On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>3.0 to a more modern platform.

I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.

What's the output of ``uname -X''?

....
>I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>come out of the printer.
>
>The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>directory to the lpd daemon.

SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).

--
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

``If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police,
the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the
government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws.''
EDWARD ABBEY (1927-1989)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
> >I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
> >3.0 to a more modern platform.
>
> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.

There was Open Server 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 and
Open Desktop 1.0 ,2.0 and 3.0

I had licenses for all of them. Most people had Open Desktop as Open
Server was extremely expensive. Most Open Desktop was Single User or 16
User. But the network printing was not very good. I later used netcat
with them to get more repliable printing. The 3.0 version was based on
Unix 3.2v4.2 with X.



- --
Boyd Gerber
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://quantumlab.net/pine_privacy_guard/

iD8DBQFEwnKvVtBjDid73eYRAlN5AJ9oebkV843nd3lzq+g+WS 4XOo0NKgCeJJa/
uOhPO+IzO0vBKjqUeHx1cyE=
=6Tug
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>> >I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>> >3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>
>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>
>There was Open Server 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 and
> Open Desktop 1.0 ,2.0 and 3.0
>
>I had licenses for all of them. Most people had Open Desktop as Open
>Server was extremely expensive. Most Open Desktop was Single User or 16
>User. But the network printing was not very good. I later used netcat
>with them to get more repliable printing. The 3.0 version was based on
>Unix 3.2v4.2 with X.

I generally had my customers buy the top-end SCO 3.2v[45] packages since
they included all the networking, and it was far easier to do updates than
maintaining multiple packages.

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

``We shouldn't elect a President; we should elect a magician.''
Will Rogers

Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>
> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.

I was wrong, according to the login in screen it is Open Server 3.O

from the /usr/adm/messages I get

SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2v4.2 Operating System

>
> What's the output of ``uname -X''?

Release = 3.2v4.2
KernelID = 93/04/28
Machine = i80486
BusType = ISA

I omitted some specific identification stuff.

>
> ...
>> I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>> Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>> stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>> work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>> come out of the printer.
>>
>> The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>> directory to the lpd daemon.
>
> SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
> desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
> scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
> mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).

Unfortunately, unless I can find a precompiled netcat binary which will
work that's not really and option. There is no Development System.

lpd seemed easy since it was apparently already there and I have a
server which can accept the lpd requests and send them to my printer.
hpnp is also there but none of my network printers are directly
accessible making one available seemed like more work.

This seemed like a simple problem when I started. I'm just trying to
make it work well enough to complete the project.

I suppose it's good practice getting up to speed on this version.

Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>>>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>> There was Open Server 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 and
>> Open Desktop 1.0 ,2.0 and 3.0
>>
>> I had licenses for all of them. Most people had Open Desktop as Open
>> Server was extremely expensive. Most Open Desktop was Single User or 16
>> User. But the network printing was not very good. I later used netcat
>> with them to get more repliable printing. The 3.0 version was based on
>> Unix 3.2v4.2 with X.
>
> I generally had my customers buy the top-end SCO 3.2v[45] packages since
> they included all the networking, and it was far easier to do updates than
> maintaining multiple packages.
>
> Bill
> --

I remember it a little differently. Open Desktop was a 2 user license
and Open Server was the multi-user version starting at 16 users. They
both included all of the networking and X stuff, at least from ODT 2,
which was the first version I had after Xenix. I never saw an
OpenServer/Desktop 1.0. I never had a OpenServer 2.0 or OpenDesktop 3.0.
Then I went to OpenServer 5.0.x which did have the different versions
(Host Enterprise).

--
Rob

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Bill Campbell wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
> > > > > I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
> > > > > 3.0 to a more modern platform.
> > > > I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
> > > There was Open Server 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 and
> > > Open Desktop 1.0 ,2.0 and 3.0
> > >
> > > I had licenses for all of them. Most people had Open Desktop as Open
> > > Server was extremely expensive. Most Open Desktop was Single User or 16
> > > User. But the network printing was not very good. I later used netcat
> > > with them to get more repliable printing. The 3.0 version was based on
> > > Unix 3.2v4.2 with X.
> >
> > I generally had my customers buy the top-end SCO 3.2v[45] packages since
> > they included all the networking, and it was far easier to do updates than
> > maintaining multiple packages.
>
> I remember it a little differently. Open Desktop was a 2 user license and Open
> Server was the multi-user version starting at 16 users. They both included all
> of the networking and X stuff, at least from ODT 2, which was the first
> version I had after Xenix. I never saw an OpenServer/Desktop 1.0. I never had
> a OpenServer 2.0 or OpenDesktop 3.0. Then I went to OpenServer 5.0.x which
> did have the different versions (Host Enterprise).

