From sms at 2BSD.COM Thu May 1 01:56:58 2003 From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 08:56:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: <200304301556.h3UFuwb20269@moe.2bsd.com> Hi - > From: Jochen Kunz > > > cn 1 csr 176540 vector 344 no address found for kl/dl-11 > > Is 'cn 1 ...' line 38 of the /etc/dtab file? > Yes: > cn 1 176540 344 5 cnrint cnxint Interesting. I do not recall any particular problem getting additional DL devices recognized (the 11/93 had 7 of them). Seeing the 'no address found' error is *strange* though - that would indicate that 'autoconfig' could not find 'cnrint' or 'cnxint' in the /unix symbol table. Look at /sys/autoconfig and you can see where that message is coming from. If you do nm /unix | egrep 'cnxint|cnrint' what do you see? > NKL 4 # KL11, DL11 > The card has four ports, one of them is the console. (The M8192 CPU card > has no SLU / ROM / ...) Ah, ok. My 11/73 has a SLU/ROM card and the console is on that. I also have a DHV installed (alas, the system is powered down now so I can not check for more information). > But I would prefere to get the DHV11 working. It seams that this device > is more suitable for multi user operation. Yes, it's a little better. Not as nice as a DHQ-11 though (which can run in DHU or DHV modes - with DHU mode having much better silo handling). I forget the exact error you were getting on the DHV but if it was 'no interrupt' then it might be that the DHV clone is not behaving exactly like a DEC DHV In /sys/autoconfig/dhvauto.c here is how the probing attempts to force an interrupt: dhvprobe(addr,vector) struct dhvdevice *addr; int vector; { if ( grab ( &(addr->dhvcsr) ) & DHV_CS_MCLR ) DELAY(35000L); if ( grab ( &(addr->dhvcsr) ) & (DHV_CS_MCLR|DHV_CS_DFAIL) ) return ( 0 ); stuff ( DHV_CS_RI | DHV_CS_RIE, &(addr->dhvcsr) ); DELAY(3500L); stuff ( 0, &(addr->dhvcsr) ); return(ACP_IFINTR); } Either 3500 microseconds (very approximately of course) is too short of a wait _or_ the method of trying to generate an interrupt is not correct. You can try changing 'ACP_IFINTR' to 'ACP_EXISTS' which tells autoconf to not care if the device interrupted or not. > ** Last Mounted on / > ** Root file system > ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes > ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames > ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity > ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts > ** Phase 5 - Check Free List > BLK(S) MISSING > SALVAGE? y > > ** Phase 6 - Salvage Free List > 1364 files, 11625 used, 2430 free > > ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED ***** > > But on the next reboot I get the same when running fsck. Any hints? How are you rebooting? With the "reboot" command or by using the 'halt' button? You do not want to use the 'reboot' command because that does a "sync" which flushes the disc cache (and superblock) back out to disc - that overwrites the work that 'fsck' did. A few 'missing' blocks is not a serious problem though and can be ignored. Cheers, Steven Schultz From sms at 2BSD.COM Thu May 1 02:03:40 2003 From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 09:03:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: <200304301603.h3UG3eE20319@moe.2bsd.com> Hi! > From: David Evans > > cn 1 176540 344 5 cnrint cnxint > > to the end of this line? Perhaps the autoconfig parser becomes confused > if there aren't any. I don't think that's the problem in this case - the error that is being printed out: cn 1 csr 176540 vector 344 no address found for kl/dl-11 comes from what appears to be a missing entry (or an entry that autoconfig can't find) in the /unix kernel symbol table. One way, I think, this can happen is when booting an alternate kernel (/genunix instead of /unix). THe only suggestion I have at this point is to turn on debugging in autoconfig. To do this go into /sys/autoconfig/main.c and add a line that forces 'debug = 1;', then install (after saving the original ;)) autoconfig into /etc and reboot. Hopefully useful info about what autoconfig is doing will be printed. > Mine is at least correctly identified by autoconfig, though I've never > attached a terminal to it to see whether the ports actually do anything. > The post that's vanished included my dhv line from /etc/dtab but, except > for the goofy CSR I used for some reason that I cannot now remember, it If I find the time I'll power up the 11/73 and see what it says but I've had a DHV11 on the system for years (it's how I got the RTS/CTS flow control working). My suspicion is that the DHV clone isn't behaving 100% like a DEC DHV card. > > BTW: Never play with the SMD cables when the machine is running. Now I > > get: > > Is the disk write-inhibited? Doing a 'reboot' (which performs a sync(2) call) will overwrite what fsck has done - when the message about "reboot" comes out you should use the front panel or ODT to simply halt the cpu and then start the boot process cold. Cheers, Steven Schultz From jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de Thu May 1 02:23:49 2003 From: jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de (Jochen Kunz) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 18:23:49 +0200 Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble In-Reply-To: <20030430094032.A7330@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>; from dfevans@bbcr.uwaterloo.ca on Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 15:40:32 CEST References: <200304292248.h3TMmmc08433@moe.2bsd.com> <20030430102422.D196974@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> <20030430094032.A7330@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> Message-ID: <20030430182349.N196974@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> On 2003.04.30 15:40 David Evans wrote: > I didn't see my other post go through; I got it only via private mail. > have you tried adding some comments > to the end of this line? Perhaps the autoconfig parser becomes > confused if there aren't any. Hmm. [...] I added comments at the end of the lines and now it works: April 30 17:29:29 init: configure system dhv ? csr 160440 vector 310 didn't interrupt. ra 0 csr 172150 vector 154 vectorset attached ra 1 csr 160334 vector 764 vectorset attached rx ? csr 177170 vector 264 skipped: No CSR. tms 0 csr 174500 vector 260 vectorset attached ts 0 csr 172520 vector 224 attached cn 1 csr 176540 vector 344 attached cn 2 csr 176550 vector 354 attached cn 3 csr 176560 vector 364 attached Hmmm. No manpage for cn/dl/kl? Major / minor device numbers? [reading the kernel source] Aha. /dev/ttyl1 is what I am looking for. But the interrupt vector seams to be wrong. But still trouble with the dhv. Maybe wrong interrupt vector too? Maybe I compile a kernel with support for a DZQ11... > > But I would prefere to get the DHV11 working. It seams that this > > device is more suitable for multi user operation. > Mine is at least correctly identified by autoconfig, though I've > never attached a terminal to it to see whether the ports actually do > anything. Normaly I use the console for booting only and then I telnet to the machine. But I wane connect some terminals to the PDP-11 at the VCFe, so the visitors can log in play around. [fsck trouble] > Is the disk write-inhibited? No. It seams that I made the mistake to reboot using reboot(8) insted of power cycling the machine when fsck modified the file system. Didn't notice that / was mounted r/w. -- tschüß, Jochen Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/ From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Thu May 1 02:59:36 2003 From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:59:36 -0400 Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble In-Reply-To: <20030430182349.N196974@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de>; from jkunz@unixag-kl.fh-kl.de on Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 06:23:49PM +0200 References: <200304292248.h3TMmmc08433@moe.2bsd.com> <20030430102422.D196974@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> <20030430094032.A7330@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> <20030430182349.N196974@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> Message-ID: <20030430125936.A7938@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 06:23:49PM +0200, Jochen Kunz wrote: > On 2003.04.30 15:40 David Evans wrote: > > > I didn't see my other post go through; > I got it only via private mail. > Ahh, OK--misfire on my part. > > have you tried adding some comments > > to the end of this line? Perhaps the autoconfig parser becomes > > confused if there aren't any. > Hmm. > [...] > I added comments at the end of the lines and now it works: > > April 30 17:29:29 init: configure system > > dhv ? csr 160440 vector 310 didn't interrupt. OK--that at least fixed the "three handlers" (or whatever) error message. I haven't looked in detail at the parsing code for autoconfig so I don't know why this is happening. I may poke at it tonight if I have the energy, though of course Steve has the knowledge to do it more easily. :-) > But still trouble with the dhv. Maybe wrong interrupt vector too? It's possible that your DHV board is simply strapped for something other than 310. > Normaly I use the console for booting only and then I telnet to the > machine. Likewise. > But I wane connect some terminals to the PDP-11 at the VCFe, so > the visitors can log in play around. > Not a bad plan. > [fsck trouble] > > Is the disk write-inhibited? > No. It seams that I made the mistake to reboot using reboot(8) insted of > power cycling the machine when fsck modified the file system. Didn't > notice that / was mounted r/w. I typically use "reboot -n" in such circumstances. -- David Evans (NeXTMail/MIME OK) dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/ University of Waterloo "Default is the value selected by the composer Ontario, Canada overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual From jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de Thu May 1 02:58:26 2003 From: jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de (Jochen Kunz) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 18:58:26 +0200 Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble In-Reply-To: <200304301556.h3UFuwb20269@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 17:56:58 CEST References: <200304301556.h3UFuwb20269@moe.2bsd.com> Message-ID: <20030430185826.R196974@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> On 2003.04.30 17:56 Steven M. Schultz wrote: > Interesting. I do not recall any particular problem getting > additional DL devices recognized (the 11/93 had 7 of them). As already mentioned: If I add comments at the end of the lines it works: cn 1 176540 344 5 cnrint cnxint # kl/dl-11 (on mvx11-aa) cn 2 176550 354 5 cnrint cnxint # kl/dl-11 (on mvx11-aa) cn 3 176560 364 5 cnrint cnxint # kl/dl-11 (on mvx11-aa) cn 1 csr 176540 vector 344 attached cn 2 csr 176550 vector 354 attached cn 3 csr 176560 vector 364 attached Sounds like a funny bug? But if I try to use /dev/ttyl1 I get a message about a unknown interrupt and the output of /dev/ttyl1 hangs after the first character. > If you do > nm /unix | egrep 'cnxint|cnrint' > what do you see? # nm /unix | egrep 'cnxint|cnrint' 007402 T _cnrint 007624 T _cnxint 000050 t cnrint 000060 t cnxint > Yes, it's a little better. Not as nice as a DHQ-11 though I have a M3106 DZQ11 that I can use instead. > I forget the exact error you were getting on the DHV but if it was > 'no interrupt' then it might be that the DHV clone is not behaving > exactly like a DEC DHV The DHV is a DEC M3104: dhv ? csr 160440 vector 310 didn't interrupt. The DL11 card is a clone made by Sigma. > How are you rebooting? With the "reboot" command or by using the > 'halt' button? [...] Noticed that already. I am really not used to Unix stuff of that age. ;-) -- tschüß, Jochen Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/ From sms at 2BSD.COM Thu May 1 04:43:11 2003 From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:43:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: <200304301843.h3UIhBa22154@moe.2bsd.com> Hi - > From: Jochen Kunz > As already mentioned: If I add comments at the end of the lines it > cn 1 176540 344 5 cnrint cnxint # kl/dl-11 (on mvx11-aa) > cn 2 176550 354 5 cnrint cnxint # kl/dl-11 (on mvx11-aa) > cn 3 176560 364 5 cnrint cnxint # kl/dl-11 (on mvx11-aa) > cn 1 csr 176540 vector 344 attached > cn 2 csr 176550 vector 354 attached > cn 3 csr 176560 vector 364 attached > Sounds like a funny bug? Yes, it does. A bug in the parsing. Why it does not affect all the lines is unknown. Perhaps some trailing whitespace caused the parser to exhibit the bug. > But if I try to use /dev/ttyl1 I get a message about a unknown interrupt > and the output of /dev/ttyl1 hangs after the first character. What is the exact message? I did a "strings /unix" and could not not find a string that looked mentioned unknown or interrupt. That would seem to indicate that the device is interrupting but not at the expected vector. It is possible to use 'adb' to look at the contents of the vectors. adb -k /unix /dev/kmem 0344/o will show the contents of the 0344 vector. The value there should be equal to 'cnrint' (or cnxint - I forget which comes first). > I have a M3106 DZQ11 that I can use instead. Definitely worth trying. > The DHV is a DEC M3104: > dhv ? csr 160440 vector 310 didn't interrupt. > The DL11 card is a clone made by Sigma. Ah, ok. Thanks for the correction. I misread the initial mail item. > > 'halt' button? > [...] > Noticed that already. I am really not used to Unix stuff of that age. :) I did the the same thing - wondered why I could never get a clean file system. Then I realized what was going on. Cheers, Steven Schultz From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu Thu May 1 13:30:47 2003 From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 20:30:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: <200305010330.h413Ul921643@opihi.ucsd.edu> > From: "Steven M. Schultz" > To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:43:11 -0700 (PDT) > > Hi - > > > From: Jochen Kunz > > > > 'halt' button? > > [...] > > Noticed that already. I am really not used to Unix stuff of that age. > > :) > > I did the the same thing - wondered why I could never get a clean > file system. Then I realized what was going on. Isn't this really true of Unix systems of any age, when doing fsck on a mounted root file system? carl From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Thu May 1 13:35:03 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 23:35:03 -0400 Subject: [pups] Restoring volumes Message-ID: <000001c30f92$a78292a0$0100a8c0@who5> Hello again from Gregg C Levine Just for the sake of an argument, has anyone actually managed to restore a volume from the collection on the ftp server, back to an originally sized disk pack? Or for that matter restored a system so that it behaves as advertised under E-11? No, folks that machine I "have on order", has not arrived. Once again I am searching for information for a future project. One that might be happening sometime this week, or even later this month. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) Sign on the side of a transport belonging to the Rebel Alliance, "Force happens". From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Thu May 1 13:48:52 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 23:48:52 -0400 Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble In-Reply-To: <200305010330.h413Ul921643@opihi.ucsd.edu> Message-ID: <000401c30f94$95541d40$0100a8c0@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine In a word, "Yes". I have seen it happen on a system running Linux, here, and the disk was going. It would eventually destroy its partition table, but that is beside the point. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Carl Lowenstein > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 11:31 PM > To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble > > > From: "Steven M. Schultz" > > To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org > > Subject: Re: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble > > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:43:11 -0700 (PDT) > > > > Hi - > > > > > From: Jochen Kunz > > > > > > 'halt' button? > > > [...] > > > Noticed that already. I am really not used to Unix stuff of that age. > > > > :) > > > > I did the the same thing - wondered why I could never get a clean > > file system. Then I realized what was going on. > > Isn't this really true of Unix systems of any age, when doing fsck > on a mounted root file system? > > carl From sms at 2BSD.COM Thu May 1 14:04:30 2003 From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 21:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: <200305010404.h4144UJ18330@moe.2bsd.com> Hi - > From: Carl Lowenstein > > > > 'halt' button? > > > [...] > > > > I did the the same thing - wondered why I could never get a clean > > file system. Then I realized what was going on. > > Isn't this really true of Unix systems of any age, when doing fsck > on a mounted root file system? Not really. Newer systems mount the root filesystem read-only while running fsck. After the filesystem is verified as clean then it is upgraded to read-write. Older systems such as 2BSD can't run with a read-only root filesystem that I know of. At least not easily/happily. Might be possible (the ability to upgrade a ro mount to rw is present) but it's never been a priority to look into it ;) Cheers, Steven Schultz From jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de Thu May 1 19:24:50 2003 From: jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de (Jochen Kunz) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 02:24:50 -0700 Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble In-Reply-To: <200304301843.h3UIhBa22154@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 11:43:11 %z References: <200304301843.h3UIhBa22154@moe.2bsd.com> Message-ID: <20030501092450.GE1481@oblina.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> On 2003.04.30 11:43 Steven M. Schultz wrote: > > Sounds like a funny bug? > Yes, it does. A bug in the parsing. Why it does not affect > all the lines is unknown. Perhaps some trailing whitespace > caused the parser to exhibit the bug. Maybe I get some time at the VCFE to investigate this. (Showing visitors "live hacking". ;-) ) > > But if I try to use /dev/ttyl1 I get a message about a unknown > interrupt > > and the output of /dev/ttyl1 hangs after the first character. > What is the exact message? Sorry don't know. I may be able to reproduce the error later. I got PSU trouble when I wanted to do this yesterday... > That would seem to indicate that the device is interrupting > but not at the expected vector. If I use a different vector (e.g. 404) it tells me that the vector is wrong when booting. Maybe I can use a VAX with NetBSD for some "probing".... > > I have a M3106 DZQ11 that I can use instead. > Definitely worth trying. But when I was compiling the kernel with the new driver the machine crashed. The PSU simply stoped working. :-((( It worked again when I pulled all non-essential cards and the TK50. Maybe I overloaded the PSU? Maybe I will need a new PSU soon? If everything fails I can use the BA215 for the PDP-11. I have several spare PSUs for that box. But a BA215 is not the "right", "contemporary" enclosure for PDP-11/73. > I did the the same thing - wondered why I could never get a > clean file system. Then I realized what was going on. Nice to hear that I am not the only one who made that mistake. ;-) -- tschüß, Jochen Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Thu May 1 10:50:28 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:50:28 +1200 Subject: [pups] About Per Brinch Hansen Message-ID: <200305011250.28308.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Anyone thought of asking him if he could contribute his Concurrent Pascal and Solo, etc, to PUPS? Just a thought. Welsey Parish -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Thu May 1 23:49:55 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 08:49:55 -0500 Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: Carl Lowenstein: Isn't this really true of Unix systems of any age, when doing fsck on a mounted root file system? Some middle-elderly BSD systems--4.1 and possibly 4.0-- managed the buffer pool in such a way that the super-block of a mounted file system was kept in the original buffer, with device and block number correctly stored in the struct buf header. Hence if fsck wrote to the block device rather than the raw one, the super-block came out right even when checking a mounted file system; in particular there was no need to reboot. This convenience was abolished in either 4.2 or 4.3 (I am travelling right now and cannot check manuals and sources). I never quite understood why, though I never looked at the source code in the later systems. The scheme found in most current systems, in which the root starts out read-only, is a better idea anyway. Norman Wilson Toronto ON (normally) From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Thu May 1 22:54:03 2003 From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 08:54:03 -0400 Subject: [pups] Restoring volumes In-Reply-To: <000001c30f92$a78292a0$0100a8c0@who5>; from hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net on Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 11:35:03PM -0400 References: <000001c30f92$a78292a0$0100a8c0@who5> Message-ID: <20030501085403.A9936@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 11:35:03PM -0400, Gregg C Levine wrote: > Just for the sake of an argument, has anyone actually managed to > restore a volume from the collection on the ftp server, back to an > originally sized disk pack? Or for that matter restored a system so > that it behaves as advertised under E-11? > I did it on SIMH--I extracted the 2.11BSD system that had precompiled networking in it...don't recall who made it. I don't know whether this overlaps sufficiently with what you want to do for me to be useful. -- David Evans (NeXTMail/MIME OK) dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/ University of Waterloo "Default is the value selected by the composer Ontario, Canada overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG Fri May 2 05:14:57 2003 From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) Date: Thu, 1 May 03 12:14:57 PDT Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD device config trouble Message-ID: <0305011914.AA15038@ivan.Harhan.ORG> Norman Wilson wrote: > This convenience was abolished in either 4.2 or 4.3 (I am > travelling right now and cannot check manuals and > sources). I don't remember the details in my head and I'm also typing this on the go, but in 4.3BSD fsck does work on the block device and then you reboot with, well, reboot, and it works. MS From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Fri May 2 08:31:47 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 18:31:47 -0400 Subject: [pups] Restoring volumes In-Reply-To: <000401c30fa3$40e59720$f10010ac@dawabbit> Message-ID: <000901c31031$74a7c5e0$0100a8c0@who5> Hello again from Gregg C Levine Yes, Ian. That's exactly what I mean. Of course I was thinking of RL02 images, rather then a RK05 image. Which one did you choose? And can you post something explaining the steps? And your response was the simpler form, which is what I wanted. David's comment was a bit obtuse, but I got it. By the way? Are you a WB fan? As in Warner Bros. Animation. I'm partial to the wisdom of B. Bunny. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) Sign on the side of a transport belonging to the Rebel Alliance, "Force happens". > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian King [mailto:iking at killthewabbit.org] > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 1:34 AM > To: Gregg C Levine > Subject: Re: [pups] Restoring volumes > > That's where I got my RK05 image for UNIX v6, which I run on my 11/34. Is > that what you're asking, or am I being simple? -- Ian > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gregg C Levine" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 8:35 PM > Subject: [pups] Restoring volumes > > > Hello again from Gregg C Levine > Just for the sake of an argument, has anyone actually managed to > restore a volume from the collection on the ftp server, back to an > originally sized disk pack? Or for that matter restored a system so > that it behaves as advertised under E-11? > > No, folks that machine I "have on order", has not arrived. Once again > I am searching for information for a future project. One that might be > happening sometime this week, or even later this month. > ------------------- > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net > ------------------------------------------------------------ > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Fri May 2 09:08:39 2003 From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 19:08:39 -0400 Subject: [pups] Restoring volumes In-Reply-To: <000901c31031$74a7c5e0$0100a8c0@who5>; from hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net on Thu, May 01, 2003 at 06:31:47PM -0400 References: <000401c30fa3$40e59720$f10010ac@dawabbit> <000901c31031$74a7c5e0$0100a8c0@who5> Message-ID: <20030501190839.A4640@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 06:31:47PM -0400, Gregg C Levine wrote: > And your response was the simpler form, which is what I wanted. > David's comment was a bit obtuse, but I got it. It was obtuse mostly because I couldn't remember exactly what I did nor was I really sure what you wanted to do. That's a dangerous combination! -- David Evans (NeXTMail/MIME OK) dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/ University of Waterloo "Default is the value selected by the composer Ontario, Canada overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual From jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de Thu May 8 07:16:38 2003 From: jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de (Jochen Kunz) Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 23:16:38 +0200 Subject: [pups] Tektronix 8560 with PDP-11/23 CPU running TNIX (UINX) Message-ID: <20030507231637.K206647@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> Hi. I got a "Tektronix 8560 Multi-User Software Development Unit" together with a Tektronix 8540 in system 68k CPU emulator. The 8560 is based on the DEC M8186 PDP-11/23 CPU module but that card is the one and only DEC part in the machine. Everything else is from Tektronix. There is a 35 MB 8" disk and a 8" floppy in the 8560 and it runs some flavor of UNIX called TNIX. I am trying to break into it currently, as I have no passwords. I can't get it to single user mode and I have no distribution media nor no stand alone tools. Has someone heared from this machine bevore? Has someone distribution media or stand alone tools? -- tschüß, Jochen Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/ From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Thu May 8 07:32:32 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 17:32:32 -0400 Subject: [pups] Tektronix 8560 with PDP-11/23 CPU running TNIX (UINX) In-Reply-To: <20030507231637.K206647@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> Message-ID: <000101c314e0$2bff7e60$0100a8c0@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine Only indirectly. That because of the Tek4010 terminals that worked with the PDP-11 families. There are speculations regarding the whole hardware collection. Tell you what? Post photos, on notes on it, on your website, in both English, and your native language, on your website, and a link here, on this list to it. Also include your progress. That because I'd love to have the chance to see your collection. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Jochen Kunz > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 5:17 PM > To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: [pups] Tektronix 8560 with PDP-11/23 CPU running TNIX (UINX) > > Hi. > > I got a "Tektronix 8560 Multi-User Software Development Unit" together > with a Tektronix 8540 in system 68k CPU emulator. The 8560 is based on > the DEC M8186 PDP-11/23 CPU module but that card is the one and only DEC > part in the machine. Everything else is from Tektronix. There is a 35 MB > 8" disk and a 8" floppy in the 8560 and it runs some flavor of UNIX > called TNIX. I am trying to break into it currently, as I have no > passwords. I can't get it to single user mode and I have no distribution > media nor no stand alone tools. > > Has someone heared from this machine bevore? > Has someone distribution media or stand alone tools? > -- > > > tschüß, > Jochen > > Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/ > > > _______________________________________________ > PUPS mailing list > PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups Sign on Imperial Storm Trooper during the battle of Endor. "Kick me!". From talmage at madison.onespeeddave.com Fri May 9 07:03:00 2003 From: talmage at madison.onespeeddave.com (David W. Talmage) Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 17:03:00 -0400 Subject: [pups] Tektronix 8560 with PDP-11/23 CPU running TNIX (UINX) In-Reply-To: Message from Jochen Kunz of "Wed, 07 May 2003 23:16:38 +0200." <20030507231637.K206647@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> Message-ID: <200305082103.h48L3079024077@madison.onespeeddave.com> >I got a "Tektronix 8560 Multi-User Software Development Unit" together >with a Tektronix 8540 in system 68k CPU emulator. The 8560 is based on I found this by Googling for "tnix single-user": http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/pups/1998-March/000027.html From jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de Fri May 9 16:52:09 2003 From: jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de (Jochen Kunz) Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 08:52:09 +0200 Subject: [pups] Tektronix 8560 with PDP-11/23 CPU running TNIX (UINX) In-Reply-To: <200305082103.h48L3079024077@madison.onespeeddave.com>; from talmage@madison.onespeeddave.com on Thu, May 08, 2003 at 23:03:00 CEST References: <200305082103.h48L3079024077@madison.onespeeddave.com> Message-ID: <20030509085209.A206647@MissSophie.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> On 2003.05.08 23:03 David W. Talmage wrote: > I found this by Googling for "tnix single-user": > http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/pups/1998-March/000027.html Meanwhile I found out myself that I have to run syschk and that the system asks for single or multi user mode after syschk. I was able to remove the root passwd but didn't get much further. The file system needs to be repaired and I have no stand alone utilities. But only the stand alone syschk is able to repair the file system. Interresting that the machine in the mail archive above has a /73 CPU. I have a spare /73 CPU module so I may be able to upgrade my machine... -- tschüß, Jochen Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/ From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sun May 18 21:29:00 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 23:29:00 +1200 Subject: [pups] Fwd: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Message-ID: <200305182328.13320.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> I asked Per Brinch Hansen recently about Solo and Concurrent Pascal, for use on the PDP 11 simulators, et al, and I received a reply today. This is it. I am wondering, does anyone have any clue as to where these copies of the system might be squirrelled away? How many might've seen it at their Universities? Wesley Parish ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 00:17:33 -0400 From: Per Brinch Hansen To: Wesley Parish Cc: Per Brinch Hansen Date: 18 May 2003 To: Wesley Parish From: Per Brinch Hansen Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al On May 4, you wrote: What I was wondering is, would it be worth asking you about the possibility of your releasing the Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS and several other such computer tools and programs, to PUPS (the PDP Unix Preservation Society)? At Caltech we prepared a distribution tape for the PDP 11/45 with the source text and portable code of the Solo system, including the Concurrent and Sequential Pascal compiler. The system reports were supplemented by implementation notes. By the spring of 1976 we had distributed the system to 75 companies and 100 universities in 21 countries. Later, other people moved the system to the Interdata 8/32, NCR 8250, Modular 1, LSI 11, IBM 370/145 and many other computers. Sad to say, I no longer have a copy of the system (and I don't know who does). Per Brinch Hansen ------------------------------------------------------- -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From cube1 at charter.net Wed May 21 12:36:52 2003 From: cube1 at charter.net (Jay Jaeger) Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 21:36:52 -0500 Subject: [pups] Fwd: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al In-Reply-To: <200305182328.13320.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20030520213524.03daedf0@cirithi> I recall some folks at the University of Wisconsin playing with Concurrent Pascal. I doubt that a copy survived, though. Jay Jaeger At 11:29 PM 5/18/2003 +1200, you wrote: >I asked Per Brinch Hansen recently about Solo and Concurrent Pascal, for use >on the PDP 11 simulators, et al, and I received a reply today. > >This is it. I am wondering, does anyone have any clue as to where these >copies of the system might be squirrelled away? How many might've seen it at >their Universities? > >Wesley Parish > >---------- Forwarded Message ---------- > >Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al >Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 00:17:33 -0400 >From: Per Brinch Hansen >To: Wesley Parish >Cc: Per Brinch Hansen > >Date: 18 May 2003 >To: Wesley Parish >From: Per Brinch Hansen >Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al > >On May 4, you wrote: > > What I was wondering is, would it be worth asking you about > the possibility of your releasing the Concurrent Pascal, Solo > OS and several other such computer tools and programs, to PUPS > (the PDP Unix Preservation Society)? > >At Caltech we prepared a distribution tape for the PDP 11/45 >with the source text and portable code of the Solo system, >including the Concurrent and Sequential Pascal compiler. The >system reports were supplemented by implementation notes. > >By the spring of 1976 we had distributed the system to 75 >companies and 100 universities in 21 countries. Later, other >people moved the system to the Interdata 8/32, NCR 8250, >Modular 1, LSI 11, IBM 370/145 and many other computers. > >Sad to say, I no longer have a copy of the system (and I >don't know who does). > >Per Brinch Hansen > >------------------------------------------------------- > >-- >Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" >You ask, "What is the most important thing?" >Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." >I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." > >_______________________________________________ >PUPS mailing list >PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups --- Jay R. Jaeger The Computer Collection cube1 at charter.net From aek at spies.com Thu May 22 06:45:35 2003 From: aek at spies.com (Al Kossow) Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 13:45:35 -0700 Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Message-ID: <200305212045.h4LKjZ0L005615@spies.com> I was given a disc image of the system for the PDP11 I'll try to dig it up for you. From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Tue May 27 10:54:16 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 10:54:16 +1000 (EST) Subject: [pups] Temporary loss of minnie.tuhs.org Message-ID: <200305270054.h4R0sG1P061799@minnie.tuhs.org> All, At 7am on Saturday 31st May (local time), the machine which runs this mailing list will be temporarily shut down as major power and UPS alterations are done in the machine room. I am informed that this should only take 12 hours, but you know what computers and such are like. Therefore, you should expect that this mailing list will be unavailable over the weekend of the 31st May / 1st June. Normal services will be resumed shortly :-) Cheers, Warren From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Tue May 27 11:19:54 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 21:19:54 -0400 Subject: [pups] Temporary loss of minnie.tuhs.org In-Reply-To: <200305270054.h4R0sG1P061799@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <000001c323ee$151e4600$0100a8c0@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine **Sneezes into his hand.** Yes, I do. Now, Warren does that include the direct FTP service? Or just the box who hosts this mail list? Or everything? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Warren Toomey > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 8:54 PM > To: pups at tuhs.org > Subject: [pups] Temporary loss of minnie.tuhs.org > > All, > At 7am on Saturday 31st May (local time), the machine which runs > this mailing list will be temporarily shut down as major power and UPS > alterations are done in the machine room. I am informed that this should > only take 12 hours, but you know what computers and such are like. > Therefore, you should expect that this mailing list will be unavailable > over the weekend of the 31st May / 1st June. > > Normal services will be resumed shortly :-) > > Cheers, > Warren > _______________________________________________ > PUPS mailing list > PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Tue May 27 11:57:47 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 11:57:47 +1000 Subject: [pups] Temporary loss of minnie.tuhs.org In-Reply-To: <000001c323ee$151e4600$0100a8c0@who5> References: <200305270054.h4R0sG1P061799@minnie.tuhs.org> <000001c323ee$151e4600$0100a8c0@who5> Message-ID: <20030527015747.GA62555@minnie.tuhs.org> >> From: pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org] >> At 7am on Saturday 31st May (local time), the machine which runs >> this mailing list will be temporarily shut down On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 09:19:54PM -0400, Gregg C Levine wrote: > Hello from Gregg C Levine > **Sneezes into his hand.** Yes, I do. Now, Warren does that include > the direct FTP service? Or just the box who hosts this mail list? Or > everything? That's everything. All things in tuhs.org will be gone for at least 12 hours. Warren From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sun May 18 21:29:00 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 23:29:00 +1200 Subject: [TUHS] Fwd: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Message-ID: <200305182328.13320.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> I asked Per Brinch Hansen recently about Solo and Concurrent Pascal, for use on the PDP 11 simulators, et al, and I received a reply today. This is it. I am wondering, does anyone have any clue as to where these copies of the system might be squirrelled away? How many might've seen it at their Universities? Wesley Parish ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 00:17:33 -0400 From: Per Brinch Hansen To: Wesley Parish Cc: Per Brinch Hansen Date: 18 May 2003 To: Wesley Parish From: Per Brinch Hansen Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al On May 4, you wrote: What I was wondering is, would it be worth asking you about the possibility of your releasing the Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS and several other such computer tools and programs, to PUPS (the PDP Unix Preservation Society)? At Caltech we prepared a distribution tape for the PDP 11/45 with the source text and portable code of the Solo system, including the Concurrent and Sequential Pascal compiler. The system reports were supplemented by implementation notes. By the spring of 1976 we had distributed the system to 75 companies and 100 universities in 21 countries. Later, other people moved the system to the Interdata 8/32, NCR 8250, Modular 1, LSI 11, IBM 370/145 and many other computers. Sad to say, I no longer have a copy of the system (and I don't know who does). Per Brinch Hansen ------------------------------------------------------- -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From AdmiralAK at yahoo.com Wed May 14 05:56:34 2003 From: AdmiralAK at yahoo.com (Apostolos Koutropoulos) Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:56:34 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Looking for obscure unix information Message-ID: Hi to all, I stumbled on your mailing list and I thought this would be a good place to pose my question. I was looking around for information about several little known (to me) unix derived Oses. AMIX (Amiga Unix) RISCiX ArchBSD Lynx Inferno Helios What I am looking for is basically what versions existed and when they were released, and also from where did they originate. For instance I know that RISCiX originated from BSD 4.4 but that is all I know. I also know that inferno grew out of the research for plan 9, but what version of plan 9 it evolved from I don¹t know. Anyone know the above info? If not any idea where I can look for further info? Thanks :) From apgarcia at oppie.phys.uwm.edu Thu May 22 05:53:17 2003 From: apgarcia at oppie.phys.uwm.edu (Phil Garcia) Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 14:53:17 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm Message-ID: Hi, What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? Does it affect the archive in any way? From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Thu May 22 09:09:50 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 19:09:50 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000201c31fee$15b707e0$0100a8c0@who5> Hello again from Gregg C Levine Personally? I think SCO should just drop it. For everyone else? Search me. Let's wait a few more weeks. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Phil Garcia > Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 3:53 PM > To: tuhs at tuhs.org > Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm > > Hi, > > What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? > Does it affect the archive in any way? > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Thu May 22 09:19:45 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 09:19:45 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030521231945.GA14255@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 02:53:17PM -0500, Phil Garcia wrote: > Hi, > What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? > Does it affect the archive in any way? Assuming that the Caldera BSD-style license agreement for Ancient UNIX is real (http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf), then it gives us the right to freely distribute these systems. Warren From iking at windows.microsoft.com Thu May 22 13:37:38 2003 From: iking at windows.microsoft.com (Ian King) Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 20:37:38 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm Message-ID: Reminds me of the old joke about the gnat buzzing around the elephant's nether end, with rape on its mind.... :-) ________________________________ From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org on behalf of Phil Garcia Sent: Wed 5/21/2003 12:53 PM To: tuhs at tuhs.org Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm Hi, What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? Does it affect the archive in any way? _______________________________________________ TUHS mailing list TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From grog at lemis.com Thu May 22 14:37:38 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:07:38 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: <20030521231945.GA14255@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20030521231945.GA14255@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030522043738.GJ68593@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 9:19:45 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 02:53:17PM -0500, Phil Garcia wrote: >> Hi, >> What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? >> Does it affect the archive in any way? > > Assuming that the Caldera BSD-style license agreement for Ancient UNIX > is real (http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf), then it gives > us the right to freely distribute these systems. I'd feel a *lot* happier if we'd finally get confirmation from SCO that they both know about this license and agree that it's genuine. I was contacted by a reporter a week or so ago, and I told her about it. She contacted Caldera, who pointed to http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html as the current valid license agreement: > When I mentionned to SCO that they had released free licenses to > ancient Unix, they said that that license was for non-commercial > use. When I mentionned the letter (January 2002) from Bill Broderick > that seemingly grants unemcumbered use of these ancient Unix > versions, SCO said that that is not the license agreement and that > they would send me the license agreement. Here it is: > http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html It appears that there has been such turnover in Caldera/SCO in the last 15 months that they don't know what they have done. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Thu May 22 19:24:25 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:24:25 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c Message-ID: <200305220924.h4M9OPki011867@localhost.localdomain> Greetings all. The V7 ls(1) man page says that the -s option, which prints total blocks, includes any indirect blocks. However, the V7 struct stat didn't have the st_blocks member in the struct stat, and the code in ls.c uses long nblock(size) long size; { return((size+511)>>9); } So, is this just a case of the man page being mistaken? When did the struct stat acquire the st_blocks member? While I'm at it, the V7 ls -a option only adds . and .. to the list; apparently all other dot files were printed by default. When did ls change such that -a applied to all dot files? Thanks, Arnold Robbins From arnold at skeeve.com Thu May 22 19:32:58 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 12:32:58 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] Open Source Initiative response to SCO vs. IBM Message-ID: <200305220932.h4M9WwOO012040@localhost.localdomain> A friend passed this URL on to me. I have not read it yet. Principal author is Eric Raymond. http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html Arnold From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Thu May 22 21:54:03 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 07:54:03 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm Message-ID: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original, genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002 that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors? Certainly there are electronic copies around; it existed (perhaps still exists) as a PDF file on Caldera's web site. I have a hardcopy in my own files, next to the old SCO Ancient UNIX Source Code agreement for which I paid hard cash (as we used to call the US dollar). But if there is an original somewhere, that might carry more weight. Is Bill Broderick still in an appropriately high position at Caldera or SCO? Norman Wilson Toronto ON From grog at lemis.com Fri May 23 12:37:22 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:07:22 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030523023722.GE80220@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 7:54:03 -0400, Norman Wilson wrote: > I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you > like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough > to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original, > genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002 > that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's > name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors? This is a question I've been asking for some time. Sadly, nobody has answered "yes". See also the message I sent yesterday: SCO have also maid claims which suggest they don't recognize the statement. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From chris at nodewarrior.org Fri May 23 13:32:09 2003 From: chris at nodewarrior.org (Chris Palmer) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 20:32:09 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c In-Reply-To: <200305220924.h4M9OPki011867@localhost.localdomain> References: <200305220924.h4M9OPki011867@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20030523033209.GE29449@nodewarrior.org> Aharon Robbins writes: > long > nblock(size) > long size; > { > return((size+511)>>9); > } Unfortunately I can't answer any of your questions; I can only ask a new one: What's with that "511" in there? From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com Fri May 23 14:10:30 2003 From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 00:10:30 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] (no subject) Message-ID: > The V7 ls(1) man page says that the -s option, which prints total >blocks, includes any indirect blocks. >However, the V7 struct stat didn't have the st_blocks member in the > struct stat, and the code in ls.c uses > long > nblock(size) > long size; > { > return((size+511)>>9); > } >So, is this just a case of the man page being mistaken? Yes, it looks like a manual bug. Retrieving the true number of indirect blocks isn't possible from the 7th edition stat. I'm not sure when (or by whom) the st_blocks member was added. > While I'm at it, the V7 ls -a option only adds . and .. to the > list; apparently all other dot files were printed by default. > When did ls change such that -a applied to all dot files? UCB or USL did this (I'm sure which first). Both tended to use more . files. Dennis From grog at lemis.com Fri May 23 14:17:27 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:47:27 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c In-Reply-To: <20030523033209.GE29449@nodewarrior.org> References: <200305220924.h4M9OPki011867@localhost.localdomain> <20030523033209.GE29449@nodewarrior.org> Message-ID: <20030523041727.GM80220@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 20:32:09 -0700, Chris Palmer wrote: > Aharon Robbins writes: > >> long >> nblock(size) >> long size; >> { >> return((size+511)>>9); >> } > > Unfortunately I can't answer any of your questions; I can only ask a new > one: What's with that "511" in there? Sector size - 1, just like the 9 is log(2) (511). It converts bytes to sectors. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG Fri May 23 13:44:26 2003 From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) Date: Thu, 22 May 03 20:44:26 PDT Subject: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c Message-ID: <0305230344.AA13738@ivan.Harhan.ORG> Chris Palmer wrote: > What's with that "511" in there? To divide by N rounding up you first add N-1, then divide by N. MS From imp at bsdimp.com Fri May 23 14:02:51 2003 From: imp at bsdimp.com (M. Warner Losh) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 22:02:51 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c In-Reply-To: <20030523033209.GE29449@nodewarrior.org> References: <200305220924.h4M9OPki011867@localhost.localdomain> <20030523033209.GE29449@nodewarrior.org> Message-ID: <20030522.220251.00484167.imp@bsdimp.com> In message: <20030523033209.GE29449 at nodewarrior.org> Chris Palmer writes: : Aharon Robbins writes: : : > long : > nblock(size) : > long size; : > { : > return((size+511)>>9); : > } : : Unfortunately I can't answer any of your questions; I can only ask a new : one: What's with that "511" in there? It rounds size up to the next larger block, and >> 9 divides by 512. So if you size was 512 it would return '1' but if it was 513 it would return '2'. Warner From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Fri May 23 23:40:43 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:40:43 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] The nameless horror of dotfiles [was (no subject)] Message-ID: <200305231341.h4NDfNJ8028100@minnie.tuhs.org> Dennis Ritchie, on ls discarding all names beginning with .: UCB or USL did this (I'm sure which first). Both tended to use more . files. Judging by the manuals, Research did it first. In every manual from 1/e to 6/e, the entry for ls(I) has this description for the -a option: list all entries; usually those beginning with "." are suppressed I always thought this was just a quick-and-dirty way to skip the . and .. entries; the sort of shortcut that was common in the good old days when everything was written in assembly language. That the USL system kept the old convention probably reflects its PWB heritage; both the latter system and that of Berkeley had already invented lots of configuration files clumsily hidden by putting . at the beginning-- more than ls had options at the time--and I guess they felt it was better to let sleeping dots lie. Incidentally, in 1/e ls(I) had a whopping five options: l, t, a, s, and d, each with the same meaning as now (except that -s is described simply as `give size in blocks for each entry' with nothing about accounting for indirect blocks or other overhead). Who says we haven't made decadence, er, progress over the years? Norman Wilson Toronto ON PS: I've lost track. Did the original Subject: line of this thread of conversation get lost because it began with a dot? From tms2 at mail.ptd.net Sat May 24 01:00:51 2003 From: tms2 at mail.ptd.net (T.M. Sommers) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 11:00:51 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm References: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030523023722.GE80220@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: <3ECE37A3.6CDF0FA9@mail.ptd.net> Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > > On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 7:54:03 -0400, Norman Wilson wrote: > > I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you > > like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough > > to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original, > > genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002 > > that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's > > name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors? > > This is a question I've been asking for some time. Sadly, nobody has > answered "yes". See also the message I sent yesterday: SCO have also > maid claims which suggest they don't recognize the statement. If he was their agent, then it doesn't matter what they claim to recognize now; they are bound by his statement. From kstailey at yahoo.com Sat May 24 13:42:24 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 20:42:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] (no subject) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030524034224.21529.qmail@web10008.mail.yahoo.com> --- Dennis Ritchie wrote: > > The V7 ls(1) man page says that the -s option, which prints total > >blocks, includes any indirect blocks. > > >However, the V7 struct stat didn't have the st_blocks member in the > > struct stat, and the code in ls.c uses > > > long > > nblock(size) > > long size; > > { > > return((size+511)>>9); > > } > > >So, is this just a case of the man page being mistaken? > > Yes, it