
    the new box to boot from IDE and boot the old drive in the new
    system. Then you can run mkdev hd and configure the 5.0.6 drive
    into the 3.0 kernel, reboot and run divvy /dev/hd10 and
    name the division for the 5.0.6 as boot, nswap, nroot, and
    nu (if you have a u file system) in that order.

    Until you name the file systems, you can't mount them. Divvy writes
    the name of the file system in /dev on the root file system of the
    booted disk where you already have root, rroot, u, and ru.

    You can't use the names already used for the 3.0 disk
    (root, u, etc.). Note that Open server 3.0 does not have a boot
    file system. That disk will start with root and then swap and then
    u (if used). mount the 5.0.6 drive and then copy your data.

    Caution: Don't run mkdev hd a second time as that is only needed to
    run the commands to initialize the hard disk partition and devision
    tables. See Bela's post on stamping the drive geometry.

    It would be safer to run fdisk -r /dev/rhd10 to view the partition
    table. If fdisk shows you reasonable information, then carefully
    run divvy /dev/hd10 to see if you can see the division table.
    The 3.0 version may choke on the 5.0.6 division table. Even so, it
    should be safe to use it to name a target division as naming does
    not write to the division table and only creates the nodes in /dev.

    >
    > Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    > can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?
    >
    > I'm lost.
    >
    > Thanks!
    >
    > jf
    >
    >


    --
    Steve Fabac
    S.M. Fabac & Associates
    816/765-1670

  6. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    Steve M. Fabac, Jr. wrote:
    > jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    >> I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    >> off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    >> ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    >> have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    >>
    >> When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K

    >
    > Left unsaid is what type drive do you have in the 5.0.6 box?
    >
    > If it is SCSI, then you've a problem as SCO booted from a SCSI drive
    > will not mount an IDE drive. You can boot from IDE and mount a
    > SCSI drive as long as the SCSI controller is configured into the
    > kernel (mkdev hd the first time).
    >
    > If this is a SCSI vs IDE problem, then you should be able to set
    > the new box to boot from IDE and boot the old drive in the new
    > system. Then you can run mkdev hd and configure the 5.0.6 drive
    > into the 3.0 kernel, reboot and run divvy /dev/hd10 and
    > name the division for the 5.0.6 as boot, nswap, nroot, and
    > nu (if you have a u file system) in that order.
    >
    > Until you name the file systems, you can't mount them. Divvy writes
    > the name of the file system in /dev on the root file system of the
    > booted disk where you already have root, rroot, u, and ru.
    >
    > You can't use the names already used for the 3.0 disk
    > (root, u, etc.). Note that Open server 3.0 does not have a boot
    > file system. That disk will start with root and then swap and then
    > u (if used). mount the 5.0.6 drive and then copy your data.
    >
    > Caution: Don't run mkdev hd a second time as that is only needed to
    > run the commands to initialize the hard disk partition and devision
    > tables. See Bela's post on stamping the drive geometry.
    >
    > It would be safer to run fdisk -r /dev/rhd10 to view the partition
    > table. If fdisk shows you reasonable information, then carefully
    > run divvy /dev/hd10 to see if you can see the division table.
    > The 3.0 version may choke on the 5.0.6 division table. Even so, it
    > should be safe to use it to name a target division as naming does
    > not write to the division table and only creates the nodes in /dev.


    Hmmm. You know......

    Have you played with virtualization at all? Do you have a Linux box floating
    around? While the file systems used in the SCO systems I've dealt with aren't
    really readable by anyone else, it's pretty straightforward to virtualize a
    licensed SCO installation, and with that running you could blow a disk image
    from your old drive into a mountable disk image for your virtualization.

    If you want to avoid possibly corrupting your antique drive, I'd consider
    pulling this stunt with a modern RHEL or similar system. I'm doing just this
    sort of stunt right now, to move good quality server iron into a usable OS and
    keeping freshly installed copies of the old OS around for access to old
    software and data formats.

    Nico Kadel-Garcia

  7. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    On Feb 29, 3:52*pm, jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. *I need the data
    > off the IDE drive. *I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    > ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    > have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    >
    > When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K
    >
    > Any ideas on how to get this to work? *Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    > can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?


    http://aplawrence.com/SCOFAQ/FAQ_sco...overdrive.html

  8. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?


    Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
    news:7d432477-cef7-42d3-9b02-101e1f2c176b@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
    >I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    > off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    > ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    > have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    >
    > When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K
    >
    > Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    > can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?
    >


    I don't know haw was it on SCO 3.0, but on 3.2v4.2 and 5.0.5 system don't
    mount partitions - only divisions. And I'm not shure, it is posiible to use
    2 disks witch the same names of divisions.?

    Jerry



  9. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    "jerry" wrote:

    > Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci
    > news:7d432477-cef7-42d3-9b02-101e1f2c176b@h25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
    > >I have an old machine with SCO 3.0 and no networking. I need the data
    > > off the IDE drive. I put this drive in a 5.0.6 box that I have and
    > > ran mkdev hd, but it would never show the partitions on the drive (I
    > > have since put the drive back in the old box and it boots fine.).
    > >
    > > When the old server boots, it does show /usr mounting as S51K
    > >
    > > Any ideas on how to get this to work? Do I need to mkdev hd first or
    > > can I just access the filesystem directly somehow?

    >
    > I don't know haw was it on SCO 3.0, but on 3.2v4.2 and 5.0.5 system don't
    > mount partitions - only divisions. And I'm not shure, it is posiible to use
    > 2 disks witch the same names of divisions.?


    Division names are not stored in the division table. Names are
    associated with divisions by the existence of device nodes in /dev with
    the right major/minor numbers. So if you add an old root drive to an
    existing system (no longer the root drive), all the minor numbers will
    have changed and its divisions appear "nameless".

    Recent versions of `divvy` will show you the embedded filesystem names
    (as written by `fsname` and/or `labelit`), and sufficiently new systems
    will even have had those stamps put in automatically. Definitely not
    3.2v4.2, ODT 3.0 (which was 3.2v4.2-based), nor even OSR505. A drive
    from one of those OSes will just appear to have no names, you must
    assign new ones in `divvy`.

    >Bela<


  10. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    Thanks for all the replies....trying to answer everyones questions....

    "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    something else?

    "Run # dparam /dev/...." - When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    not found" I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    found nothing.

    "SCSI or IDE" - Both drives are IDE. The old drive AND the new 5.0.6
    drive. I put the old drive on the secondary IDE controller as the
    Master drive.


    Thanks for all the ideas! so far, no joy. I have limited memory of
    SCO setups. I "teethed" on SCO back in the early 90's (around the
    time this box was built), but I can't remember crap about it! Thanks
    again!

    jf


  11. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:

    > "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    > but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    > something else?


    Oooh, a mystery...

    That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.

    Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    vendor or OS name? Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.

    Does the command `uname -X` work? (probably "illegal option")

    Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? Use cut & paste, not write
    & type.

    Does the directory /etc/perms exist? If so, what filenames are in it?

    Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? If so, what filenames are in
    it; look inside the files, anything relevant? Don't post whole files
    unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    boring legalese).

    > "Run # dparam /dev/...." - When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    > not found" I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    > found nothing.


    That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. Well, that
    is, _if_ you did it as root. It won't be found for a user, it's a
    root-only command.

    ....

    >From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could

    be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. Unlikely to be
    anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.

    >Bela<


  12. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    On Tue, Mar 04, 2008, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    >jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    >
    >> "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    >> but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    >> something else?

    >
    >Oooh, a mystery...
    >
    >That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.
    >
    >Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    >vendor or OS name? Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.
    >

    ....
    >>From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could

    >be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    >3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    >Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. Unlikely to be
    >anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.


    Many of the early flavors of Unix had networking by default. These systems
    probably support some of the old 3COM, SMC, and/or Western Digital ISA NICS
    (e.g. 3c501 (a truly horrible card), 3c503, SMC 8013, etc.).

    Given that I rarely throw anything away, it's entirely possible that I have
    some of these in my store room.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676

    Our Foreign dealings are an Open Book, generally a Check Book.
    Will Rogers

  13. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    On Mar 4, 9:31*pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    > jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    > > but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' * *So, maybe it's
    > > something else?