The 2 user is what I refered to single user(console and one user). The
largest ODT was 15 user. I had a lot of architects using ODT. They had
to have 16 users because of the way their architecual software worked.
Even though they used id on the one machine the services counted more
users. I do not remember the command but you could see 5-10 users being
used while they were running their software. They had a hardware key that
would be tested while running the software package. We had tried the 2
user ODT but they could not run their software. The OS would give them an
error message about user licences and their software would abort. Their
were no problems with the 16 user licensed ODT.

Later most of these archetects moved to AutoCAD and MS OS's. I think it
was ARRIS that they used. The company stopped making upgrades for the SCO
Unix and started only supporting MS. They had large HP Plotters that they
used with the SCO OS's.

- --
Boyd Gerber
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://quantumlab.net/pine_privacy_guard/

iD8DBQFEwrKCVtBjDid73eYRAsUfAJwKxMaTUqomxoT73uDpxw a1JCfrQQCcCvN/
MDIbZn2sZw9Og5RQp9Wf+44=
=gpyd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In article ,
Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>Bill Campbell wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>
>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>
>I was wrong, according to the login in screen it is Open Server 3.O
>
>from the /usr/adm/messages I get
>
>SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2v4.2 Operating System
>
>>
>> What's the output of ``uname -X''?
>
>Release = 3.2v4.2
>KernelID = 93/04/28
>Machine = i80486
>BusType = ISA
>
>I omitted some specific identification stuff.
>
>>
>> ...
>>> I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>>> Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>>> stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>>> work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>>> come out of the printer.
>>>
>>> The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>>> directory to the lpd daemon.
>>
>> SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
>> desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
>> scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
>> mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).

>Unfortunately, unless I can find a precompiled netcat binary
>which will work that's not really and option. There is no
>Development System.

http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp

I've used it a lot. From my POV it's the only decent way to
handle IP printing.

Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com

Bill Vermillion wrote:
> In article ,
> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>> Bill Campbell wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>>>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>> I was wrong, according to the login in screen it is Open Server 3.O
>>
>>from the /usr/adm/messages I get
>> SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2v4.2 Operating System
>>
>>> What's the output of ``uname -X''?
>> Release = 3.2v4.2
>> KernelID = 93/04/28
>> Machine = i80486
>> BusType = ISA
>>
>> I omitted some specific identification stuff.
>>
>>> ...
>>>> I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>>>> Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>>>> stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>>>> work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>>>> come out of the printer.
>>>>
>>>> The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>>>> directory to the lpd daemon.
>>> SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
>>> desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
>>> scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
>>> mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).
>
>> Unfortunately, unless I can find a precompiled netcat binary
>> which will work that's not really and option. There is no
>> Development System.
>
> http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp
>
> I've used it a lot. From my POV it's the only decent way to
> handle IP printing.
>
> Bill
That link seems to be redirected. Possibly because it was obsolete?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Steinmetz"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sco.misc
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Ancient SCO Unix Question


> Bill Campbell wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>
>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>
> I was wrong, according to the login in screen it is Open Server 3.O
>
> from the /usr/adm/messages I get
>
> SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2v4.2 Operating System
>
>>
>> What's the output of ``uname -X''?
>
> Release = 3.2v4.2
> KernelID = 93/04/28
> Machine = i80486
> BusType = ISA
>
> I omitted some specific identification stuff.
>
>>
>> ...
>>> I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>>> Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>>> stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>>> work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>>> come out of the printer.
>>>
>>> The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>>> directory to the lpd daemon.
>>
>> SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
>> desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
>> scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
>> mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).
>
> Unfortunately, unless I can find a precompiled netcat binary which will
> work that's not really and option. There is no Development System.
>
> lpd seemed easy since it was apparently already there and I have a server
> which can accept the lpd requests and send them to my printer. hpnp is
> also there but none of my network printers are directly accessible making
> one available seemed like more work.
>
> This seemed like a simple problem when I started. I'm just trying to make
> it work well enough to complete the project.

A netcat binary that will run even on that version is readily available, as
is a sample printer interface scripts that uses it, on pcunix.com
http://aplawrence.com/SCOFAQ/FAQ_scotec7getnetcat.html

But wait, don't bother.
I finally got off my rear and wrote the universal network printer interface
script I always meant to write which allows me to share it finally.
Up to now I've been using a tar file that I just unpack onto any openserver
box and immediately I can just define a network printer in scoadmin just by
selecting one of:
HPLaserJet.nc, HPLaserJet.rlpr, epson.nc, epson.rlpr instead of HPLaserJet
or epson. And then defining a corresponding line in /etc/printers.
This was all based on the examples in the url above.
It was great, very convenient for me in that all I do is a single wget or
curl command, piped into tar and I can print in about one minute.
But those *.nc *.rlpr files were modified copies of the same scripts that
came with the OS, which I can't legally redistribute.

But now I finally made a simple, single, stand-alone wrapper script that
just runs any of the other scripts from the /usr/spool/lp/model directory
instead of containing one of them itself.

Which means now the directions for installing netcat and a netcat printer
are both very simple, and, the resulting printer functions the same as a
locally connected printer since it uses the same interface scripts you
select from in scoadmin for parallel port or serial printers. Previously you
had to write your own interface script from examples on Tony's site, and
then if you wanted to use an interface script you had to look at other
examples on Tony's site for making a virtual local printer that uses the
interface script and then just runs lp again to print to another printer, or
do like I did and hack up copies of sco's interface scripts.

The new universal script is short and sweet and is an improvement over the
previous netcat examples in that:
* allows use of rlpr as well as netcat. rlpr is a user space lpd/lpr client
that you use just like netcat. Although
the OS has and lpd client built in, it's not convenient to use for
several reasons.
* allows you to use all the same printer interface scripts as an local
printer
* looks & works the same as a local printer to the os & apps
* no writing your own interface scripts
* no kludgy virtual printers that just print to other printers and makes
duplicate printers in scoadmin & lpstat that everyone involved with that box
must know the messy details about ignoring certain printers and never using
them directly but also never deleting them etc...
* light/efficient. I managed to avoid running any child processes or
external binaries other than the interface script and the network util.
(like grep and basename and using backticks etc...)
* ready to add more protocols like smbclient, ftp, email etc...

/usr/spool/lp/model/Net:

---------------------
#!/bin/ksh

LP=/usr/spool/lp
export PATH="${LP}/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/lib:/usr/local/bin:/usr/gnu/bin"
SELF=${0##*/}

while : ; do
IFS=: read NAME HOST PORT PROTOCOL MODEL COMMENTS || break
[[ "$NAME" = "$SELF" ]] && break
done < /etc/printers
INTERFACE=${LP}/model/$MODEL

[[ -z "$MODEL" ]] && exit 1
[[ -e $INTERFACE ]] || exit 1
whence $PROTOCOL >/dev/null 2>&1 || exit 1

case $PROTOCOL in
netcat) $INTERFACE "$@" | netcat -h $HOST -p $PORT ;;
rlpr) $INTERFACE "$@" | rlpr -H $HOST -P $PORT ;;
esac
---------------------

But don't bother cut & pasting.
I just posted it because it's small and I like to look at it
Just grab this tar and unpack it as root.
http://www.aljex.com/bkw/sco/#rlpnc

Then create a Local Printer in scoadmin
Select "Net" for the model
Select or type-in /dev/null for the device
Then create a corresponding line in /etc/printers

There are comments and several examples in /etc/printers

The tar already includes a netcat binary that might run on your box, already
installed in a spot where the script expects it.
The rlpr binaries on the same web page probably (almost certainly) will not
work on your box. I don't think there are anough updates & patches available
to to allow the to run either.

You might need to get this netcat binary:
http://aplawrence.com/KevinSmith/netcat/netcat.coff
and save it as /usr/spool/lp/bin/netcat , overwriting the ELF one that I
included in the tar.
I don't know if r4.2 was elf yet, or if it's libraries will be compatible
enough even if it can run elf binaries.

Anyone else on osr5.anything can just untar and go. I've been using the same
binary for years on various 5.0.x

Brian K. White -- brian@aljex.com -- http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk!

Brian K. White wrote:

> You might need to get this netcat binary:
> http://aplawrence.com/KevinSmith/netcat/netcat.coff
> and save it as /usr/spool/lp/bin/netcat , overwriting the ELF one that I
> included in the tar.
> I don't know if r4.2 was elf yet, or if it's libraries will be compatible
> enough even if it can run elf binaries.

3.2v4.2 was pure COFF, no knowledge of ELF at all.

>Bela<

On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Bela Lubkin wrote:
>Brian K. White wrote:
>
>> You might need to get this netcat binary:
>> http://aplawrence.com/KevinSmith/netcat/netcat.coff
>> and save it as /usr/spool/lp/bin/netcat , overwriting the ELF one that I
>> included in the tar.
>> I don't know if r4.2 was elf yet, or if it's libraries will be compatible
>> enough even if it can run elf binaries.
>
>3.2v4.2 was pure COFF, no knowledge of ELF at all.

True enough, but one can build COFF binaries on OpenServer 3.0.? systems
that will run on older 3.2v4.2 systems.

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

``... because most politicians and bureaucrats are technological idiots,
it's going to be crucial for the rank and file members of the IT community
to find its collective voice soon.'' --Michael Vizard, InfoWorld Editor in
Chief.

In article <_NCwg.66872$9c6.24747@dukeread11>,
Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>Bill Vermillion wrote:
>> In article ,
>> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>> Bill Campbell wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>>>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>>>>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>>> I was wrong, according to the login in screen it is Open Server 3.O
>>>
>>>from the /usr/adm/messages I get
>>> SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2v4.2 Operating System
>>>
>>>> What's the output of ``uname -X''?
>>> Release = 3.2v4.2
>>> KernelID = 93/04/28
>>> Machine = i80486
>>> BusType = ISA
>>>
>>> I omitted some specific identification stuff.
>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>> I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>>>>> Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>>>>> stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>>>>> work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>>>>> come out of the printer.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>>>>> directory to the lpd daemon.
>>>> SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
>>>> desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
>>>> scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
>>>> mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).
>>
>>> Unfortunately, unless I can find a precompiled netcat binary
>>> which will work that's not really and option. There is no
>>> Development System.
>>
>> http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp
>>
>> I've used it a lot. From my POV it's the only decent way to
>> handle IP printing.
>>
>> Bill
>That link seems to be redirected. Possibly because it was obsolete?

It was there yesterday when I posted that. Since I looked it up on
another session I may have mis-typed it.

I see what I did. It is not 'www' but 'members'.

Use the link of
http://www.learnbydestroying.com, and you'll be taken to the
cruzio.com site, and the use the sublink sco/lp.

I don't see a link to the 'lp' subdirectory, so be sure
to type sco/lp. I juet checked again. Anf forgive my
error in posting 'www'.

You should also be able to get the same files from
http://www.pcunix.com

Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com

Bill Vermillion wrote:
> In article <_NCwg.66872$9c6.24747@dukeread11>,
> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>> Bill Vermillion wrote:
>>> In article ,
>>> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>>> Bill Campbell wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2006, Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>>>>> I have been asked to convert an application from SCO Unix Open Desktop
>>>>>> 3.0 to a more modern platform.
>>>>> I don't remember an OpenDesktop 3.0, 2.0 yes.
>>>> I was wrong, according to the login in screen it is Open Server 3.O
>>>>
>>> >from the /usr/adm/messages I get
>>>> SCO UNIX System V/386 Release 3.2v4.2 Operating System
>>>>
>>>>> What's the output of ``uname -X''?
>>>> Release = 3.2v4.2
>>>> KernelID = 93/04/28
>>>> Machine = i80486
>>>> BusType = ISA
>>>>
>>>> I omitted some specific identification stuff.
>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> I have confirmed that the lpd target server works. I have Linux and
>>>>>> Windows clients printing properly to it. The print requests seem to be
>>>>>> stuck in the printer spool on the SCO server. TCP/IP connections seem to
>>>>>> work including sort of cating files to port 515 and getting something to
>>>>>> come out of the printer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem seems to be getting print request from the lpd spool
>>>>>> directory to the lpd daemon.
>>>>> SCO's earlier attempts at network printing left something to be
>>>>> desired. My solution has been to write my own printer interface
>>>>> scripts using netcat to deliver the print jobs, bypassing SCO's
>>>>> mechanism (and I hate the Berserkley lpd interface in any case ;-).
>>>> Unfortunately, unless I can find a precompiled netcat binary
>>>> which will work that's not really and option. There is no
>>>> Development System.
>>> http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp
>>>
>>> I've used it a lot. From my POV it's the only decent way to
>>> handle IP printing.
>>>
>>> Bill
>> That link seems to be redirected. Possibly because it was obsolete?
>
> It was there yesterday when I posted that. Since I looked it up on
> another session I may have mis-typed it.
>
> I see what I did. It is not 'www' but 'members'.
>
> Use the link of
> http://www.learnbydestroying.com, and you'll be taken to the
> cruzio.com site, and the use the sublink sco/lp.
>
> I don't see a link to the 'lp' subdirectory, so be sure
> to type sco/lp. I juet checked again. Anf forgive my
> error in posting 'www'.
>
> You should also be able to get the same files from
> http://www.pcunix.com
>
> Bill
Thanks,

