OS/2 Warp 4 not moving past NAPS.

[Grant Taylor]

Followup-To: comp.os.os2.misc

I'm running into an odd issue installing OS/2 Warp 4 into QEMU VMs.

The install is stalling at / not progressing past "Installing Network
Adapters and Protocol Services" (NAPS). NAPS makes it to 100%, but the
install never goes beyond that.

The VM is still running and has not locked up. The mouse still moves,
the spinners in the install GUI are still spinning, and OS/2 respond
gracefully to Control-Alt-Delete.

I've got six different QEMU VMs on two different systems doing this.
I've tried with different emulated NIC types (AMD PC-Net & Realtek 8139
& none), different Adapter Drivers (NIC specific & IBM NULL MAC),
connected and disconnected.

I've never seen anything like this.

I previously did a quite similar install in QEMU but using PCI
passthrough to connect an IBM Token Ring NIC to OS/2 and that seemed to
install without problems. (Admittedly, the errors on boot about the
driver not properly loading because the TR NIC is not currently
connected to a MAU. But the install did complete and reboot without
errors or stalling.)

Does anybody have any ideas?



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/15/19 12:34 PM, WBSTClarke wrote:
> MPTS/LAPS installation runs a NIC detection, which may be what is
> causing the failure. It also edits \CONFIG.SYS after saving the current
> one as \CONFIG.MPT before a reboot.

I figured something like that might be happening.

> You'll probably be better off NOT installing Network Support at
> the start and Selective Install-ing it after successful Base System
> installation. I can't remember the precise actions necessary, but
> you should be able to figure it out.

I had tried to install without networking. But it seemed that even if I
unchecked anything network related, the installer would still insist on
installing NAPS. I don't recall if I also unchecked everything for
optional components (assistant, WIN-OS/2, etc.) or not. Perhaps one of
those things is dragging NAPS in with them.

Thank you for the reply WBSTClarke.

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/15/19 2:41 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> I had tried to install without networking.  But it seemed that even if I
> unchecked anything network related, the installer would still insist on
> installing NAPS.  I don't recall if I also unchecked everything for
> optional components (assistant, WIN-OS/2, etc.) or not.  Perhaps one of
> those things is dragging NAPS in with them.

Yep.

I unchecked EVERYTHING that I could. I still get the following message
when clicking Next on the Select the services to install screen:

--8<--
No Networking Services Selected

You have not selected any networking services, however the following
required service will be installed:

Network Adapters and Protocol Services

-->8--

:-/

So, how do I get OS/2 Warp 4 installed without NAPS so that I can deal
with this issue later? Or, better, how do I resolve the underlying
issue in the first place?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Andi B.]

Grant Taylor schrieb:

OS/2 MPTS has a problem with more than about 500 (or 250?) drivers in \ibmcom\macs
directory. Not sure if NAPS uses the same broken MPTS code. Check how many drivers you have.

Andi

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/16/19 9:19 AM, Andi B. wrote:
> OS/2 MPTS has a problem with more than about 500 (or 250?) drivers in
> \ibmcom\macs directory. Not sure if NAPS uses the same broken MPTS code.
> Check how many drivers you have.

Intriguing.

However I don't think it's related to the problem I was seeing because
this is a fresh install (booted off of updated install disks, fresh
formatted, and nothing else on the drive). I'd be shocked if the
problem that you are talking about existed in a brand new install. I
would think that what you're describing would be much more likely with
an install / update of an existing system that has accumulated drivers /
files.

That being said, I've not had my coffee yet, so I'm even more likely to
be wrong than usual.

Thank you for the reply Andi.

[Andi B.]

Grant Taylor schrieb:

You said OS/2 W4 which is the original old version. But if you say NAPS I'm thinking of
Alex MPTS frontend which I think was introduced with some version of eCS. Of course the
original W4 CD does not have the problem I described. As it had to less NIC drivers
included to trigger this problem. But does it have anything called NAPS? Puzzling.

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/16/19 11:05 AM, Andi B. wrote:
> You said OS/2 W4 which is the original old version. But if you say NAPS
> I'm thinking of Alex MPTS frontend which I think was introduced with
> some version of eCS. Of course the original W4 CD does not have the
> problem I described. As it had to less NIC drivers included to trigger
> this problem.