    >
    > Oooh, a mystery...
    >
    > That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.
    >
    > Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    > vendor or OS name? *Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.
    >
    > Does the command `uname -X` work? *(probably "illegal option")
    >
    > Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? *Use cut & paste, not write
    > & type.
    >
    > Does the directory /etc/perms exist? *If so, what filenames are in it?
    >
    > Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? *If so, what filenames are in
    > it; look inside the files, anything relevant? *Don't post whole files
    > unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    > boring legalese).
    >
    > > "Run # dparam /dev/...." *- When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    > > not found" *I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    > > found nothing.

    >
    > That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    > Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. *Well, that
    > is, _if_ you did it as root. *It won't be found for a user, it's a
    > root-only command.
    >
    > ...
    >
    > >From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could

    >
    > be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    > 3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    > Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. *Unlikely to be
    > anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.
    >
    >
    >
    > >Bela<- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Ah Ha! Possibly mystery solved?

    I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    said "SCO Unix" on it. Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    tape drive rails, etc)

    With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    SCO. But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.

    So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix? If so, am I screwed for
    trying to get the data off?

    thanks again for the help!

    jf

  14. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    > On Mar 4, 9:31 pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    >> jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    >>> "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    >>> but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    >>> something else?

    >> Oooh, a mystery...
    >>
    >> That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.
    >>
    >> Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    >> vendor or OS name? Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.
    >>
    >> Does the command `uname -X` work? (probably "illegal option")
    >>
    >> Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? Use cut & paste, not write
    >> & type.
    >>
    >> Does the directory /etc/perms exist? If so, what filenames are in it?
    >>
    >> Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? If so, what filenames are in
    >> it; look inside the files, anything relevant? Don't post whole files
    >> unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    >> boring legalese).
    >>
    >>> "Run # dparam /dev/...." - When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    >>> not found" I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    >>> found nothing.

    >> That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    >> Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. Well, that
    >> is, _if_ you did it as root. It won't be found for a user, it's a
    >> root-only command.
    >>
    >> ...
    >>
    >> >From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could

    >>
    >> be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    >> 3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    >> Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. Unlikely to be
    >> anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Bela<- Hide quoted text -

    >> - Show quoted text -

    >
    > Ah Ha! Possibly mystery solved?
    >
    > I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    > said "SCO Unix" on it. Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    > tape drive rails, etc)
    >
    > With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    > SCO. But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    > anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    > that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.
    >
    > So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix? If so, am I screwed for
    > trying to get the data off?


    Screwed on trying to mount the drive on an SCO system? Maybe yes.

    However, you indicate that it boots. Does it have a tape drive?
    does it have networking? Either of those can be used to move
    files to another machine.

    Tar has been backward compatible for UNIX V since AT&T versions.
    Use tar to write a tape, move the tape drive to a current
    SCO box and restore the tape to the current system.

    If you find that you have networking on the old box, don't try to
    change the IP address. Just configure the SCO box (target box)
    to the same network and get a variation of the following to
    work on the old box:

    cd /path_to_target_directory
    tar xvf /tmp/archive.tar . (run man tar on the old box for exact command string)
    ftp ip_of_SCO_box
    login as root with password
    bin
    cd /target_where_you_can_store_tar_archive
    put archive.tar
    bye

    Login on the SCO box and use tar to extract the data.

    Failing the above, search this group for serial transfer strategies.




    >
    > thanks again for the help!
    >
    > jf
    >
    >


    --
    Steve Fabac
    S.M. Fabac & Associates
    816/765-1670

  15. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    On Wed, Mar 05, 2008, Steve M. Fabac, Jr. wrote:
    >jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:

    ....
    >> Ah Ha! Possibly mystery solved?
    >>
    >> I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    >> said "SCO Unix" on it. Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    >> tape drive rails, etc)
    >>
    >> With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    >> SCO. But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    >> anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    >> that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.
    >>
    >> So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix? If so, am I screwed for
    >> trying to get the data off?

    >
    >Screwed on trying to mount the drive on an SCO system? Maybe yes.
    >
    >However, you indicate that it boots. Does it have a tape drive?
    >does it have networking? Either of those can be used to move
    >files to another machine.
    >
    >Tar has been backward compatible for UNIX V since AT&T versions.
    >Use tar to write a tape, move the tape drive to a current
    >SCO box and restore the tape to the current system.


    A word of warning about tar, many old versions only backed up information
    on files with nothing on directories, symbolic links, FIFOs, or other non-
    file entities. Restoring from a tar backup would create new directories
    with the default mode and umask values, and not have anything else.

    My workaround on this was to create a cpio archive of everything except
    files, then include that backup on the tar backup using something like this
    (it's been a long time so my cpio options may not be correct):

    find / -xdev ! -type f | cpio -oc > /nonfiles.cpio

    ....
    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676

    Politicians - card carrying members of the burglars union - like you to
    remember, they can reach in your pocket with impunity. -- Ted Roberts

  16. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:

    > On Mar 4, 9:31pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    > > jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > > "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    > > > but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    > > > something else?

    > >
    > > Oooh, a mystery...
    > >
    > > That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.
    > >
    > > Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    > > vendor or OS name? Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.
    > >
    > > Does the command `uname -X` work? (probably "illegal option")
    > >
    > > Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? Use cut & paste, not write
    > > & type.
    > >
    > > Does the directory /etc/perms exist? If so, what filenames are in it?
    > >
    > > Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? If so, what filenames are in
    > > it; look inside the files, anything relevant? Don't post whole files
    > > unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    > > boring legalese).
    > >
    > > > "Run # dparam /dev/...." - When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    > > > not found" I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    > > > found nothing.

    > >
    > > That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    > > Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. Well, that
    > > is, _if_ you did it as root. It won't be found for a user, it's a
    > > root-only command.
    > >
    > > ...
    > >
    > > >From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could

    > >
    > > be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    > > 3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    > > Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. Unlikely to be
    > > anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.

    >
    > Ah Ha! Possibly mystery solved?
    >
    > I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    > said "SCO Unix" on it. Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    > tape drive rails, etc)
    >
    > With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    > SCO. But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    > anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    > that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.
    >
    > So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix?


    Every single possibility that I mentioned was a version of AT&T Unix.
    SCO, Microport, ISC, and a bunch of others in the "System V Unix on x86"
    industry all got their licenses and their initial source code from AT&T.

    I was hoping to narrow it down to the specific distribution.

    > If so, am I screwed for
    > trying to get the data off?


    Most of the other possibilities would be using a fairly unmodified
    System V filesystem, although they might be using 2K blocks which OSR5
    doesn't like. Or they might be using 512- or 1K bytes which it's OK
    with. You can't mount it because you haven't found the start of the
    filesystem, we need to know the partitioning scheme for that, thus need
    to know the OS.

    None of the files I mentioned exist?

    >Bela<


  17. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    On Mar 5, 6:59*pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    > jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > On Mar 4, 9:31pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    > > > jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > > > "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    > > > > but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' *So, maybe it's
    > > > > something else?

    >
    > > > Oooh, a mystery...

    >
    > > > That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.

    >
    > > > Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mentiona
    > > > vendor or OS name? *Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.

    >
    > > > Does the command `uname -X` work? *(probably "illegal option")

    >
    > > > Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? *Use cut & paste, not write
    > > > & type.

    >
    > > > Does the directory /etc/perms exist? *If so, what filenames are in it?

    >
    > > > Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? *If so, what filenames arein
    > > > it; look inside the files, anything relevant? *Don't post whole files
    > > > unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    > > > boring legalese).

    >
    > > > > "Run # dparam /dev/...." *- When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    > > > > not found" *I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    > > > > found nothing.

    >
    > > > That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    > > > Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. *Well, that
    > > > is, _if_ you did it as root. *It won't be found for a user, it's a
    > > > root-only command.

    >
    > > > ...

    >
    > > > >From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could

    >
    > > > be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    > > > 3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    > > > Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. *Unlikely to be
    > > > anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.

    >
    > > Ah Ha! *Possibly mystery solved?

    >
    > > I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    > > said "SCO Unix" on it. *Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    > > tape drive rails, etc)

    >
    > > With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    > > SCO. *But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    > > anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    > > that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.

    >
    > > So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix?

    >
    > Every single possibility that I mentioned was a version of AT&T Unix.
    > SCO, Microport, ISC, and a bunch of others in the "System V Unix on x86"
    > industry all got their licenses and their initial source code from AT&T.
    >
    > I was hoping to narrow it down to the specific distribution.
    >
    > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *If so, am I screwed for
    > > trying to get the data off?