I think the correct url is http://members.cruzio.com/~jeffl/sco/lp/
That seems to be the directory with all of the good stuff.

--
Rob

Bill Campbell wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Bela Lubkin wrote:

> >3.2v4.2 was pure COFF, no knowledge of ELF at all.

> True enough, but one can build COFF binaries on OpenServer 3.0.? systems
> that will run on older 3.2v4.2 systems.

That's because Open Server 3.0 _was_ SCO Unix 3.2v4.2 (plus add-ons).

>Bela<

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006, Bela Lubkin wrote:
> Bill Campbell wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Bela Lubkin wrote:
> > >3.2v4.2 was pure COFF, no knowledge of ELF at all.
>
> > True enough, but one can build COFF binaries on OpenServer 3.0.? systems
> > that will run on older 3.2v4.2 systems.
>
> That's because Open Server 3.0 _was_ SCO Unix 3.2v4.2 (plus add-ons).

And IIRC Open Server 1.0 was SCO Unix 3.2v4.0. I do not remember the
versions between 3.2v4.0 and 3.2v4.2. So I do not remember what Open
Server 2.0 was.

--
Boyd Gerber
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006, Bela Lubkin wrote:
> > Bill Campbell wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Bela Lubkin wrote:
> > > >3.2v4.2 was pure COFF, no knowledge of ELF at all.
> >
> > > True enough, but one can build COFF binaries on OpenServer 3.0.? systems
> > > that will run on older 3.2v4.2 systems.
> >
> > That's because Open Server 3.0 _was_ SCO Unix 3.2v4.2 (plus add-ons).
>
> And IIRC Open Server 1.0 was SCO Unix 3.2v4.0. I do not remember the
> versions between 3.2v4.0 and 3.2v4.2. So I do not remember what Open
> Server 2.0 was.

I maybe wrong. I was looking at some notes and 1.0 may have been SCO Unix
3.2v2.2 and 3.2v4.0 maybe Open Server 2.0

--
Boyd Gerber
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047

On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Jul 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
....
>> And IIRC Open Server 1.0 was SCO Unix 3.2v4.0. I do not remember the
>> versions between 3.2v4.0 and 3.2v4.2. So I do not remember what Open
>> Server 2.0 was.
>
>I maybe wrong. I was looking at some notes and 1.0 may have been SCO Unix
>3.2v2.2 and 3.2v4.0 maybe Open Server 2.0

I think that was OpenDesktop 2.0, not OpenServer. Didn't OpenServer start
in the 2nd quarter of 1995 with 3.2v5.0?

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

With Congress, every time they make a joke it's a law; and every time
they make a law it's a joke.
-- Will Rogers

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Bill Campbell wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2006, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> >> And IIRC Open Server 1.0 was SCO Unix 3.2v4.0. I do not remember the
> >> versions between 3.2v4.0 and 3.2v4.2. So I do not remember what Open
> >> Server 2.0 was.
> >
> >I maybe wrong. I was looking at some notes and 1.0 may have been SCO Unix
> >3.2v2.2 and 3.2v4.0 maybe Open Server 2.0
>
> I think that was OpenDesktop 2.0, not OpenServer. Didn't OpenServer start
> in the 2nd quarter of 1995 with 3.2v5.0?

I have a box with Open Server 3.0 on it and a tape with Open Server 2.0.
Saddly the tape is unreadable. I have a CD that says both Open Server and
Open Desktop on it. The 3.2v5.0 had OpenServer combined without the
space.

--
Boyd Gerber
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047