looks like a manual bug. Retrieving > the true number of indirect blocks isn't possible > from the 7th edition stat. I'm not sure when (or by > whom) the st_blocks member was added. > > > While I'm at it, the V7 ls -a option only adds . and .. to the > > list; apparently all other dot files were printed by default. > > When did ls change such that -a applied to all dot files? > > UCB or USL did this (I'm sure which first). > Both tended to use more . files. > > Dennis > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs 1BSD ls.c has: for(;;) { p = &dentry; for (j=0; j<16; j++) *p++ = getc(&inf); if (dentry.dinode==0 || aflg==0 && dentry.dname[0]=='.') continue; if (dentry.dinode == -1) break; ep = gstat(makename(dir, dentry.dname), 0); if (ep->lnum != -1) ep->lnum = dentry.dinode; for (j=0; j<14; j++) ep->lname[j] = dentry.dname[j]; } so it skips all that start with "." unless aflg is set from invoking ls with -a. I got it from the 1BSD tape that is on the CSRG archive CD-ROM set. I had to port ar11 to FreeBSD/i386 to get the sources out of the cont.a files. If anyone wants my port of ar11 I can send it to them. ls.c starts with this block of comments: # /* * ls - list file or directory * * Modified by Bill Joy UCB May/August 1977 * * This version of ls is designed for graphic terminals and to * list directories with lots of files in them compactly. * It supports three variants for listings: * * 1) Columnar output. * 2) Stream output. * 3) Old one per line format. * * Columnar output is the default. * If, however, the standard output is not a teletype, the default * is one-per-line. * * With columnar output, the items are sorted down the columns. * We use columns only for a directory we are interpreting. * Thus, in particular, we do not use columns for * * ls /usr/bin/p* * * This version of ls also prints non-printing characters as '?' if * the standard output is a teletype. * * Flags relating to these and other new features are: * * -m force stream output. * * -1 force one entry per line, e.g. to a teletype * * -q force non-printings to be '?'s, e.g. to a file * * -c force columnar output, e.g. into a file * * -n like -l, but user/group id's in decimal rather than * looking in /etc/passwd to save time */ It's interesting they called CRTs "graphic terminals". __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com Sat May 24 14:17:52 2003 From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie) Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 00:17:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] The nameless horror of dotfiles [was (no subject)] Message-ID: The omniscient Norman seems to have nailed me: > Judging by the manuals, Research did it first. In every manual from > 1/e to 6/e, the entry for ls(I) has this description for the -a option: > list all entries; usually those beginning with "." are suppressed I suspect that in v7 (where .thing was indeed listed by default) we decided that since .thing was a real file in the directory it was better to list it instead of hiding it by default. (Seeing . and .. seemed seldom interesting, however). I was solely (and much more recently) responsible for the lack of subject header in my earlier reply. Dennis From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Sun May 25 04:47:57 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 14:47:57 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm Message-ID: <200305241848.h4OImTJ8039912@minnie.tuhs.org> T. M. Sommers: If [Broderick] was [SCO's or Caldera's] agent, then it doesn't matter what they claim to recognize now; they are bound by his statement. Assuming it can be proven that the statement was officially made, which is why I ask after properly signed hardcopy rather than the PDF file we have all seen. Probably there are documents hidden away in SCO's files--there must have been some paper trail leading to Broderick's letter--but that is likely to be harder to track down from outside. I don't doubt Broderick really wrote that letter, nor that he was authorized to make the statement. But the problem before us isn't truth, it's proof. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From arnold at skeeve.com Sun May 25 23:08:02 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 16:08:02 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] V7 ls -s option Message-ID: <200305251308.h4PD82YW011475@localhost.localdomain> > From: Dennis Ritchie > To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: [TUHS] (no subject) > Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 00:10:30 -0400 > > > The V7 ls(1) man page says that the -s option, which prints total > >blocks, includes any indirect blocks. > > >However, the V7 struct stat didn't have the st_blocks member in the > > struct stat, and the code in ls.c uses > > > long > > nblock(size) > > long size; > > { > > return((size+511)>>9); > > } > > >So, is this just a case of the man page being mistaken? > > Yes, it looks like a manual bug. Retrieving > the true number of indirect blocks isn't possible > from the 7th edition stat. I'm not sure when (or by > whom) the st_blocks member was added. Thanks for confirming this. In fact, the V7 calculation is only an approximation in another sense; a file with large holes could generate too large a result. System III doesn't have st_nblocks either. > > While I'm at it, the V7 ls -a option only adds . and .. to the > > list; apparently all other dot files were printed by default. > > When did ls change such that -a applied to all dot files? > > UCB or USL did this (I'm sure which first). > Both tended to use more . files. > > Dennis As already pointed out, earlier Research code only checked the first character for being '.'; I later looked at the V6 ls.c. The System III ls.c is essentially the V7 one, but with comments added, and -l printing both owner and group, with -g and -o to turn off group or owner from -l. Also, support for FIFOs. The nblock() calculation is considerably more complicated, and would seem to actually get the number of indirect blocks. At first glance, it looks though like a file with holes would still confuse it. Nothing like engaging in Software Archeology... :-) Thanks, Arnold From grog at lemis.com Mon May 26 12:56:50 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 12:26:50 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: <3ECE37A3.6CDF0FA9@mail.ptd.net> References: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030523023722.GE80220@wantadilla.lemis.com> <3ECE37A3.6CDF0FA9@mail.ptd.net> Message-ID: <20030526025650.GK15770@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Friday, 23 May 2003 at 11:00:51 -0400, T.M. Sommers wrote: > Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >> >> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 7:54:03 -0400, Norman Wilson wrote: >>> I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you >>> like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough >>> to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original, >>> genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002 >>> that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's >>> name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors? >> >> This is a question I've been asking for some time. Sadly, nobody has >> answered "yes". See also the message I sent yesterday: SCO have also >> maid claims which suggest they don't recognize the statement. > > If he was their agent, then it doesn't matter what they claim to > recognize now; they are bound by his statement. Yes, of course. The issue here is whether we can prove that the statement was made. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From grog at lemis.com Mon May 26 14:16:34 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 13:46:34 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] V7 ls -s option In-Reply-To: <200305251308.h4PD82YW011475@localhost.localdomain> References: <200305251308.h4PD82YW011475@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20030526041634.GR15770@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Sunday, 25 May 2003 at 16:08:02 +0300, Aharon Robbins wrote: >> From: Dennis Ritchie >> To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org >> Subject: [TUHS] (no subject) >> Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 00:10:30 -0400 >> >>> The V7 ls(1) man page says that the -s option, which prints total >>> blocks, includes any indirect blocks. >> >>> However, the V7 struct stat didn't have the st_blocks member in the >>> struct stat, and the code in ls.c uses >> >>> long >>> nblock(size) >>> long size; >>> { >>> return((size+511)>>9); >>> } >> >>> So, is this just a case of the man page being mistaken? >> >> Yes, it looks like a manual bug. Retrieving >> the true number of indirect blocks isn't possible >> from the 7th edition stat. I'm not sure when (or by >> whom) the st_blocks member was added. > > Thanks for confirming this. In fact, the V7 calculation is only > an approximation in another sense; a file with large holes could > generate too large a result. A block is a block. If it's allocated, it's all there (at least in the Seventh Edition). It doesn't make any difference that some of the space in the block may not represent valid data. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From vance at aurema.com Mon May 26 15:40:38 2003 From: vance at aurema.com (Christopher Vance) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 15:40:38 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: <20030526025650.GK15770@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <200305221154.h4MBsZJ8019026@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030523023722.GE80220@wantadilla.lemis.com> <3ECE37A3.6CDF0FA9@mail.ptd.net> <20030526025650.GK15770@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20030526054038.GE559@aurema.com> On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 12:26:50PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: : Yes, of course. The issue here is whether we can prove that the : statement was made. I guess the issue is what Dion L Johnson II, Paul Hatch, John Terpstra, Bill Broderick, "drew at caldera.com", and/or Ransom Love will say in a relevant court about the existence and veracity of the announcing email. It's interesting that the Levenez chart, used by SCO to argue that Linux "stole stuff", comes from a page linking to a copy of the BSDish Caldera license. -- Christopher Vance From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Tue May 27 10:54:18 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 10:54:18 +1000 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Temporary loss of minnie.tuhs.org Message-ID: <200305270054.h4R0sIQG061814@minnie.tuhs.org> All, At 7am on Saturday 31st May (local time), the machine which runs this mailing list will be temporarily shut down as major power and UPS alterations are done in the machine room. I am informed that this should only take 12 hours, but you know what computers and such are like. Therefore, you should expect that this mailing list will be unavailable over the weekend of the 31st May / 1st June. Normal services will be resumed shortly :-) Cheers, Warren From kstailey at yahoo.com Tue May 27 12:45:58 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 19:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm In-Reply-To: <20030526025650.GK15770@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20030527024558.89482.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> --- Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Friday, 23 May 2003 at 11:00:51 -0400, T.M. Sommers wrote: > > Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > >> > >> On Thursday, 22 May 2003 at 7:54:03 -0400, Norman Wilson wrote: > >>> I haven't come up to speed yet on SCOIBM Wars (pronounce it as you > >>> like, but perhaps not in polite company), but even so I know enough > >>> to ask a question: is anyone in possession of a signed, original, > >>> genuine, non-electronic copy of the Bill Broderick letter of 23 Jan 2002 > >>> that granted a mostly free license (as long as credit given and Caldera's > >>> name not used in vain) for 32V, V7, and predecessors? > >> > >> This is a question I've been asking for some time. Sadly, nobody has > >> answered "yes". See also the message I sent yesterday: SCO have also > >> maid claims which suggest they don't recognize the statement. > > > > If he was their agent, then it doesn't matter what they claim to > > recognize now; they are bound by his statement. > > Yes, of course. The issue here is whether we can prove that the > statement was made. > > Greg The fact that they are not threatened by TUHS the way they are by Linux will probably make them ignore TUHS but you never know. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com From arnold at skeeve.com Tue May 27 22:26:24 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 15:26:24 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] V7 ls -s option Message-ID: <200305271226.h4RCQOQD005872@localhost.localdomain> The V7 ls.c code: > >>> long > >>> nblock(size) > >>> long size; > >>> { > >>> return((size+511)>>9); > >>> } > >> I wrote: > > In fact, the V7 calculation is only > > an approximation in another sense; a file with large holes could > > generate too large a result. Greg wrote: > A block is a block. If it's allocated, it's all there (at least in > the Seventh Edition). It doesn't make any difference that some of the > space in the block may not represent valid data. You're missing my point. Consider a C program along these lines: int main(void) { int fd = creat("/some/file", 0600); lseek(fd, 123456789L, 0); /* absolute seek */ write(fd, "x", 1); close(fd); } After running this program, the `/some/file' file now looks rather large. But it only has one block allocated to it. However, the V7 nblock() function computes a number somewhat larger than one. Thanks, Arnold From grog at lemis.com Wed May 28 10:07:02 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 09:37:02 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] V7 ls -s option In-Reply-To: <200305271226.h4RCQOQD005872@localhost.localdomain> References: <200305271226.h4RCQOQD005872@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20030528000702.GF84922@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Tuesday, 27 May 2003 at 15:26:24 +0300, Aharon Robbins wrote: > The V7 ls.c code: > >>>>> long >>>>> nblock(size) >>>>> long size; >>>>> { >>>>> return((size+511)>>9); >>>>> } >>>> > > I wrote: > >>> In fact, the V7 calculation is only >>> an approximation in another sense; a file with large holes could >>> generate too large a result. > > Greg wrote: > >> A block is a block. If it's allocated, it's all there (at least in >> the Seventh Edition). It doesn't make any difference that some of the >> space in the block may not represent valid data. > > You're missing my point. Consider a C program along these lines: > > int main(void) > { > int fd = creat("/some/file", 0600); > > lseek(fd, 123456789L, 0); /* absolute seek */ > write(fd, "x", 1); > close(fd); > } > > After running this program, the `/some/file' file now looks rather > large. But it only has one block allocated to it. However, the V7 > nblock() function computes a number somewhat larger than one. Yes, I missed your point. Sorry. This is what comes of shooting off my mouth before reading the code. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mckusick at beastie.mckusick.com Mon May 26 02:22:39 2003 From: mckusick at beastie.mckusick.com (Kirk McKusick) Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 09:22:39 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c Message-ID: <200305251622.h4PGMdp0003047@beastie.mckusick.com> The st_blocks field was first added to the stat structure in 4.2BSD (4.1b really) as part of the overhaul to add the new filesystem. I added it because the variable filesystem blocksize made it difficult to compute the amount of storage dedicated to a file. Kirk McKusick From arnold at skeeve.com Wed May 28 21:14:11 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 14:14:11 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: Eric Raymond striking a blow for ... something Message-ID: <200305281114.h4SBEBta027832@localhost.localdomain> I just saw this: http://www.catb.org/~esr/nosecrets/ This either Very Smart or Very Dumb, I'm not sure which. I don't know that it need be discussed to death on this list, either, but I do figure that the list members will at least be interested in it. Arnold From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Wed May 28 21:51:38 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 07:51:38 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: Eric Raymond striking a blow for ... something Message-ID: <200305281152.h4SBqDJ8075263@minnie.tuhs.org> Aharon Robbins: I just saw this: http://www.catb.org/~esr/nosecrets/ This either Very Smart or Very Dumb, I'm not sure which. I will just point out the recursive conflict when he says I can't talk about how this information will be applied, nor by who. You'll have to trust me, or at any rate my record as ambassador to the community ... I find it hard to take a secret No Secrets campaign seriously. If I am to be used as an example of something or to promote some cause, I think it's only fair that the campaigner tell me just what he's up to first. That such a campaign exists in the current context also sounds to me like an admission that substantial parts of Linux were in fact lifted directly from a licensed UNIX. That that might be so seems surprising; that someone would want to prove it was OK even more so. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed May 28 22:07:22 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 05:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: Eric Raymond striking a blow for ... something In-Reply-To: <200305281114.h4SBEBta027832@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20030528120722.72762.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> --- Aharon Robbins wrote: > I just saw this: > > http://www.catb.org/~esr/nosecrets/ > > This either Very Smart or Very Dumb, I'm not sure which. I don't know > that it need be discussed to death on this list, either, but I do figure > that the list members will at least be interested in it. > > Arnold I think the intent is to to demonstrate that they did not value their trade secrets and did not make an effort to (even just a show of an effort) to defend them. By showing that tens of thousands of people had access to the UNIX source that was supposed to be a secret and SCO not going after any of them (unlike, say, Microsoft's defending Windows source) will weaken their arguments that these were valuable trade secrets. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed May 28 22:11:16 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 05:11:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: Eric Raymond striking a blow for ... something In-Reply-To: <200305281152.h4SBqDJ8075263@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030528121116.15955.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> --- Norman Wilson wrote: > Aharon Robbins: > > I just saw this: > > http://www.catb.org/~esr/nosecrets/ > > This either Very Smart or Very Dumb, I'm not sure which. > > I will just point out the recursive conflict when he says > > I can't talk about how this information will be applied, nor by > who. You'll have to trust me, or at any rate my record as > ambassador to the community ... > > I find it hard to take a secret No Secrets campaign seriously. > If I am to be used as an example of something or to promote some > cause, I think it's only fair that the campaigner tell me just > what he's up to first. If ESR told the world what he was going to do with the evidence then the opposition would be able to prepare for it. > That such a campaign exists in the current context also sounds to > me like an admission that substantial parts of Linux were in fact > lifted directly from a licensed UNIX. Hmmm. Either that or he's trying to keep all the bases covered. What happened in reality and what they prove in the courts need not be the same as we have seen as time and again Microsoft goes to trial and gets off. It helps to have a fallback arguement ready. > That that might be so seems > surprising; that someone would want to prove it was OK even more so. > > Norman Wilson > Toronto ON > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From arnold at skeeve.com Wed May 28 23:27:30 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 16:27:30 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: Eric Raymond striking a blow for ... something Message-ID: <200305281327.h4SDRUJi015729@localhost.localdomain> > I find it hard to take a secret No Secrets campaign seriously. That says it well. > That such a campaign exists in the current context also sounds to > me like an admission that substantial parts of Linux were in fact > lifted directly from a licensed UNIX. That that might be so seems > surprising; that someone would want to prove it was OK even more so. I think it's more of a "How dare anyone even think licensed code was lifted? We all know better than that. I'm gonna show you that you don't even have a leg to stand on." Whatever. Anyone with any sense knows that SCO hasn't got much ground to stand on. Sadly, "anyone with any sense" likely doesn't cover the judge and the jury. Sigh. (Fade to black, as Dionne Warwick sings "Deja Vu" in the background...) Arnold From kstailey at yahoo.com Thu May 29 04:49:13 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 11:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <20030528121116.15955.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030528184913.25621.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> Press Release Novell Challenges SCO Position, Reiterates Support for Linux PROVO, Utah � May 28, 2003 � Defending its interests in developing services to operate on the Linux platform, Novell today issued a dual challenge to The SCO Group over its recent statements regarding its UNIX ownership and potential intellectual property rights claims over Linux. First, Novell challenged SCO's assertion that it owns the copyrights and patents to UNIX System V, pointing out that the asset purchase agreement entered into between Novell and SCO in 1995 did not transfer these rights to SCO. Second, Novell sought from SCO facts to back up its assertion that certain UNIX System V code has been copied into Linux. Novell communicated these concerns to SCO via a letter (text below) from Novell� Chairman and CEO Jack Messman in response to SCO making these claims. more: http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2003/05/pr03033.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Thu May 29 05:25:05 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 15:25:05 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: <200305281925.h4SJPYJ8078685@minnie.tuhs.org> Interesting. I suggest everyone interested in this fracas read the whole scoop at (to repeat Kenneth Stailey's pointer) http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2003/05/pr03033.html Here's a question of interest not to the Linux community but to the TUHS one: if, as Novell now claim, the 1995 agreement didn't convey the UNIX copyrights to SCO, under what right did SCO issue the Ancient UNIX Source Code agreements, whether the restrictive version of early 1998 or the do-as-you-like Caldera letter of early 2002? Are those agreements really valid? Norman Wilson Toronto ON From ckeck at texoma.net Thu May 29 09:24:56 2003 From: ckeck at texoma.net (Cornelius Keck) Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 18:24:56 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <200305281925.h4SJPYJ8078685@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: > Here's a question of interest not to the Linux community but to > the TUHS one: if, as Novell now claim, the 1995 agreement didn't > convey the UNIX copyrights to SCO, under what right did SCO issue > the Ancient UNIX Source Code agreements, whether the restrictive > version of early 1998 or the do-as-you-like Caldera letter of early > 2002? Are those agreements really valid? Good point. If memory serves me correctly, the 1998 agreement was not free for the asking, but rather required shelling out US$100, which means that SCO "sold" something they never owned, which constitutes fraud (anybody with some legal background reading this: please correct). What's the statue of limitations (sp?) for this? Regards, Cornelius -- Cornelius Keck ckeck at texoma.net From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Thu May 29 10:02:19 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 10:02:19 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: References: <200305281925.h4SJPYJ8078685@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030529000219.GA82058@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 06:24:56PM -0500, Cornelius Keck wrote: > > Here's a question of interest not to the Linux community but to > > the TUHS one: if, as Novell now claim, the 1995 agreement didn't > > convey the UNIX copyrights to SCO, under what right did SCO issue > > the Ancient UNIX Source Code agreements, whether the restrictive > > version of early 1998 or the do-as-you-like Caldera letter of early > > 2002? Are those agreements really valid? > > Good point. If memory serves me correctly, the 1998 agreement was > not free for the asking, but rather required shelling out US$100, > which means that SCO "sold" something they never owned, which > constitutes fraud (anybody with some legal background reading > this: please correct). What's the statue of limitations (sp?) > for this? Actually, Novell have only asserted that SCO/Caldera did not obtain the rights to System V. Now, neither the $100 nor the BSD-style SCO/Caldera Ancient UNIX licenses covered System V, so this might not be fraud. It depends on whether or not SCO/Caldera have the rights to Research Editions 1 to 7 and System III :-) This is all getting to be like a very bad TV soap: UNIX Sons and Daughters. We've got grandad Research who was a pioneer in the area, son USL, and now a lot of bastard grandchildren. And of course there's the newcomer in town called Linux. Warren From mike at ducky.net Thu May 29 17:49:56 2003 From: mike at ducky.net (Mike Haertel) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 00:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <200305281925.h4SJPYJ8078685@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <200305290749.h4T7nu22092199@ducky.net> >Here's a question of interest not to the Linux community but to >the TUHS one: if, as Novell now claim, the 1995 agreement didn't >convey the UNIX copyrights to SCO, under what right did SCO issue >the Ancient UNIX Source Code agreements, whether the restrictive >version of early 1998 or the do-as-you-like Caldera letter of early >2002? Are those agreements really valid? You can have the right to sublicense something without owning the copyright. You can even have the right to sublicense the right to sublicense without owning the copyright, and so on. It all depends on your contract with the real copyright holder. This is probably how the contract for Novell's "sale" of Unix to (old) SCO was written. But only the real copyright holder can bring a legal action against copyright violators. And judging from recent press releases it would seem that Novell feels it is under no contractual obligation to do so on (new) SCO's behalf. From rob at vetsystems.com Thu May 29 22:16:33 2003 From: rob at vetsystems.com (Robert Tillyard) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 13:16:33 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <200305290749.h4T7nu22092199@ducky.net> Message-ID: I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and not on copyright issues. But if it turns out the IBM is guilty of lifting SCO code and putting it into Linux I think SCO does have the right to get a bit upset about it, after all I wouldn't be to happy if I had to compete with a product that's just about free and contains code that I wrote. Regards, Rob. On 29/5/03 8:49 am, "Mike Haertel" wrote: >> Here's a question of interest not to the Linux community but to >> the TUHS one: if, as Novell now claim, the 1995 agreement didn't >> convey the UNIX copyrights to SCO, under what right did SCO issue >> the Ancient UNIX Source Code agreements, whether the restrictive >> version of early 1998 or the do-as-you-like Caldera letter of early >> 2002? Are those agreements really valid? > > You can have the right to sublicense something without owning > the copyright. You can even have the right to sublicense the > right to sublicense without owning the copyright, and so on. > It all depends on your contract with the real copyright holder. > > This is probably how the contract for Novell's "sale" of Unix > to (old) SCO was written. > > But only the real copyright holder can bring a legal action > against copyright violators. And judging from recent press > releases it would seem that Novell feels it is under no > contractual obligation to do so on (new) SCO's behalf. From kstailey at yahoo.com Thu May 29 23:18:49 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 06:18:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030529131849.23434.