    >
    > Most of the other possibilities would be using a fairly unmodified
    > System V filesystem, although they might be using 2K blocks which OSR5
    > doesn't like. *Or they might be using 512- or 1K bytes which it's OK
    > with. *You can't mount it because you haven't found the start of the
    > filesystem, we need to know the partitioning scheme for that, thus need
    > to know the OS.
    >
    > None of the files I mentioned exist?
    >
    >
    >
    > >Bela<- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Thanks for sticking with me on this....

    Of the files you mentioned, the only one that existed was /etc/motd,
    but it was empty (0 size). /etc/issue, /etc/perms, /etc/
    copyrights...all did not exist.

    You were correct in that UNAME -X returned an illegal option. Also,
    man gives me nothing (just comes back to a command prompt).

    Any other ideas here?

    jf

  18. Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:
    > On Mar 5, 6:59 pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    >> jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    >>> On Mar 4, 9:31pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    >>>> jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    >>>>> "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    >>>>> but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    >>>>> something else?
    >>>> Oooh, a mystery...
    >>>> That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.
    >>>> Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    >>>> vendor or OS name? Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.
    >>>> Does the command `uname -X` work? (probably "illegal option")
    >>>> Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? Use cut & paste, not write
    >>>> & type.
    >>>> Does the directory /etc/perms exist? If so, what filenames are in it?
    >>>> Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? If so, what filenames are in
    >>>> it; look inside the files, anything relevant? Don't post whole files
    >>>> unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    >>>> boring legalese).
    >>>>> "Run # dparam /dev/...." - When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    >>>>> not found" I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    >>>>> found nothing.
    >>>> That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    >>>> Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. Well, that
    >>>> is, _if_ you did it as root. It won't be found for a user, it's a
    >>>> root-only command.
    >>>> ...
    >>>> >From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could
    >>>> be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    >>>> 3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    >>>> Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. Unlikely to be
    >>>> anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.
    >>> Ah Ha! Possibly mystery solved?
    >>> I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    >>> said "SCO Unix" on it. Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    >>> tape drive rails, etc)
    >>> With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    >>> SCO. But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    >>> anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    >>> that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.
    >>> So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix?

    >> Every single possibility that I mentioned was a version of AT&T Unix.
    >> SCO, Microport, ISC, and a bunch of others in the "System V Unix on x86"
    >> industry all got their licenses and their initial source code from AT&T.
    >>
    >> I was hoping to narrow it down to the specific distribution.
    >>
    >>> If so, am I screwed for
    >>> trying to get the data off?

    >> Most of the other possibilities would be using a fairly unmodified
    >> System V filesystem, although they might be using 2K blocks which OSR5
    >> doesn't like. Or they might be using 512- or 1K bytes which it's OK
    >> with. You can't mount it because you haven't found the start of the
    >> filesystem, we need to know the partitioning scheme for that, thus need
    >> to know the OS.
    >>
    >> None of the files I mentioned exist?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Bela<- Hide quoted text -

    >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
    >>
    >> - Show quoted text -

    >
    > Thanks for sticking with me on this....
    >
    > Of the files you mentioned, the only one that existed was /etc/motd,
    > but it was empty (0 size). /etc/issue, /etc/perms, /etc/
    > copyrights...all did not exist.
    >
    > You were correct in that UNAME -X returned an illegal option. Also,
    > man gives me nothing (just comes back to a command prompt).
    >
    > Any other ideas here?
    >
    > jf


    It's uname -X, not UNAME -X, unless that was a typo?

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------
    Pat Welch, UBB Computer Services, a WCS Affiliate
    SCO Authorized Partner
    Microlite BackupEdge Certified Reseller
    Unix/Linux/Windows/Hardware Sales/Support
    (209) 745-1401 Cell: (209) 251-9120
    E-mail: patubb@inreach.com
    ----------------------------------------------------

  19. old Unix mystery, Re: Access a SCO 3.0 drive from 5.0.6?

    jfranks1970@gmail.com wrote:

    > On Mar 5, 6:59 pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    > > jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > > On Mar 4, 9:31pm, Bela Lubkin wrote:
    > > > > jfranks1...@gmail.com wrote:
    > > > > > "What is SCO 3.0???" - I don't know what it's supposed to be called,
    > > > > > but a 'uname -a' gives 'V/386 mp386 3.0e1U 3 80386' So, maybe it's
    > > > > > something else?

    > >
    > > > > Oooh, a mystery...

    > >
    > > > > That doesn't match up with any official release that I know of from SCO.

    > >
    > > > > Look at the files /etc/issue and /etc/motd: do either of these mention a
    > > > > vendor or OS name? Show us contents _if_ they are relevant.

    > >
    > > > > Does the command `uname -X` work? (probably "illegal option")

    > >
    > > > > Is that the _exact_ output from `uname -a`? Use cut & paste, not write
    > > > > & type.

    > >
    > > > > Does the directory /etc/perms exist? If so, what filenames are in it?

    > >
    > > > > Does the directory /etc/copyrights exist? If so, what filenames are in
    > > > > it; look inside the files, anything relevant? Don't post whole files
    > > > > unless they're real short (the system I'm looking at has 200 lines of
    > > > > boring legalese).

    > >
    > > > > > "Run # dparam /dev/...." - When I run this command, I get "dparam:
    > > > > > not found" I did a search of the system for a file called dparam and
    > > > > > found nothing.

    > >
    > > > > That eliminates all x86 releases of SCO Xenix, SCO Unix, SCO Open
    > > > > Desktop, SCO Open Server, and SCO OpenServer through 5.0.7. Well, that
    > > > > is, _if_ you did it as root. It won't be found for a user, it's a
    > > > > root-only command.

    > >
    > > > > ...

    > >
    > > > > From the version number, I think there's a very small chance this could
    > > > > be an early pre-beta of SCO Unix (from before the first official release,
    > > > > 3.2.0); but more likely some other flavor of System V/386: Microport,
    > > > > Interactive Systems, straight out of AT&T / USG, etc. Unlikely to be
    > > > > anything Univel/Novellish, from the version number.

    > >
    > > > Ah Ha! Possibly mystery solved?

    > >
    > > > I was handed this server and a box that had a hand written note that
    > > > said "SCO Unix" on it. Nothing inside really mattered (drivers, old
    > > > tape drive rails, etc)

    > >
    > > > With that, I *assumed* (yea I know what that makes me) that it was
    > > > SCO. But, after your post and suggestions (none of which found
    > > > anything like what should have been there), I did notice a copyright
    > > > that comes up during the bootup: Copyright 1987 AT&T.

    > >
    > > > So, Could this be a version of AT&T unix?

    > >
    > > Every single possibility that I mentioned was a version of AT&T Unix.
    > > SCO, Microport, ISC, and a bunch of others in the "System V Unix on x86"
    > > industry all got their licenses and their initial source code from AT&T.
    > >
    > > I was hoping to narrow it down to the specific distribution.
    > >
    > > > If so, am I screwed for
    > > > trying to get the data off?

    > >
    > > Most of the other possibilities would be using a fairly unmodified
    > > System V filesystem, although they might be using 2K blocks which OSR5
    > > doesn't like. Or they might be using 512- or 1K bytes which it's OK
    > > with. You can't mount it because you haven't found the start of the
    > > filesystem, we need to know the partitioning scheme for that, thus need
    > > to know the OS.
    > >
    > > None of the files I mentioned exist?


    > Thanks for sticking with me on this....
    >
    > Of the files you mentioned, the only one that existed was /etc/motd,
    > but it was empty (0 size). /etc/issue, /etc/perms, /etc/
    > copyrights...all did not exist.
    >
    > You were correct in that UNAME -X returned an illegal option. Also,
    > man gives me nothing (just comes back to a command prompt).
    >
    > Any other ideas here?


    As root, run:

    # ls -lr / > /tmp/allfiles
    # compress /tmp/allfiles # creates /tmp/allfiles.Z

    Upload that file somewhere, post a message here about having done so.
    Don't post the output here, it will be way too big and inappropriate for
    a newsgroup posting. (If `compress` does not exist, upload
    /tmp/allfiles, which will be even bigger...)

    >Bela<


+ Reply to Thread