Ah. That makes more sense.

> But does it have anything called NAPS? Puzzling.

Yes, OS/2 Warp 4(.00), does indeed include "MPTS Network Adapters and
Protocol Services". I was shortening that to (MPTS) NAPS.

[Marcel Mueller]

Am 15.11.19 um 19:02 schrieb Grant Taylor:

> Followup-To:  comp.os.os2.misc
>
> I'm running into an odd issue installing OS/2 Warp 4 into QEMU VMs.
>
> The install is stalling at / not progressing past "Installing Network
> Adapters and Protocol Services" (NAPS).  NAPS makes it to 100%, but the
> install never goes beyond that.

> I've never seen anything like this.

Well the original W4 was rather buggy regarding networking.

Do you have a chance to apply fixpacks /before/ installing network
services? This will likely fix the issue.

There are two options:
- Either apply the fixpacks before MPTS install, e.g. by injecting them
as an ISO image.
- Or create a patched version of the install media. There is a tool
around that can apply fixpacks to install CDs (don't remember the name)
and create a version that installs directly at a fixpack level that is
known to work.

Furthermore I remember that older OS/2 versions do not like to much
memory at install. Restricting to <64MB during install could also help.

I also vaguely remember that installing no network driver including the
null driver caused problems.
It is not that unlikely the only one or even none of the network
adapters of QEMU is supported out of the box. For sure Realtek is not
supported. AFAIK the company did not even exist then.
I would start with the AMD (pcnet) type. This might be supported.
And once you get everything running and fixpacks installed upgrade to
E1000 which is well known to work (with additional drivers) and
multiplies the throughput.

I usually do not try plain install. I always use an image of some other
installation. This also applies to the VM which is eventually based on
an old 2.1ß installation from '92. So I did not run into the above pitfalls.
But I have to admit that I am using VBox which is well known to support
OS/2 guests very well, including GUI integration like virtual video and
mouse driver and shared clipboard.


Marcel

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/17/19 1:19 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> Well the original W4 was rather buggy regarding networking.

*nod*

> Do you have a chance to apply fixpacks /before/ installing network
> services? This will likely fix the issue.

No. As stated in a previous reply, I get a dialog that states the
following when I unselect all components and networking options:

--8<--
No Networking Services Selected

You have not selected any networking services, however the following
required service will be installed:

Network Adapters and Protocol Services

-->8--

> There are two options:
> - Either apply the fixpacks before MPTS install, e.g. by injecting them
> as an ISO image.
> - Or create a patched version of the install media. There is a tool
> around that can apply fixpacks to install CDs (don't remember the name)
> and create a version that installs directly at a fixpack level that is
> known to work.

Maybe I need more coffee first, but I don't see how those two methods
are different. How can I "inject MPTS fixpacks into the ISO" that is
not "create a patched version of the install media"?

I am actually quite curious about how to go about this / these methods.

At this point, it's an academic exercise as I've moved past the original
problem of stalling at NAPS. I overcame this hurdle by installing to
FAT instead of HPFS. (See other replies in this thread for more details.)

> Furthermore I remember that older OS/2 versions do not like to much
> memory at install. Restricting to <64MB during install could also help.

Hum. I didn't see anything that indicated that there was a problem
related to memory. I did installs (on FAT) into VMs with 128 / 256 /
384 / 512 MB of memory. Plush, the physical box that I'm using has 384
MB of memory. Admittedly, I don't know if OS/2 Warp 4 is using more
than 64 MB of that memory. I don't even know how to check that.

Hum.... Perhaps I should learn how to check that and do so.

> I also vaguely remember that installing no network driver including the
> null driver caused problems.

I think I ran into that in the past. I think I worked around it by
installing a random (IBM) driver with the intention of placating MPTS so
that it would install. I remember being quite happy when I learned
about IBM's Null MAC driver. I now install it by default if I don't
have other NICs or drivers therefor ready at install time.

I was similarly happy when I found IBM's Null Printer driver as I am
dealing with a program (eNetwork Personal Communications 4.3, a.k.a.
PCOMM) that gets cranky if there's not a printer configured.

> It is not that unlikely the only one or even none of the network
> adapters of QEMU is supported out of the box. For sure Realtek is not
> supported. AFAIK the company did not even exist then.

I /think/ that I tried the Realtek 8029 and I /want/ to say that it was
supported. Or it may be that drivers exist for it, but aren't included
in the install media. I think that drivers exist for the Realtek 8139
and even 8169, but I'm confident that they aren't included in the
install media.

> I would start with the AMD (pcnet) type. This might be supported.

Yes, the AMD PC-Net (10 Mbps) NIC is supported out of the box by OS/2
Warp 4 as released by IBM.

> And once you get everything running and fixpacks installed upgrade to
> E1000 which is well known to work (with additional drivers) and
> multiplies the throughput.

That's good to know.

Question: Do you have any idea if OS/2 supports multi-port NICs? Say a
dual / quad port E1000.

Follow up question: Do each of these ports show up as separate
interfaces to TCP/IP Configuration Notebook?

> I usually do not try plain install. I always use an image of some other
> installation. This also applies to the VM which is eventually based on
> an old 2.1ß installation from '92. So I did not run into the above
> pitfalls.

Interesting.

> But I have to admit that I am using VBox which is well known to support
> OS/2 guests very well, including GUI integration like virtual video and
> mouse driver and shared clipboard.

Yep. I normally prefer VirtualBox for much of my dynamic virtualization
work. I find it to be more flexible and to have better support for the
strange things I want to play with and do in the sandbox that is my
workstation. I have used KVM for production roles on servers in the
past and have been happy with it. But I don't do much more than play
with things in VirtualBox now.

Thank you for your reply Marcel.

[Marcel Mueller]

Am 17.11.19 um 19:06 schrieb Grant Taylor:

>> There are two options:
>> - Either apply the fixpacks before MPTS install, e.g. by injecting
>> them as an ISO image.
>> - Or create a patched version of the install media. There is a tool
>> around that can apply fixpacks to install CDs (don't remember the
>> name) and create a version that installs directly at a fixpack level
>> that is known to work.
>
> Maybe I need more coffee first, but I don't see how those two methods
> are different.  How can I "inject MPTS fixpacks into the ISO" that is
> not "create a patched version of the install media"?

I meant inject into the VM as ISO image in a virtual drive. Without
networking there is no other way to transfer large data into a VM.
But if the installer don't let you proceed to a working desktop, this is
not an option.

> I am actually quite curious about how to go about this / these methods.

The second approach creates a new installation media that has fixed
versions of all the files.

> At this point, it's an academic exercise as I've moved past the original
> problem of stalling at NAPS.  I overcame this hurdle by installing to
> FAT instead of HPFS.

Not that pretty, really not.
OS/2 w/o HPFS isn't OS/2.

>> Furthermore I remember that older OS/2 versions do not like to much
>> memory at install. Restricting to <64MB during install could also help.
>
> Hum.  I didn't see anything that indicated that there was a problem
> related to memory.  I did installs (on FAT) into VMs with 128 / 256 /
> 384 / 512 MB of memory.  Plush, the physical box that I'm using has 384
> MB of memory.  Admittedly, I don't know if OS/2 Warp 4 is using more
> than 64 MB of that memory.  I don't even know how to check that.

Plain Warp 4 for sure does not occupy more than a dozen MB. Even the
file system cache is restricted to 2MB as long as you do not install the
32 bit HPFS386 driver. AFAIK 32 MB was recommended as minimum for W4.
But it can use significantly more memory, and it will do so as soon as
you run Firefox. ;-) At least 2GB should be supported, but even FF does
not need that much. For more that 512 MB a recent Fixpack level and
Kernel is required.

There are several tools that show the amount of memory available (FC/2,
XWP, Theseus ...), but I don't know how to do this with builtin tools.

>> I also vaguely remember that installing no network driver including
>> the null driver caused problems.
>
> I think I ran into that in the past.  I think I worked around it by
> installing a random (IBM) driver with the intention of placating MPTS so
> that it would install.

Yes, that could work.

Unfortunately MPTS is broken even more. If you add a new (correct)
driver later w/o Fixpacks applied it tends to write garbage into the
network configuration file PROTOCOL.INI.

> I was similarly happy when I found IBM's Null Printer driver as I am
> dealing with a program (eNetwork Personal Communications 4.3, a.k.a.
> PCOMM) that gets cranky if there's not a printer configured.

Remote printers are also an option. Unix printers using LPR or Samba
printers are supported.

>> I would start with the AMD (pcnet) type. This might be supported.
>
> Yes, the AMD PC-Net (10 Mbps) NIC is supported out of the box by OS/2
> Warp 4 as released by IBM.

That's a good starting point to get further files into the VM without
too much effort. FTP works as soon as TCP/IP has been configured.

>> And once you get everything running and fixpacks installed upgrade to
>> E1000 which is well known to work (with additional drivers) and
>> multiplies the throughput.
>
> That's good to know.
>
> Question:  Do you have any idea if OS/2 supports multi-port NICs?  Say a
> dual / quad port E1000.

AFAIK yes, but I never tried that.

But as long as we are talking about VMs adding additional network
adapters is much simpler.

> Follow up question:  Do each of these ports show up as separate
> interfaces to TCP/IP Configuration Notebook?

If they are configured for TCP/IP, yes.
MPTS does the binding between physical adapters and logical LAN
interfaces. You can bind TCP/IP to any available network adapter as long
as it has a different IP.

>> I usually do not try plain install. I always use an image of some
>> other installation. This also applies to the VM which is eventually
>> based on an old 2.1ß installation from '92. So I did not run into the
>> above pitfalls.
>
> Interesting.

As bad the IBM installers always have been as good it works once you got
beyond that. If you don't touch an OS/2 system it runs for another decade.

>> But I have to admit that I am using VBox which is well known to
>> support OS/2 guests very well, including GUI integration like virtual
>> video and mouse driver and shared clipboard.
>
> Yep.  I normally prefer VirtualBox for much of my dynamic virtualization
> work.  I find it to be more flexible and to have better support for the
> strange things I want to play with and do in the sandbox that is my
> workstation.

The most important feature for me are headless VMs on a remote server
used via RDP. I use this for daily business including just now and
including OS/2. In contrast to the administration interfaces of most
hypervisors VBox is responsive through RDP. You can even play simple
real-time games like Widelands.


Marcel

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/18/19 11:56 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> I meant inject into the VM as ISO image in a virtual drive. Without
> networking there is no other way to transfer large data into a VM.

I largely agree.

I've been known to create an additional hard drive, format it (FAT-16 in
this case), copy files to it from something that can access it, and then
swing said hard drive to the VM that needs things. Same concept as a CD
ISO file. But larger media. ;-)

I've also been known to mount the VM's hard drive (typically FAT-16, but
Linux supposedly supports HPFS and JFS from OS/2) and copy files into it
that way. …

> But if the installer don't let you proceed to a working desktop, this is
> not an option.

Yep.

> The second approach creates a new installation media that has fixed
> versions of all the files.

If I'm going to be doing more playing with OS/2 in VMs, I should
consider that.

> Not that pretty, really not.

True.

> OS/2 w/o HPFS isn't OS/2.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I hear what you're saying and appreciate it. But, OS/2 is defined by
more than HPFS.

> Plain Warp 4 for sure does not occupy more than a dozen MB. Even the
> file system cache is restricted to 2MB as long as you do not install the
> 32 bit HPFS386 driver. AFAIK 32 MB was recommended as minimum for W4.
> But it can use significantly more memory, and it will do so as soon as
> you run Firefox. ;-) At least 2GB should be supported, but even FF does
> not need that much. For more that 512 MB a recent Fixpack level and
> Kernel is required.

ACK

Thank you for the information.

> There are several tools that show the amount of memory available (FC/2,
> XWP, Theseus ...), but I don't know how to do this with builtin tools.

I'll check them out.

I'm not opposed to add-on tools. I've just not done so yet.

> Yes, that could work.
>
> Unfortunately MPTS is broken even more. If you add a new (correct)
> driver later w/o Fixpacks applied it tends to write garbage into the
> network configuration file PROTOCOL.INI.

It sounds like Fixpacks have the same problem as NT Service Packs in
that just about anything can overwrite files with older versions and
thus need to have the Fixpack / Service Pack re-applied.

Well, at least I know what I'm dealing with.

> Remote printers are also an option. Unix printers using LPR or Samba
> printers are supported.

I don't actually have a /need/ for a printer per say. PCOMM does get
cranky if there's not a printer installed. It can even get into a loop
of alternating messages about no printer. IBM's NULL Printer was
sufficient to make PCOMM happy. Thus I'm happy.

> That's a good starting point to get further files into the VM without
> too much effort. FTP works as soon as TCP/IP has been configured.

ACL

There's always NetBIOS / NetBEUI (I see that IBM uses both names as part
of file names) and traditional SMB networking. Yet another known quantity.

As annoying as SMB networking can be, I think it's going to be slightly
better when it comes to automatically copying files around with mounts
(NET USE) than trying to script FTP.

> AFAIK yes, but I never tried that.

I've got a couple of multi-port NICs that I'm going to see if I can't
get to work.

My Brain: I wonder if OS/2 ever supported any Fibre Channel.
Me: STFU BRAIN!!!

> But as long as we are talking about VMs adding additional network
> adapters is much simpler.

Ya.

Unfortunately, the VM, even with PCI passthrough, didn't work out as
desired. So I'm back to a physical machine.

> If they are configured for TCP/IP, yes.

Good. That means that if a multi-port NIC has OS/2 drivers, that each
port will show up as a separate interface. This means that OS/2 can use
one for TCP/IP and OS/390 can use the other one for it's TCP/IP stack.

> MPTS does the binding between physical adapters and logical LAN
> interfaces. You can bind TCP/IP to any available network adapter as long
> as it has a different IP.

ACK

> As bad the IBM installers always have been as good it works once you got
> beyond that. If you don't touch an OS/2 system it runs for another decade.

*nod*

Similar can be said about NetWare.

> The most important feature for me are headless VMs on a remote server
> used via RDP. I use this for daily business including just now and
> including OS/2. In contrast to the administration interfaces of most
> hypervisors VBox is responsive through RDP. You can even play simple
> real-time games like Widelands.

QEMU has VNC in lieu of RDP. It seemed to work well enough across my LAN.

[Mat Nieuwenhoven]

On Sun, 17 Nov 2019 11:06:59 -0700, Grant Taylor wrote:

<snip>
:>> - Or create a patched version of the install media. There is a tool

:>> around that can apply fixpacks to install CDs (don't remember the name)
:>> and create a version that installs directly at a fixpack level that is
:>> known to work.
:>
:>Maybe I need more coffee first, but I don't see how those two methods
:>are different. How can I "inject MPTS fixpacks into the ISO" that is
:>not "create a patched version of the install media"?
:>
:>I am actually quite curious about how to go about this / these methods.

Look at updcd on Hobbes:
http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/download/pub/os2/system/patches/updcd260.zip .
There was a 261 patch to version 260 but that doesn't seem to be on
Hobbes.

Mat Nieuwenhoven

[Marcel Mueller]

Am 19.11.19 um 06:45 schrieb Grant Taylor:

>> That's a good starting point to get further files into the VM without
>> too much effort. FTP works as soon as TCP/IP has been configured.
>
> ACL
>
> There's always NetBIOS / NetBEUI (I see that IBM uses both names as part
> of file names) and traditional SMB networking.  Yet another known quantity.

Plain NetBIOS has the main disadvantage that no one else supports it
anymore. With WinXX it was a dirty hack since XP, Samba AFAIR never did.

> As annoying as SMB networking can be, I think it's going to be slightly
> better when it comes to automatically copying files around with mounts
> (NET USE) than trying to script FTP.

Sure, but plenty much configuration steps are needed for recent Samba to
get the old LANMAN2 protocol working with weak authentication and no
encryption. And again you need recent networking Fixpacks for OS/2.
However, once it works it is still /very/ reliable. And it is still
possible to connect to recent Samba versions, in my case the one of
Debian Buster. The only thing is, that immediately after installation
FTP is easier to set up to transfer all the Fixpacks (about a dozen are
required).

The alternative to the bultin IBM Peer is Samba for OS/2. But this
requires NetDrive which is not freeware, and in my case it crashed like
a metronome. I never tried it again afterwards.

>> But as long as we are talking about VMs adding additional network
>> adapters is much simpler.
>
> Ya.
>
> Unfortunately, the VM, even with PCI passthrough, didn't work out as
> desired.  So I'm back to a physical machine.

Is it? For me OS/2 is /much more stable/ since I moved it into a VM
about 8 years ago. But I never did hacks like PCI passthrough.

>> If they are configured for TCP/IP, yes.
>
> Good.  That means that if a multi-port NIC has OS/2 drivers, that each
> port will show up as a separate interface.  This means that OS/2 can use
> one for TCP/IP and OS/390 can use the other one for it's TCP/IP stack.

One moment. You want to share a single physical network adapter from
different OS at the same time? This won't work.

>> As bad the IBM installers always have been as good it works once you
>> got beyond that. If you don't touch an OS/2 system it runs for another
>> decade.
>
> *nod*
>
> Similar can be said about NetWare.

Excluding 4.01, please. Up to 3.12 it was solid as a rock.

>> The most important feature for me are headless VMs on a remote server
>> used via RDP. I use this for daily business including just now and
>> including OS/2. In contrast to the administration interfaces of most
>> hypervisors VBox is responsive through RDP. You can even play simple
>> real-time games like Widelands.
>
> QEMU has VNC in lieu of RDP.  It seemed to work well enough across my LAN.

VNC is slow. You can't work over VNC the way like with local hardware.
There is always some input lag. Very good for remote administration
indeed, but not for daily business.
RDP in contrast is designed to run over even slow WAN connections. And
it is almost as fast as a local PC if using LAN. I use it with a 3k
monitor every day. No visible delay.


Marcel

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/19/19 12:56 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> Plain NetBIOS has the main disadvantage that no one else supports it
> anymore. With WinXX it was a dirty hack since XP, Samba AFAIR never did.

I'm fairly certain that Samba did support NetBIOS.

I think that AIX had an independent NetBIOS implementation too.

I'd be mildly surprised if Mac OS Classic didn't have some form of
NetBIOS support.

> Sure, but plenty much configuration steps are needed for recent Samba to
> get the old LANMAN2 protocol working with weak authentication and no
> encryption.

Maybe. But based on my memory of using Samba years gone by, I don't
think it was that difficult.

> And again you need recent networking Fixpacks for OS/2.

I had zero trouble getting OS/2 Warp 4 to talk with OS/2 Warp 4.52. No
Fixpacks needed. They talked to each other out of the box.

> However, once it works it is still /very/ reliable. And it is still
> possible to connect to recent Samba versions, in my case the one of
> Debian Buster. The only thing is, that immediately after installation
> FTP is easier to set up to transfer all the Fixpacks (about a dozen
> are required).

I've not messed with Fixpacks yet. I'm still using what's installed off
of plastic from IBM.

> The alternative to the bultin IBM Peer is Samba for OS/2. But this
> requires NetDrive which is not freeware, and in my case it crashed like
> a metronome. I never tried it again afterwards.

Why would I want Samba for OS/2 when IBM includes the necessary
software? #confused

> Is it? For me OS/2 is /much more stable/ since I moved it into a VM
> about 8 years ago. But I never did hacks like PCI passthrough.

Well, there's the fact that the card doesn't do what I need it to do in
VM and it does do what I need it to do in a physical machine. So, VM
isn't really an option.

I've not yet had stability problems with OS/2. Time will tell.

> One moment. You want to share a single physical network adapter from
> different OS at the same time? This won't work.

Single physical network adapter ≠ single network interface ports.

single physical network adapter with dual ports ≈ two network interface
ports.

I want to use one network interface port with OS/2 and the other network
interface port with OS/390.

My initial tests with an Intel PRO/1000 MT seem promising. I've got
OS/2 using the first network interface port and things configured for
OS/390 to use the other network interface port. Things seem to be
working, but I need to do considerable more testing to know for sure.

> Excluding 4.01, please. Up to 3.12 it was solid as a rock.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> VNC is slow. You can't work over VNC the way like with local hardware.

I routinely use VNC from a Linux workstation to my Linux desktop at home
and it's acceptably fast. Even for end user tasks like replying to this
Usenet message.

> There is always some input lag. Very good for remote administration
> indeed, but not for daily business.

I'm only really needing remote administration.

> RDP in contrast is designed to run over even slow WAN connections. And
> it is almost as fast as a local PC if using LAN. I use it with a 3k
> monitor every day. No visible delay.

Sure. I don't think that RDP is going to be an option for my remote needs.

I think I'm going to be using VNC or an IP-KVM. (Let's not even think
about the protocol(s) that will be.)

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/18/19 11:59 PM, Mat Nieuwenhoven wrote:
> Look at updcd on Hobbes:
> http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/download/pub/os2/system/patches/updcd260.zip .
> There was a 261 patch to version 260 but that doesn't seem to be on
> Hobbes.

Thank you for the information Mat.

[Marcel Mueller]

Am 20.11.19 um 05:32 schrieb Grant Taylor:

> On 11/19/19 12:56 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
>> Plain NetBIOS has the main disadvantage that no one else supports it
>> anymore. With WinXX it was a dirty hack since XP, Samba AFAIR never did.
>
> I'm fairly certain that Samba did support NetBIOS.

Sure? Not NetBIOS over TCP/IP, also called TCPBEUI?

>> Sure, but plenty much configuration steps are needed for recent Samba
>> to get the old LANMAN2 protocol working with weak authentication and
>> no encryption.
>
> Maybe.  But based on my memory of using Samba years gone by, I don't
> think it was that difficult.

This has changed. Several default security settings prevent the setup of
LANMAN2 sessions. It is not just the protocol level.

>> And again you need recent networking Fixpacks for OS/2.
>
> I had zero trouble getting OS/2 Warp 4 to talk with OS/2 Warp 4.52.  No
> Fixpacks needed.  They talked to each other out of the box.

Connecting to a Samba Server things change. It starts with the case of
the password. Warp 4 without any Fixpack AFAIR converts the password
silently to upper case which usually ends up with access denied.

>> However, once it works it is still /very/ reliable. And it is still
>> possible to connect to recent Samba versions, in my case the one of
>> Debian Buster. The only thing is, that immediately after installation
>> FTP is easier to set up to transfer all the Fixpacks (about a dozen
>> are required).
>
> I've not messed with Fixpacks yet.  I'm still using what's installed off
> of plastic from IBM.

And you are connected to a Samba 4 server?

>> The alternative to the bultin IBM Peer is Samba for OS/2. But this
>> requires NetDrive which is not freeware, and in my case it crashed
>> like a metronome. I never tried it again afterwards.
>
> Why would I want Samba for OS/2 when IBM includes the necessary
> software?  #confused

- Samba for OS/2 can connect to Windows as well. IBM Peer cannot connect
to recent Windows versions anymore, not even with all Fixpacks.
- Samba for OS/2 has large file support (>2GB).
- Samba for OS/2 supports encryption.
- Samba for OS/2 can connect to a server without weakening security to a
level close to zero.

> I've not yet had stability problems with OS/2.  Time will tell.
>
>> One moment. You want to share a single physical network adapter from
>> different OS at the same time? This won't work.
>
> Single physical network adapter ≠ single network interface ports.
>
> single physical network adapter with dual ports ≈ two network interface
> ports.

Yes, but usually only one chipset with common registers and/or resources
managed by only one driver.

> I want to use one network interface port with OS/2 and the other network
> interface port with OS/390.

I would really wonder if that works. PCI passthrough cannot map the same
PCI device to different VMs at the same time.

> My initial tests with an Intel PRO/1000 MT seem promising.  I've got
> OS/2 using the first network interface port and things configured for
> OS/390 to use the other network interface port.  Things seem to be
> working, but I need to do considerable more testing to know for sure.

Does this card register as multiple PCI devices? If yes then you likely
will succeed.


Marcel

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/20/19 10:39 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> Sure? Not NetBIOS over TCP/IP, also called TCPBEUI?

As I said, I'm fairly certain that Samba did support NetBIOS a.k.a.
NetBEUI, over 802.2 LLC frames.

Yes, I know that Samba does support NetBIOS over TCP/IP, a.k.a. NBT.
That's not what I'm talking about.

> This has changed. Several default security settings prevent the setup of
> LANMAN2 sessions. It is not just the protocol level.

I know that SMB / CIFS / SMB2 has changed a lot in the last 25 years.

> Connecting to a Samba Server things change. It starts with the case of
> the password. Warp 4 without any Fixpack AFAIR converts the password
> silently to upper case which usually ends up with access denied.

It is entirely depending on which version of Samba and how it's configured.

Current / contemporary Samba, sure. Samba from ~2000, that's a
different story.

> And you are connected to a Samba 4 server?

Nope.

I'm connecting OS/2 Warp 4 with OS/2 Warp 4.52, both as distributed by IBM.

> - Samba for OS/2 can connect to Windows as well. IBM Peer cannot connect
> to recent Windows versions anymore, not even with all Fixpacks.

Note that both the server and the client are OS/2 Warp 4(.52) from 20+
years ago.

> - Samba for OS/2 has large file support (>2GB).

That doesn't impact what I'm doing.

> - Samba for OS/2 supports encryption.

I don't care about encryption on a private LAN.

> - Samba for OS/2 can connect to a server without weakening security to a
> level close to zero.

There's no need to change security settings when going from OS/2 Warp 4
to OS/2 Warp 4.52 (on a private LAN).

> Yes, but usually only one chipset with common registers and/or resources
> managed by only one driver.

So. That doesn't matter.

> I would really wonder if that works. PCI passthrough cannot map the same
> PCI device to different VMs at the same time.

I don't know yet.

> Does this card register as multiple PCI devices? If yes then you likely
> will succeed.

No. Nor does it matter.

OS/390 is a completely different kettle of fish. It hooks into OS/2 via
a custom driver that uses the 802.2 protocol to talk to the standard
OS/2 drivers & protocol (LAPS).

[Dave Yeo]

On 11/18/19 11:56 PM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> The alternative to the bultin IBM Peer is Samba for OS/2. But this
> requires NetDrive which is not freeware, and in my case it crashed like
> a metronome. I never tried it again afterwards.

IIRC, Netdrive plus the Samba plugin are freeware with all other plugins
being payware. Also seems stable based on others usage, I'm happy with
ftp for my limited needs
Dave

[Grant Taylor]

On 11/19/19 9:32 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> I want to use one network interface port with OS/2 and the other network
> interface port with OS/390.

Well, the dual port E1000 doesn't work as desired in OS/2 Warp Server
for e-business (4.52). But it does work as desired in ArcaOS 5.0.0.

Under ArcaOS the multiple ports on the NIC show up as independent
interfaces. Under OS/2 WSeb they showed up under a single interface.

Do to the nature of what I'm doing, I needed discrete interfaces so that
I could have different settings and protocols on each port ~> interface.
OS/2 WSeb would bind the same protocols to all ports under the single
interface, which doesn't work for what I need.

> My initial tests with an Intel PRO/1000 MT seem promising.  I've got
> OS/2 using the first network interface port and things configured for
> OS/390 to use the other network interface port.  Things seem to be
> working, but I need to do considerable more testing to know for sure.

The way that OS/390 interfaces with the network turned out to be a
problem and I couldn't get this to work as desired under OS/2 WSeb.

It didn't help that OS/390 uses 802.2 LLC w/ SNAP Ethernet frames for
TCP/IP when the rest of the world uses Ethernet II (a.k.a. DIX) Ethernet
frames for TCP/IP. So, I'm having to route through another system that
understands TCP/IP on both 802.2 LLC w/ SNAP and Ethernet II frames.
I'm currently using OS/2 WSeb running in a VM.

I'm thinking about trying a quad E1000 NIC so that I can give one
interface to OS/390 and connect it to another interface for ArcaOS, both
of which will use TCP/IP over 802.2 LLC w/ SNAP. I'll then have ArcaOS
route between that interface and the main interface using TCP/IP over
Ethernet II.