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com> --- Robert Tillyard wrote: > I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and not on > copyright issues. SCO has packed so much FUD around this issue. If Novell did anything to help it made SCO clarify their posistion. http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=110126 Another good thing that came out of this mess is the neat-o table embedded in this page: http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html That shows AIX (and XENIX/SCO) in relationship to other systems. Search for "Relationships among the Unix variants at issue" It does leave out AIX 2 on ROMP. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From kstailey at yahoo.com Fri May 30 02:08:29 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 09:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] where to find source to pack(1)/unpack(1) Message-ID: <20030529160829.55129.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> Hi, I have a cont.a.z I would like to extract. When I run it through Solaris unpack(1) there are no complaints but then I go to unarchive it with either my 3BSD derived ar11 port or Warren's 2.9BSD newoldar and get: $ file cont.a cont.a: old PDP-11 archive $ ar11 tv cont.a rwx---r-- 2/0 3505 Aug 20 17:07 1976 alog.mat rw----r-- 2/0 273 Jan 3 05:14 1978 assem rwx---r-- 2/0 6332 Aug 20 17:07 1976 atan.mat r-s--x-w- 9/49170995977 Oct 22 01:48 1974 1 1 1 1 1 ar11: phase error on 1 1 1 1 1 Same thing with newoldar. I'm thinking Solaris unpack was incompatible with the pack that was used to make the cont.a.z. Possibly endian issues. I go poking around for pack(1) in V7 and PWB and 2.11BSD but can't find anything. Any ideas? Thanks, Ken __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From imp at bsdimp.com Thu May 29 22:33:54 2003 From: imp at bsdimp.com (M. Warner Losh) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 06:33:54 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: References: <200305290749.h4T7nu22092199@ducky.net> Message-ID: <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> In message: Robert Tillyard writes: : I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and not on : copyright issues. All of SCO's statements to the court have been contractual. Their statements to the press have been inflated to include things that aren't actually alledged in the court filings. : But if it turns out the IBM is guilty of lifting SCO code and putting it : into Linux I think SCO does have the right to get a bit upset about it, : after all I wouldn't be to happy if I had to compete with a product that's : just about free and contains code that I wrote. That's the rub. Do they, in point of fact, actually have any code they own the Copyright to or the patent rights to? SCO is blustering more and more as the open source community exposes them for the fruads that they have become. Warner From cyrille.lefevre at laposte.net Fri May 30 01:44:13 2003 From: cyrille.lefevre at laposte.net (Cyrille Lefevre) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:44:13 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set? In-Reply-To: <200212112326.gBBNQlr04157@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <200212112326.gBBNQlr04157@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030529154413.GA52289@gits.dyndns.org> On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 09:26:47AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > In article by Robertdkeys at aol.com: > > Warren... is there a non-broken 4.3BSD-Tahoe set somewhere? > > Bob > > As in a bootable 4.3BSD-Tahoe kit? As far as I know, no. The Unix Archive > has a broken copy in 4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe, indicating that > both usr.tar and src.tar are broken. > > It might/should be possible to merge files from the CRSG CD set from Kirk > to recreate these tar files. > > Anybody out there have an unbroken Tahoe release? Hi, take a look at http://mapage.noos.fr/clefevre/4bsd/ you will found the listings of some archives found around the net some years ago. don't ask me where, I can't remember. If you are interrested by one or more of them, let me know, I'll provide you in a way or another. FYI, appart the 4.3BSD-Tahoe archive, the following one is also broken : 4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Rev2-Foreign/usr.tar.gz 4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe/src.tar.gz 4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe/usr.tar.gz Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:cyrille.lefevre at laposte.net From grog at lemis.com Fri May 30 09:50:27 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 09:20:27 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <200305290749.h4T7nu22092199@ducky.net> <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> Message-ID: <20030529235027.GE20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 29 May 2003 at 6:33:54 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: > Robert Tillyard writes: >> I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and >> not on copyright issues. > > All of SCO's statements to the court have been contractual. Their > statements to the press have been inflated to include things that > aren't actually alledged in the court filings. What's not very clear here is that there seem to be two issues. The IBM issue is, as you say, a contractual one which about which they have been remarkably vague. The suspension of Linux distribution is a different matter. From http://www.lemis.com/grog/sco.html: On Tuesday, 27 May 2003, I spoke to Kieran O'Shaughnessy, managing director of SCO Australia. He told me that SCO had entrusted three independent companies to compare the code of the UnixWare and Linux kernels. All three had come back pointing to significant occurrences of common code ("UnixWare code", as he put it) in both kernels. In view of the long and varied history of UNIX, I wondered whether the code in question might have been legally transferred from an older version of UNIX to Linux, so I asked him if he really meant UnixWare and not System V.4. He stated that it was specifically UnixWare 7. >> But if it turns out the IBM is guilty of lifting SCO code and >> putting it into Linux I think SCO does have the right to get a bit >> upset about it, after all I wouldn't be to happy if I had to >> compete with a product that's just about free and contains code >> that I wrote. > > That's the rub. Do they, in point of fact, actually have any code > they own the Copyright to or the patent rights to? Of course they have lots of code with their own copyright. The release of JFS was one example. Probably the majority of AIX was developed by IBM, not by AT&T. It's rather similar to the issue with 4BSD in the early 90s: with a little bit of work you could probably replace the entire AT&T code in AIX and have a system which did not require an SCO license. If you mean "is there IBM copyright code in Linux?", I think the answer is again yes, but it's under the GPL or possibly IPL, IBM's attempt at a compromise between proprietary licenses and the GPL. I think they've given up on the IPL now. For what it's worth, I'd be astounded if SCO's claims were found to be true. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From imp at harmony.village.org Fri May 30 09:56:39 2003 From: imp at harmony.village.org (M. Warner Losh) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 17:56:39 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <20030529235027.GE20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030529235027.GE20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20030529.175639.34763729.imp@bsdimp.com> In message: <20030529235027.GE20321 at wantadilla.lemis.com> "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" writes: : On Thursday, 29 May 2003 at 6:33:54 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: : > In message: : > Robert Tillyard writes: : : >> I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and : >> not on copyright issues. : > : > All of SCO's statements to the court have been contractual. Their : > statements to the press have been inflated to include things that : > aren't actually alledged in the court filings. : : What's not very clear here is that there seem to be two issues. The : IBM issue is, as you say, a contractual one which about which they : have been remarkably vague. The suspension of Linux distribution is a : different matter. From http://www.lemis.com/grog/sco.html: : : On Tuesday, 27 May 2003, I spoke to Kieran O'Shaughnessy, managing : director of SCO Australia. He told me that SCO had entrusted three : independent companies to compare the code of the UnixWare and Linux : kernels. All three had come back pointing to significant : occurrences of common code ("UnixWare code", as he put it) in both : kernels. : : In view of the long and varied history of UNIX, I wondered whether : the code in question might have been legally transferred from an : older version of UNIX to Linux, so I asked him if he really meant : UnixWare and not System V.4. He stated that it was specifically : UnixWare 7. I base my statements on the legal filings that are available at the SCO site. I do not base them on anything that SCO has said to the press, since those statements are nearly universally overinflated. Since these are statements to the press, or other public statements, I trust them as much as I trust public statements by politicians. : > That's the rub. Do they, in point of fact, actually have any code : > they own the Copyright to or the patent rights to? : : Of course they have lots of code with their own copyright. The : release of JFS was one example. Probably the majority of AIX was : developed by IBM, not by AT&T. It's rather similar to the issue with : 4BSD in the early 90s: with a little bit of work you could probably : replace the entire AT&T code in AIX and have a system which did not : require an SCO license. I was speaking of SCO, not IBM. What code does SCO own the copyright to? : For what it's worth, I'd be astounded if SCO's claims were found to be : true. Me too. There's another article that is saying that there are 10-15 line snippets scattered all through the kernel. Give me a break. That claim is so absurd as to be not credible on its face. I can see one or two files, maybe stretching my disbelief to its limits, but I can't see anything more pervasive than that. Warner From grog at lemis.com Fri May 30 10:37:46 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 10:07:46 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <20030529.175639.34763729.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030529235027.GE20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030529.175639.34763729.imp@bsdimp.com> Message-ID: <20030530003746.GF20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 29 May 2003 at 17:56:39 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20030529235027.GE20321 at wantadilla.lemis.com> > "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" writes: >> On Thursday, 29 May 2003 at 6:33:54 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: >>> In message: >>> Robert Tillyard writes: >> >>>> I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and >>>> not on copyright issues. >>> >>> All of SCO's statements to the court have been contractual. Their >>> statements to the press have been inflated to include things that >>> aren't actually alledged in the court filings. >> >> What's not very clear here is that there seem to be two issues. The >> IBM issue is, as you say, a contractual one which about which they >> have been remarkably vague. The suspension of Linux distribution is a >> different matter. From http://www.lemis.com/grog/sco.html: >> >> On Tuesday, 27 May 2003, I spoke to Kieran O'Shaughnessy, managing >> director of SCO Australia. He told me that SCO had entrusted three >> independent companies to compare the code of the UnixWare and Linux >> kernels. All three had come back pointing to significant >> occurrences of common code ("UnixWare code", as he put it) in both >> kernels. >> >> In view of the long and varied history of UNIX, I wondered whether >> the code in question might have been legally transferred from an >> older version of UNIX to Linux, so I asked him if he really meant >> UnixWare and not System V.4. He stated that it was specifically >> UnixWare 7. > > I base my statements on the legal filings that are available at the > SCO site. I do not base them on anything that SCO has said to the > press, since those statements are nearly universally overinflated. > Since these are statements to the press, or other public statements, I > trust them as much as I trust public statements by politicians. The trouble is that there *is* no legal filing on the Linux without IBM case. >>> That's the rub. Do they, in point of fact, actually have any code >>> they own the Copyright to or the patent rights to? >> >> ... > > I was speaking of SCO, not IBM. What code does SCO own the copyright > to? Ah, sorry. Got to pass on that one. They probably have the rights to XENIX. >> For what it's worth, I'd be astounded if SCO's claims were found to be >> true. > > Me too. There's another article that is saying that there are 10-15 > line snippets scattered all through the kernel. Give me a break. > That claim is so absurd as to be not credible on its face. I can see > one or two files, maybe stretching my disbelief to its limits, but I > can't see anything more pervasive than that. There are plenty of cases where you need to initialize a data structure. Many data structures are public knowledge, and initialization is a brainless enough task that the code could have been written independently and look almost the same. Does this line ring a bell? (*bdevsw[major(bp->b_dev)]->d_strategy) (bp); How many people have written that independently of each other? Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Fri May 30 11:00:17 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 21:00:17 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: <200305300100.h4U10pJ8090918@minnie.tuhs.org> M. Warner Losh: There's another article that is saying that there are 10-15 line snippets scattered all through the kernel. Give me a break. That claim is so absurd as to be not credible on its face. I can see one or two files, maybe stretching my disbelief to its limits, but I can't see anything more pervasive than that. I agree that it sounds unlikely, and I won't give it much credit until SCO makes its evidence generally available. But it's by no means absurd. Suppose SCO invented some whizzy data structure and associated code conventions to afford especially efficient interprocessor locks. That could show up in fragments scattered throughout the kernel, and the idea itself could in fact be valuable intellectual property and the fragments a demonstration that the idea was stolen. Or suppose the issue at hand was a particular way to implement a file system switch. I was involved in adding such a thing to an old-fashioned kernel myself; it touches many little pieces of code all over the kernel that happen to do certain things to or with in-core i-nodes. If I was worried that someone had stolen such work wholesale, part of what I would look for would indeed be scattered fragments. As I say, there's no useful evidence on view at all, therefore there is no useful evidence that what I am describing is what the fuss is about. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Fri May 30 11:01:26 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 11:01:26 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <20030530003746.GF20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030529235027.GE20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030529.175639.34763729.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030530003746.GF20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20030530010126.GA90870@minnie.tuhs.org> On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:07:46AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > There are plenty of cases where you need to initialize a data > structure. Many data structures are public knowledge, and > initialization is a brainless enough task that the code could have > been written independently and look almost the same. Does this line > ring a bell? > > (*bdevsw[major(bp->b_dev)]->d_strategy) (bp); And you've got to watch out for these ones, which have been around since 1973: #define EPERM 1 /* Operation not permitted */ #define ENOENT 2 /* No such file or directory */ #define ESRCH 3 /* No such process */ #define EINTR 4 /* Interrupted system call */ So that that extent, there is real UNIX code in Linux 8-) Warren From grog at lemis.com Fri May 30 11:20:30 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 10:50:30 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <20030530010126.GA90870@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20030529.063354.51702197.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030529235027.GE20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030529.175639.34763729.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030530003746.GF20321@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030530010126.GA90870@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030530012030.GA39063@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Friday, 30 May 2003 at 11:01:26 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 10:07:46AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >> There are plenty of cases where you need to initialize a data >> structure. Many data structures are public knowledge, and >> initialization is a brainless enough task that the code could have >> been written independently and look almost the same. Does this line >> ring a bell? >> >> (*bdevsw[major(bp->b_dev)].d_strategy) (bp); > > And you've got to watch out for these ones, which have been around > since 1973: > > #define EPERM 1 /* Operation not permitted */ > #define ENOENT 2 /* No such file or directory */ > #define ESRCH 3 /* No such process */ > #define EINTR 4 /* Interrupted system call */ > > So that that extent, there is real UNIX code in Linux 8-) Heh. Also in the Third Edition: /src/UNIX/PDP-11/Third-Edition/dmr/bio.c: (*bdevsw[dev.d_major].d_strategy)(rbp); /src/UNIX/PDP-11/Third-Edition/dmr/bio.c: (*bdevsw[rbp->b_dev.d_major].d_strategy)(rbp); Yes, this is the reason why I asked Kieran if it was really UnixWare or UNIX System V. They need to prove where the code originally came from before they have any kind of case. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lm at bitmover.com Fri May 30 12:42:53 2003 From: lm at bitmover.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 19:42:53 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs In-Reply-To: <200305300130.h4U1UMJ8091290@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <200305300130.h4U1UMJ8091290@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030530024253.GE21405@work.bitmover.com> > SCO is blustering more and more as the open source community exposes > them for the fruads that they have become. In the for what it is worth department, I happen to know that this stuff is more complex than it seems. For instance, I am pretty sure that ATT should have won their lawsuit over the BSD stuff and if you doubt that I'd suggest that you go compare the UFS code against the 32v or v7 code. bmap() is a good place to look. Any suggestions that that was completely rewritten are patently false, at least in my opinion. I'm a file system guy, I've done a lot of work in UFS, I'm intimately familiar with the code. In fact, I defended UFS against LFS when Kirk wouldn't (LFS is a friggin' joke, any file system hacker knows that the allocation policy is 90% of the file system). I do not have knowledge of the code it is that SCO says infringes. And I think that SCO is about as astute as I am in terms of public relations (we both tend to be our own worst enemies and I thought I was without peer in that department :-) But I suspect that there is at least some merit to what they are claiming. I have to believe that nobody is stupid enough to have zero data and jump out in public like they are doing. That's just way too far over the top. Anything is possible I guess, but doesn't it seem just a little unlikely that a corporation would commit that public a suicide? I'll probably be proved wrong but I'm a CEO, running a small company, much smaller than SCO, and there is no way I'd stick my neck out that far with no data to back it up. I'd like to think I'm smarter than they are but I tend to doubt it, they have more experience. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Fri May 30 19:01:44 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 21:01:44 +1200 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: <200305302101.44047.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> On Friday 30 May 2003 11:50 am, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Thursday, 29 May 2003 at 6:33:54 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > > In message: > > > > Robert Tillyard writes: > >> I believe the legal action is over breach on contract with IBM and > >> not on copyright issues. > > > > All of SCO's statements to the court have been contractual. Their > > statements to the press have been inflated to include things that > > aren't actually alledged in the court filings. > > What's not very clear here is that there seem to be two issues. The > IBM issue is, as you say, a contractual one which about which they > have been remarkably vague. The suspension of Linux distribution is a > different matter. From http://www.lemis.com/grog/sco.html: > > On Tuesday, 27 May 2003, I spoke to Kieran O'Shaughnessy, managing > director of SCO Australia. He told me that SCO had entrusted three > independent companies to compare the code of the UnixWare and Linux > kernels. All three had come back pointing to significant > occurrences of common code ("UnixWare code", as he put it) in both > kernels. > > In view of the long and varied history of UNIX, I wondered whether > the code in question might have been legally transferred from an > older version of UNIX to Linux, so I asked him if he really meant > UnixWare and not System V.4. He stated that it was specifically > UnixWare 7. > > >> But if it turns out the IBM is guilty of lifting SCO code and > >> putting it into Linux I think SCO does have the right to get a bit > >> upset about it, after all I wouldn't be to happy if I had to > >> compete with a product that's just about free and contains code > >> that I wrote. > > > > That's the rub. Do they, in point of fact, actually have any code > > they own the Copyright to or the patent rights to? > > Of course they have lots of code with their own copyright. The > release of JFS was one example. Probably the majority of AIX was > developed by IBM, not by AT&T. It's rather similar to the issue with > 4BSD in the early 90s: with a little bit of work you could probably > replace the entire AT&T code in AIX and have a system which did not > require an SCO license. I would say that that is entirely likely. AIX was developed by IBM for IBM-specific machines running in IBM-style environments, and I can imagine that SysVRx just _doesn't_ _cut_ _the_ _mustard_. So, SCO's latching on the IBM for Monterey - RS-6000 was 64-bit, or am I getting confused? - probably gave SCO much more than it gave IBM. So ironically, if IBM donated stuff to Monterey under the terms of the agreement and later incorporated the same stuff into Linux, it _could_ look as if they had taken stuff from SysVRx/Unixware - stuff that SCO had never had the opportunity to develop if it hadn't been for Monterey and IBM's pre-existing expertise. Just some thoughts - but if that is so, I can see why IBM's not getting too het up about the whole muck-up. Wesley Parish > If you mean "is there IBM copyright code in Linux?", I think the > answer is again yes, but it's under the GPL or possibly IPL, IBM's > attempt at a compromise between proprietary licenses and the GPL. I > think they've given up on the IPL now. > > For what it's worth, I'd be astounded if SCO's claims were found to be > true. > > Greg -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From grog at lemis.com Fri May 30 13:31:24 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:01:24 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs In-Reply-To: <20030530024253.GE21405@work.bitmover.com> References: <200305300130.h4U1UMJ8091290@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030530024253.GE21405@work.bitmover.com> Message-ID: <20030530033124.GB39668@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 29 May 2003 at 19:42:53 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote: > I do not have knowledge of the code it is that SCO says infringes. Which puts you in the same boat as the rest of us. > But I suspect that there is at least some merit to what they are > claiming. I have to believe that nobody is stupid enough to have > zero data and jump out in public like they are doing. That's just > way too far over the top. Anything is possible I guess, but doesn't > it seem just a little unlikely that a corporation would commit that > public a suicide? It's certainly unlikely, agreed. But SCO has done some unlikely things recently. You saw the public threat to sue Linus Torvalds personally? > I'd like to think I'm smarter than they are but I tend to doubt it, > they have more experience. As far as I can see (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong), most of the key players at SCO have changed over the last 12 months. They appear to have few engineers left, which is presumably one reason why they gave the UnixWare and Linux code to outsiders to compare. I'm not convinced of their understanding of the matters at hand. For example, last year Caldera released "ancient UNIX" under a BSD-style license, but now they're claiming it never happened. Maybe they don't know about the company history. And if the code in dispute is derived from ancient UNIX, there'll be egg on their face. Of course, a simple comparison doesn't show the origin of the code. If it proves to have been lifted from Linux, they'll *really* look stupid. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: