networking under SimulTask

[Leslie Mikesell]

In article <4382 at cuuxb.ATT.COM> fmcgee at cuuxb.UUCP (Frank W. McGee) writes:

>[ various things about the AT&T NETBIOS interface to Simultask ]

>Yes, this allows you to run "network aware" programs under Simutask.
>It allows you all the NETBIOS services except for terminal emulation
>over the network (this is planned to be fixed).

How about things like netbios access to a mainframe gateway?  I couldn't
get this to work using REMOTE PC.

>For instance, now you could run the LAN pack available for Dbase III
>under Simultask.

At the moment, I'm mostly interested in running the network version of
WP 5.0 which seems to get some kind of error when running in the unix
filesystem.  It must have something to do with opening files with
sharing allowed. 

>As I understand the printer problem you are are referring to, it
>happens on applications that DON'T close the printer port after they
>finish using it; this can be demonstrated by quiting the application
>(ie, a forced close of the printer port).  Can't imagine what the "FIX"
>would be; app_mind_read (2) ?

No, I haven't seen anything come out of the VP/ix spooler by itself
unless you also exit from VP/ix.  Perhaps you run your dos applications
directly from unix so that when you exit the application you also
exit VP/ix.

>The problem you refer to also appears under every networking operating
>system I've ever heard of, including StarGROUP software.

But the starlan dos server will print when you close the printer port.
For example "copy file lpt1:"  works just fine under dos server, but
doesn't come out under VP/ix.  Likewise WP 5.0 printouts.
Am I doing something wrong?  I really can't imagine anyone getting
useful work done when they have to pop up the VP/ix menu or exit
their application for every printout.

>If it's that much of a hassle, you can always just access the device
>directly under Simultask and don't use the unix spooler.  But then you
>lose the ability to share the device.

Ummm... most of my print jobs are uux'ed to another machine since I
just have an ugly dot matrix locally.  I don't think direct access
will help much there.

>Hope this answers your questions,

Partly, thanks, but the real question is whether VP/ix itself is going
to be fixed.  I'm only marginally interested in being able to access
other DOS servers.  What I really want to see is netbios support 
under VP/ix alone.  Connecting it to the DOS server is a nice touch
but it should be an extension of the native support.

Les Mikesell