From cym224 at gmail.com Wed Mar 1 05:11:24 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 14:11:24 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? Message-ID: I have looked at the papers published in the AT&T Technical J. in 1985 and found no mention of UNIX. N. From corey at lod.com Wed Mar 1 05:30:16 2017 From: corey at lod.com (Corey Lindsly) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:30:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20170228193016.75AE940B9@lod.com> > > I have looked at the papers published in the AT&T Technical J. in 1985 > and found no mention of UNIX. > > N. > Certainly so. I don't know what the call-processing module ran, but on the Administration Module side it was real-time UNIX running on a 3B20D (D for Duplexed). I even have a bunch of source code for it on microfiche somewhere, although I probably should not admit to this. When I lived in Philadelphia in the early 1990s Temple University tried to give me one of their 3B20S (S for Simplex) systems that was being decommissioned. The size of several refrigerators, lamentably, I was not able to give it a home. I hope it found one .. --corey From beebe at math.utah.edu Wed Mar 1 05:35:11 2017 From: beebe at math.utah.edu (Nelson H. F. Beebe) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:35:11 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nemo writes on Tue, 28 Feb 2017 14:11:24 -0500: >> I have looked at the papers published in the AT&T Technical J. in 1985 >> and found no mention of UNIX. There is complete coverage of the Bell Labs journal family in the TUG archives at http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/index-table-b.html#bstj1920 ... http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/index-table-b.html#bstj2000 I find several mentions of the 5ESS in the years 1984--2000: MariaDB [bibtex]> select filename, label, substr(title,1,60) from bibtab -> where (title like '%5ESS%') -> and (filename like 'bstj%') -> order by filename, year, label; +--------------+---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------------+ | filename | label | substr(title,1,60) | +--------------+---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------------+ | bstj1980.bib | McRoy:1984:SSL | SLC 96 subscriber loop carrier system: integration with the | | bstj1980.bib | Basinger:1985:SSS | The 5ESS switching system: system development environment | | bstj1980.bib | Carney:1985:SSA | The 5ESS switching system: architectural overview | | bstj1980.bib | Delatore:1985:SSO | The 5ESS switching system: operational software | | bstj1980.bib | Fuhrer:1985:SSO | The 5ESS switching system: operations, administration, and m | | bstj1980.bib | Haugk:1985:SSM | The 5ESS switching system: maintenance capabilities | | bstj1980.bib | Carney:1986:PIS | Planning for ISDN in the 5ESS switch | | bstj1980.bib | Higdon:1986:PIS | Planning for ISDN in the 5ESS switch | | bstj1980.bib | Dowden:1989:OSF | Operator services feature of the 5ESS switch | | bstj1990.bib | Brunsen:1991:ASH | AT&T 5ESS switch hardware development methodology. a procedu | | bstj1990.bib | Farley:1992:SUM | The 5ESS switch US market front end process | | bstj1990.bib | Lie:1992:GTD | Global Teamwork: Developing International ISDN Capabilities | | bstj1990.bib | Gauldin:1993:WMS | 5ESS wireless mobile switching center | | bstj1990.bib | Hornbach:1993:SNG | 5ESS-2000 Switch: The Next Generation Switching System | | bstj1990.bib | Holland:1994:SEC | The 5ESS-2000 switch: exceeding customer expectations | | bstj1990.bib | Thompson:1995:SCG | 5ESS-2000 switch cellular gateway | | bstj1990.bib | Wightman:1995:DEA | Design for environment attributes of the AT&T 5ESS switch | | bstj1990.bib | Bielawski:1997:RPS | 5ESSreg packet switched network with ATM interconnect for CD | | bstj1990.bib | Gana:1997:SMA | Statistical modeling applied to managing global 5ESSreg -200 | | bstj1990.bib | Kruisbrink:1997:SDE | On-site data evolution for a 5ESSreg switch retrofit | | bstj2000.bib | Barshefsky:2000:RFS | 5ESSreg field switch performance capture | +--------------+---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------------+ 21 rows in set (0.04 sec) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Nelson H. F. Beebe Tel: +1 801 581 5254 - - University of Utah FAX: +1 801 581 4148 - - Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB Internet e-mail: beebe at math.utah.edu - - 155 S 1400 E RM 233 beebe at acm.org beebe at computer.org - - Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090, USA URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Nelson H. F. Beebe Tel: +1 801 581 5254 - - University of Utah FAX: +1 801 581 4148 - - Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB Internet e-mail: beebe at math.utah.edu - - 155 S 1400 E RM 233 beebe at acm.org beebe at computer.org - - Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090, USA URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 1 06:15:22 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:15:22 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: <20170226123956.DBD3C18C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170226123956.DBD3C18C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > Another acronym is Esc Meta Alt Ctl Shift... > > Good one! Somewhere Out There (tm) is a web page full of EMACS acronyms. > And there was a pretty funny fake Exxx error code - I think it was > "EMACS - Editor too big"? "Editor too large"; it was in a list of fake error messages in a Usenix article. Another was ENOTOBACCO - Read on empty pipe. > I was never happy with the size of EMACS, and it had nothing to do with > the amount of memory resources used. That big a binary implies a very > large amount of source, and the more lines of code, the more places for > bugs... And it makes it harder to understand, for someone working on it > (to make a change/improvement). I tried EMACS once (so I couldn't be accused of criticising it without trying it) and immediately ran back to the comfort of VI. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From lars at nocrew.org Wed Mar 1 06:22:06 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:22:06 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: (Dave Horsfall's message of "Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:15:22 +1100 (EST)") References: <20170226123956.DBD3C18C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <86shmym5g1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Dave Horsfall wrote: > Somewhere Out There (tm) is a web page full of EMACS acronyms. Or distributed with Emacs: etc/JOKES. From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 1 06:26:38 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:26:38 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Mach for i386 / Mt Xinu or other In-Reply-To: <1488134034.25263.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1488134034.25263.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Norman Wilson wrote: > And if my failing memory serves me correctly, [Henry Spencer] wrote > C-News in conjunction with Geoff Collier, as B-News was starting to > show its age and limitations. > > ==== > > Your failing memory is correct, except that his name is spelt Collyer, > not Collier. Oops - noted. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From jaapna at xs4all.nl Wed Mar 1 06:40:05 2017 From: jaapna at xs4all.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:40:05 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170226123956.DBD3C18C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: > > On Feb 28, 2017, at 21:15, Dave Horsfall wrote: > > "Editor too large"; it was in a list of fake error messages in a Usenix > article. Another was ENOTOBACCO - Read on empty pipe. ENOTOBACCO was the winner of the EUUG errno contest (I think Florence meeting). There were a couple of these contests. There should be a video somewhere where the jury is singing the winning entry of the Atlanta one. A description of the Nashville one can be found at . jaap -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 235 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From pepe at naleco.com Wed Mar 1 07:00:50 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:00:50 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> References: <1488189078.58b3f6960b9b5@www.paradise.net.nz> <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> Message-ID: <20170228210049.GA1262@naleco.com> On 2017 Feb 27, 08:49, Corey Lindsly wrote: > > > > Count me in. I put my hand up for a copy of SCO when they were offering free > > samplers in the early 2000s, but never heard back from them. > > > > I wanted to compare it with Linux ... > > > > Thanks > > > > Wesley Parish > > For anyone interested, the SCO 2.1 images are available for download here: > > http://lod.com/sco > > A few things: > > 1. I am having some difficulty getting it to install in VMWare ESXi 5. The > floppy image boots, and I get some way into the install process, but SCO > install does not see the virtual CD-ROM drive. Thus, I'm presented with > network install options only. At this point, there are a few options: > > (a) Track down the driver and/or VMWare settings to fix the CD-ROM > visibility, and proceed with the install. > > (b) Set up a SCO network install server, and proceed. > > (c) Try the install on legacy physical hardware instead. > > Of course, your experience may differ. > > > 2. There's actually an installation guide available for this OS here: > > ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd211/eng211.txt > > As well as a lot of driver updates and other good stuff: > > ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/ > > > 3. Anyone who wants to try SCO for the first time may find 5.0.7 a much > easier go. It will install directly from CD in VMWare, and there is more > driver support for it. To me, it has a very "pure" UNIX feel to it, > other than the gratuitous and absurd use of symbolic links all over the > file system. If you're interested in trying-out that version, let me know > and I'll put up those images for download too. Well, the subject says "SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0", but what you call "SCO 2.1" and for which you link updates at ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/ is UnixWare, which is a very different beast. SCO OpenDesktop (and SCO OpenServer 5.0.7 that you mention) are SysVR3 based (they are, in fact, the evolution of Microsoft Xenix). Those don't support at-runtime loadable kernel modules (only at-bootime loadable kernel modules are supported). UnixWare, on the other hand, is SysVR4 based, and comes directly from Novell, who bought it from USL, who bought it from AT&T. UnixWare 2.1 is the last version of UnixWare before SCO bundled their "scoadmin" tool with it. UnixWare 2.1.1 also is officially "Unix-95" certified. UnixWare 2.1 is probably the purest UNIX SysVR4 to be run on a PC/386, and has very little in common with the archaic SysVR3-based OpenDesktop/OpenServer releases from SCO. Regards, -- Josh Good From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Wed Mar 1 07:12:45 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:12:45 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? Message-ID: <201702282112.v1SLCjcp015051@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> As Corey said, administrative computers in switching centers ran Unix, but the call-processing machines ran an unrelated operating system. The Unix lab did influence that operating system. Bob Morris instigated, and Joe Condon, Lee McMahon, Ken Thompson and others built TPC (the phone company), a switching system controlled by a PDP-11. This system actually ran the phones in CS Research for several years. ESS5 adopted some of TPC's architecture, though none of its code. Doug From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 1 07:49:22 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:49:22 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Also, PC/IX and SCO Xenix System V 2.1.3 Message-ID: <20170228214922.GA13383@minnie.tuhs.org> There's a PC Emulator here with PC/IX and SCO Xenix System V 2.1.3 images: http://www.hampa.ch/pce/download.html Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 1 11:31:40 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:31:40 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: <86shmym5g1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> References: <20170226123956.DBD3C18C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <86shmym5g1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Feb 2017, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > > Somewhere Out There (tm) is a web page full of EMACS acronyms. > > Or distributed with Emacs: etc/JOKES. Wow - thanks! -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com Wed Mar 1 14:15:34 2017 From: gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com (Gregg Levine) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 23:15:34 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: Hello! We (well most of us) all of us know about AIX. Well what about AIX/370? ----- Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com "This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again." On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Arno Griffioen wrote: > Hi! > > Some of the stories on here reminded me of the fact that there's also likely > a whole boat-load of UNIX ports/variants in the past that were never released > to customers or outside certain companies. > > Not talking about UNIX versions that have become obsolete or which have > vanished by now like IRIX or the original Apple A/UX (now *that* was an > interesting oddball though..) and such, but the ones that either died or > failed or got cancelled during the product development process or were never > intended to be released to the outside ar all. > > Personally I came across one during some UNIX consultancy work at Commodore > during the time that they were working on bringing out an SVR4 release for the > Amiga (which they actually sold for some time) > > Side-note.. Interestingly enough according to my contacts at that time inside > CBM it was based on the much cheaper to license 3B2 SVR4 codebase and not the > M68k codebase which explained some of the oddities and lack of M68k ABI > compliance of the Amiga SVR4 release.. > > However.. > > It turned out that they had been running an SVRIII port on much older Amiga > 2000's with 68020 cards for some of their internal corporate networking and > email, UUCP, etc. and was called 'AMIX' internally. But as far as I know it > was never released to the public or external customers. > > It was a fairly 'plain jane' SVRIII port with little specific 'Amiga' hardware > bits supported but otherwise quite complete and pretty stable. > > Worked quite well in the 4MB DRAM available on these cards. The later SVR4 > didn't fare so well.. Paged itself to death unless you had 8 or even (gasp!) > 16MB. > > It was known 'outside' that something like this existed as the boot ROM's on > the 68020 card had an 'AMIX' option but outside CBM few people really knew > much about it. > > It may have been used at the University of Lowell as they developed a TI34010 > based card that may already have had some support in this release. > > Still.. > > This does make me wonder.. Does anyone else know of these kinds of special > 'snowflake' UNIX versions that never got out at various companies/insitutes? > (and can talk about it without violating a whole stack of NDA's ;) ) > > No special reason.. Just idle curiosity :) > > Likely all these are gone forever anyway as prototypes and small run production > devices and related software tends to get destroyed when companies go bust or > get aquired. > > Bye, Arno. From rudi.j.blom at gmail.com Wed Mar 1 14:20:00 2017 From: rudi.j.blom at gmail.com (Rudi Blom) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 11:20:00 +0700 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? Message-ID: >Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 14:11:24 -0500 >From: Nemo >To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society >Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > >>I have looked at the papers published in the AT&T Technical J. in 1985 >and found no mention of UNIX. > >N. My Prentice Hall "UNIX(R) System V Release 4, Programmer's Guide: Streams" lists AT&T copyrights from 1984 - 1990 and UNIX Systems Laboratories, Inc. 1991-1992. Rudi From arnold at skeeve.com Wed Mar 1 17:17:09 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:17:09 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: <201703010717.v217H9WD011328@freefriends.org> Gregg Levine wrote: > Hello! > We (well most of us) all of us know about AIX. Well what about AIX/370? What about it? It definitely existed. It and AIX for the PC were similar but different from AIX on the RS/6000... I never saw it personally, but it was orderable. Arnold From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 1 17:45:01 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ronald Natalie) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 01:45:01 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: > On Feb 28, 2017, at 10:15 PM, Gregg Levine wrote: > > Hello! > We (well most of us) all of us know about AIX. Well what about AIX/370? > —— AIX/370 was a real product. One of the ones that I don’t ever think saw the light of day was the i860 AIX port. IBM made two i860 add-in cards for the PS/2. The single processor version was called the Wizard and there was a 4 processor version with an integral frame buffer called the W4. We ported AIX to both. The i860 version actually had more in common with the 370 version than it did with the 386. All of these AIX versions came from the same source code and used the IBM TCF to allow you to transparently run executables across nodes in the cluster. The only AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and in my opinion somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. If there was a TCF-based RT kernel, I never saw it, even inside the IBM labs. Speaking of odd job control mechanisms. The 386 side had a device that multiplexed the PS/2 console into multiple streams called the “High Function Terminal.” When we wrote the virtual console for the Wizard/W4 add in card, we called it the “Low Function Terminal." From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Wed Mar 1 21:14:12 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 19:14:12 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports duringthe years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: <558c0a18-c601-4698-903f-a12ed75d5053@HK2APC01FT021.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> I had never hear of an i860 board from IBM, but a little searching, and it almost looks like it was going to be a thing. NUMBER 290-817 DATE 901218 TYPE Programming TITLE INTEL OS/2 AND AIX I860 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT TOOLS FOR C AND FORTRAN ABSTRACT Today, IBM announces C and FORTRAN compiler support for the PS/2 (R) Wizard Adapter running under both AIX (R) PS/2 and OS/2 (R) operating systems. < hundreds of lines of information deleted > TECHINFO TECHNICAL INFORMATION SPECIFIED OPERATING ENVIRONMENT v MACHINE REQUIREMENTS: | o The Intel OS/2 and AIX i860 Software Development Tools for C and | FORTRAN require one of the following PS/2 system units: | - PS/2 Model 70 | - PS/2 Model P75* | - PS/2 Model 80 | - PS/2 Model 90 XP* | - PS/2 Model 95 XP* | The Model P70 is not supported. ====> * These models are not currently supported by AIX PS/2. Therefore, the PS/2 Wizard Adapter will operate only with IBM OS/2 on these models. Or later something like this: IBM architecture - RT IBM architecture - RS/6000 IBM architecture - S/370 Intel architecture - i386 (rumors of) Intel architecture - i860 (Wizard PS/2 cardset with 4xi860) whatever comes out of Steve Chen's supercomputer work Of course, with IBM not licensing AIX source to anyone, these are only IBM machines, but that is not the same as AIX being a non-portable OS. Rumors are that IBM's customers are pressing very hard for source licenses and that someday such licenses will be available. Whether that would lead to ports to other machines, I can't predict. Very interesting! Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Ronald Natalie Sent: Wednesday, 1 March 2017 3:45 PM To: Gregg Levine Cc: Tuhs Subject: Re: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports duringthe years? > On Feb 28, 2017, at 10:15 PM, Gregg Levine wrote: > > Hello! > We (well most of us) all of us know about AIX. Well what about AIX/370? > —— AIX/370 was a real product. One of the ones that I don’t ever think saw the light of day was the i860 AIX port. IBM made two i860 add-in cards for the PS/2. The single processor version was called the Wizard and there was a 4 processor version with an integral frame buffer called the W4. We ported AIX to both. The i860 version actually had more in common with the 370 version than it did with the 386. All of these AIX versions came from the same source code and used the IBM TCF to allow you to transparently run executables across nodes in the cluster. The only AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and in my opinion somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. If there was a TCF-based RT kernel, I never saw it, even inside the IBM labs. Speaking of odd job control mechanisms. The 386 side had a device that multiplexed the PS/2 console into multiple streams called the “High Function Terminal.” When we wrote the virtual console for the Wizard/W4 add in card, we called it the “Low Function Terminal." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael at kjorling.se Wed Mar 1 22:45:05 2017 From: michael at kjorling.se (Michael =?utf-8?B?S2rDtnJsaW5n?=) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:45:05 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170226123956.DBD3C18C088@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170301124505.GE23470@yeono.kjorling.se> On 28 Feb 2017 21:40 +0100, from jaapna at xs4all.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis): > ENOTOBACCO was the winner of the EUUG errno contest (I think Florence > meeting). There were a couple of these contests. Here's one: https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/errno.2.html -- Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael at kjorling.se “People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don’t.” (Bjarne Stroustrup) From crossd at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 00:54:11 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:54:11 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Ronald Natalie wrote: > > > On Feb 28, 2017, at 10:15 PM, Gregg Levine > wrote: > > > > Hello! > > We (well most of us) all of us know about AIX. Well what about AIX/370? > > —— > > AIX/370 was a real product. One of the ones that I don’t ever think > saw the light of day was the i860 AIX port. IBM made two i860 add-in > cards for the PS/2. The single processor version was called the Wizard > and there was a 4 processor version with an integral frame buffer called > the W4. We ported AIX to both. The i860 version actually had more in > common with the 370 version than it did with the 386. All of these AIX > versions came from the same source code and used the IBM TCF to allow you > to transparently run executables across nodes in the cluster. The only > AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and in my opinion > somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. We had RTs where I was. By the time I came on the scene, they were being decommissioned in favor of RS/6k hardware (arguably, the RT was pretty low-powered even for its day), so the students were running around grabbing them and playing with them. We ran AOS on ours, which was a more-or-less straight port of 4.3BSD+NFS (maybe they started with Tahoe? I don't know), but IBM seemed to want to push AIX with them. The RT was my first exposure to "real" Unix source code. What was interesting to me was all of the #ifdef's in the source that made it clear that someone at IBM had obviously tried to port 4.3 to the 370. I don't think that ever saw the light of day, but there were definitely vestiges of it in the kernel. I had understood was that AIX/370 was actually OSF/1 based and totally separate from AIX 2.x (on the RT) and AIX 3.x (on the RS/6k)? From what you wrote, it sounds like that wasn't quite right. If there was a TCF-based RT kernel, I never saw it, even inside the IBM > labs. > > Speaking of odd job control mechanisms. The 386 side had a device that > multiplexed the PS/2 console into multiple streams called the “High > Function Terminal.” When we wrote the virtual console for the Wizard/W4 > add in card, we called it the “Low Function Terminal." Did the HFT survive into the RS/6k? I seem to recall hearing about that. Perhaps it was an option on the RT, or somehow could be used with the "crossbow" card on the 6152? - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cym224 at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 01:41:54 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 10:41:54 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: On 1 March 2017 at 02:45, Ronald Natalie wrote (in part): [...] > The only AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and in my > opinion somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. No wonder, given what they did to the poor chip it ran on. #6-) N. From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 2 04:01:34 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:01:34 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? Message-ID: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? Google it with: site:vetusware.com unix source Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 2 04:07:29 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 10:07:29 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: ON phone so can't check but if it's SysV, then yes. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 1, 2017, at 10:01, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > > Google it with: > > site:vetusware.com unix source > > Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? > > From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 04:13:33 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:13:33 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: This appears to be one of a number of sites that have decided to flaunt the law. They decide, arbitrarily and with no real legal basis, that "if something is older than x arbitrary date, it must be OK to distribute," or "if something is for an operating system that no one really uses, it must be OK to distribute." Why they do not get shut down is a mystery to me. I believe the concept started with old games for DOS and has spread to include operating systems and other software. -Henry On 1 March 2017 at 13:01, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > > Google it with: > > site:vetusware.com unix source > > Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 2 04:17:00 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:17:00 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Ronald Natalie wrote: > AIX/370 was a real product. ​Indeed​ it was. > All of these AIX versions came from the same source code and used the > IBM TCF to allow you to transparently run executables across nodes in the > cluster. ​Exactly right. TCF - Transparent Computing Facility -- No mean trick... ​you can mix PS/2 and 370 in the cluster, so root on desk allowed me root on the mainframe too. What was cool was that the TCF will look at the executable and find the proper CPU. The big mistake was that that node id was stored in a single 32 bit word and assigned per bit, which was a scaling issues. I was at Locus Computing Corp (aka LCC or just "Locus"), who developed AIX for IBM under contract and TCF was part of it. The direct result of the The LOCUS Distributed System Architecture from UCLA. The book actually describes much of the AIX/370 work, but starts with the original UCLA work. I did not work on the IBM project, although a number of my peers did. I was higher to help developed TNC - Transparent Network Computing, which is was used in Intel's Paragon and DEC's TruClusters and a never shipped HP Cluster Product. Many of the same ideas but we wanted a separate team that never saw the IBM code so there could never be any concern about ownership. The architects like me and Roman, were allowed to talk to the AIX architects, such as Bruce; but we keep separate development environments at separate sites. After the IBM work ended, all of the Locus distributed system folks the struct around went to work on TNC and the technology go sold off and licensed. What was interesting is that TNC was open'ed sourced after the Compaq/HP mergers and put into Linux but I've forgotten the URL (I'll search and follow up). It's a real shame it never went anywhere. It was a very, very cool. > The only AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and in > my opinion somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. If there was a TCF-based > RT kernel, I never saw it, even inside the IBM labs. ​That was IBM politics. LCC has the contract for the original AIX port to the 370. When the RT was developed, the Austin team was ramped up. One of our members of the TUHS list who is remaining silent I see is not saying why but I know was there ;-) and might known the actual politics, I never did. But when the AIX/RT port was forked, they started with AIX/370 code base and removed the TCF code. But LCC still had the AIX/370 contract from Enterprise system group to maintain AIX/370. And also, Locus had the contract from Entry Systems, who all they wanted TCF. So AIX/386 and AIX/370 as Ron points out were one code base, one dev team (at LCC in California). Dan Cross said: "I had understood was that AIX/370 was actually OSF/1 based" It maybe that by the end, the user space was based on the OSF/1 user space code. That was true for HP and DEC also. But I can definitely state AIX/370 and AIX/386 were one set of source trees and all of was done by Locus Computing Corporation certainly through the mid 1990s. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From usotsuki at buric.co Thu Mar 2 04:27:17 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:27:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: > They decide, arbitrarily and with no real legal basis, that "if > something is older than x arbitrary date, it must be OK to distribute," > or "if something is for an operating system that no one really uses, it > must be OK to distribute." Why they do not get shut down is a mystery > to me. I believe the concept started with old games for DOS and has > spread to include operating systems and other software. I openly used a profane word referring to bovine excrement as my opinion of this concept of "abandonware". It's just warez, plain and simple. -uso. From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 2 05:18:25 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:18:25 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> The site is rife with warez, I understand that, I was wondering about the "legality" of distributing that source code, and if legal, if it had been archived somewhere else already. On 3/1/2017 1:27 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: > >> They decide, arbitrarily and with no real legal basis, that "if >> something is older than x arbitrary date, it must be OK to >> distribute," or "if something is for an operating system that no one >> really uses, it must be OK to distribute." Why they do not get shut >> down is a mystery to me. I believe the concept started with old games >> for DOS and has spread to include operating systems and other software. > > I openly used a profane word referring to bovine excrement as my > opinion of this concept of "abandonware". > > It's just warez, plain and simple. > > -uso. > From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 05:25:06 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:25:06 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. -Henry On 1 March 2017 at 14:18, Arthur Krewat wrote: > The site is rife with warez, I understand that, I was wondering about the > "legality" of distributing that source code, and if legal, if it had been > archived somewhere else already. > > > > > On 3/1/2017 1:27 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote: > >> On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: >> >> They decide, arbitrarily and with no real legal basis, that "if something >>> is older than x arbitrary date, it must be OK to distribute," or "if >>> something is for an operating system that no one really uses, it must be OK >>> to distribute." Why they do not get shut down is a mystery to me. I >>> believe the concept started with old games for DOS and has spread to >>> include operating systems and other software. >>> >> >> I openly used a profane word referring to bovine excrement as my opinion >> of this concept of "abandonware". >> >> It's just warez, plain and simple. >> >> -uso. >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From usotsuki at buric.co Thu Mar 2 05:29:16 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:29:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: > My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to > distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at > least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) -uso. From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 05:32:01 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:32:01 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: Sure, I was referring to the AT&T source / porting bases. That being said, I have seen numerous versions of Solaris source in the wild. -Henry On 1 March 2017 at 14:29, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: > > My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to >> distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at >> least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. >> > > Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) > > -uso. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Thu Mar 2 05:49:18 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 14:49:18 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <1488397758.2792772.897224368.281306C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, at 14:29, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: > > > My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to > > distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at > > least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. > > Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) I sometimes wonder how the legality of that worked (a recent complaint someone made about BSD drivers being incorporated into Linux got me thinking about it again) - surely there are big chunks of the opensolaris code that are not *very much* changed from the original System V code they're based on. Under what theory, then, was Sun the copyright holder and therefore able to release it under the CDDL? From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Mar 2 05:51:29 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:51:29 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <1488397758.2792772.897224368.281306C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> <1488397758.2792772.897224368.281306C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Random832 wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, at 14:29, Steve Nickolas wrote: >> On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: >> >> > My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to >> > distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at >> > least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. >> >> Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) > > I sometimes wonder how the legality of that worked (a recent complaint > someone made about BSD drivers being incorporated into Linux got me > thinking about it again) - surely there are big chunks of the > opensolaris code that are not *very much* changed from the original > System V code they're based on. Under what theory, then, was Sun the > copyright holder and therefore able to release it under the CDDL? Their paid-up perpetual license that granted them the right to do that? Warner From schily at schily.net Thu Mar 2 06:18:03 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 21:18:03 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <1488397758.2792772.897224368.281306C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> <1488397758.2792772.897224368.281306C5@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <58b72c7b.JmfbzrspCV5o22DC%schily@schily.net> Random832 wrote: > > Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) > > I sometimes wonder how the legality of that worked (a recent complaint > someone made about BSD drivers being incorporated into Linux got me > thinking about it again) - surely there are big chunks of the > opensolaris code that are not *very much* changed from the original > System V code they're based on. Under what theory, then, was Sun the > copyright holder and therefore able to release it under the CDDL? Files that have been written by Sun or AT&T are published under the CDDL. Files from BSD (and not imported from Sun to BSD) did keep their BSD license.... Note that the whole license analysys did take aprox. 5 years. Example: ./cmd/csh/sh.dir.c /* * Copyright 2005 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved. * Use is subject to license terms. */ /* Copyright (c) 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989 AT&T */ /* All Rights Reserved */ /* * Copyright (c) 1980 Regents of the University of California. * All rights reserved. The Berkeley Software License Agreement * specifies the terms and conditions for redistribution. */ #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI" ... Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 2 06:28:56 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:28:56 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: Below On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: > > My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to >> distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at >> least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. >> > > Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) ​Not a lawyer and don't play one TV or anywhere else.... Some thoughts... 1.) UCB Regents Position per AT&T/BSDi/UCB - anything through 32V is public domain (see groklaw) 2.) All of Sun & IBM, bought out source licenses from AT&T with rights to do anything.... IBM is based on the SVR3 license, Sun on SVR4 3.) IBM's license is the basis for the OSF/1 license 4.) HP independently eventually gets is own bought out license, but I'm not sure what it's based [need to google the old UNIGRAM/X or the like] 5.) Sun takes SVR4 in and starts to add "Solaris features" to it (not going to argue percentages here for the moment). 6.) Sun open sources this code base... Now some questions.... >From the above, one could argue that set of code included in Solaris from the SysV linage was made public by step 6. I have seen argument that anything through SVR3 is public because of the actions of IBM, HP, and SUN when the code was bought out; but I have not seen a definitive action like step 6 that infer all of SVR3 was public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Mar 2 06:32:48 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:32:48 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > Below > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote: >> >> On Wed, 1 Mar 2017, Henry Bent wrote: >> >>> My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to >>> distribute. I believe that source exists and has been archived for at >>> least some variants of SVR1, SVR2, SVR3, and SVR4. >> >> >> Well, that's probably 95% true...the other 5% is Solaris. ;) > > > > Not a lawyer and don't play one TV or anywhere else.... > > > Some thoughts... > > 1.) UCB Regents Position per AT&T/BSDi/UCB - anything through 32V is public > domain (see groklaw) > 2.) All of Sun & IBM, bought out source licenses from AT&T with rights to do > anything.... IBM is based on the SVR3 license, Sun on SVR4 > 3.) IBM's license is the basis for the OSF/1 license > 4.) HP independently eventually gets is own bought out license, but I'm not > sure what it's based [need to google the old UNIGRAM/X or the like] > 5.) Sun takes SVR4 in and starts to add "Solaris features" to it (not going > to argue percentages here for the moment). > 6.) Sun open sources this code base... > > Now some questions.... > > From the above, one could argue that set of code included in Solaris from > the SysV linage was made public by step 6. > > I have seen argument that anything through SVR3 is public because of the > actions of IBM, HP, and SUN when the code was bought out; but I have not > seen a definitive action like step 6 that infer all of SVR3 was public. I would be skeptical of that assertion. Copyright law doesn't allow one to gain rights for earlier versions of a work they got rights for, except to the extent that the earlier work is wholly included in the later work. Warner From pepe at naleco.com Thu Mar 2 08:45:31 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 23:45:31 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> References: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> <58B45E05.1080205@gewt.net> <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> On 2017 Feb 27, 14:59, Arthur Krewat wrote: > I've been trying this myself today, both on ESXi 6.0U2, and I went and > installed ESXi 5.0 as a guest under 6.0U2 :) > > I notice that when I put the CD as IDE 1:0 (bus 1, master) it doesn't > find it. When I put it as 0:0 (bus 0, master), it hangs loading the IDE > driver. > > I suspect it doesn't know about bus 1, so it doesn't hang but also > doesn't find it, and there's something wrong with either VMware's > implementation of IDE, or SCO's handling of it - or both. I've read > where lots of devices in VMware are just to "perfect" for some device > drivers to deal with. One glaring example was you couldn't use the LSI > SAS driver with Solaris 11. It would either hang or panic, I forget > which. Switch to LSI Parallel SCSI, and it was fine. > > Anyway, I suspect that there's something in the IDE driver that's > ignoring bus1, and hanging with VMware's implementation of it. > > I'm going to try installing ESXi 4.0 and see what happens. > > On another note, it's possible I just need to install the hard drive as > IDE from the get-go, have the CDROM as slave on bus 0 and see what happens. > > Any pointers? > > thanks! > art k. > > > On 2/27/2017 12:12 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > >Corey Lindsly wrote: > >>>Count me in. I put my hand up for a copy of SCO when they were > >>>offering free > >>>samplers in the early 2000s, but never heard back from them. > >>> > >>>I wanted to compare it with Linux ... > >>> > >>>Thanks > >>> > >>>Wesley Parish > >> > >>For anyone interested, the SCO 2.1 images are available for download > >>here: > >> > >>http://lod.com/sco > >> > >>A few things: > >> > >>1. I am having some difficulty getting it to install in VMWare ESXi > >>5. The > >>floppy image boots, and I get some way into the install process, but SCO > >>install does not see the virtual CD-ROM drive. Thus, I'm presented with > >>network install options only. At this point, there are a few options: > >> > >>(a) Track down the driver and/or VMWare settings to fix the CD-ROM > >>visibility, and proceed with the install. > >> > >>(b) Set up a SCO network install server, and proceed. > >> > >>(c) Try the install on legacy physical hardware instead. I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the install process will proceed successfully to completion. It should work equally well in VirtualBox. Regards, -- Josh Good From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 2 08:52:03 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:52:03 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> References: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> <58B45E05.1080205@gewt.net> <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> Message-ID: <31ACD27B-3D3A-44AF-833A-17A7ECDA522C@gewt.net> That's easier than the way I did it ;) Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 1, 2017, at 14:45, Josh Good wrote: > >> On 2017 Feb 27, 14:59, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> I've been trying this myself today, both on ESXi 6.0U2, and I went and >> installed ESXi 5.0 as a guest under 6.0U2 :) >> >> I notice that when I put the CD as IDE 1:0 (bus 1, master) it doesn't >> find it. When I put it as 0:0 (bus 0, master), it hangs loading the IDE >> driver. >> >> I suspect it doesn't know about bus 1, so it doesn't hang but also >> doesn't find it, and there's something wrong with either VMware's >> implementation of IDE, or SCO's handling of it - or both. I've read >> where lots of devices in VMware are just to "perfect" for some device >> drivers to deal with. One glaring example was you couldn't use the LSI >> SAS driver with Solaris 11. It would either hang or panic, I forget >> which. Switch to LSI Parallel SCSI, and it was fine. >> >> Anyway, I suspect that there's something in the IDE driver that's >> ignoring bus1, and hanging with VMware's implementation of it. >> >> I'm going to try installing ESXi 4.0 and see what happens. >> >> On another note, it's possible I just need to install the hard drive as >> IDE from the get-go, have the CDROM as slave on bus 0 and see what happens. >> >> Any pointers? >> >> thanks! >> art k. >> >> >>> On 2/27/2017 12:12 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: >>> Corey Lindsly wrote: >>>>> Count me in. I put my hand up for a copy of SCO when they were >>>>> offering free >>>>> samplers in the early 2000s, but never heard back from them. >>>>> >>>>> I wanted to compare it with Linux ... >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> Wesley Parish >>>> >>>> For anyone interested, the SCO 2.1 images are available for download >>>> here: >>>> >>>> http://lod.com/sco >>>> >>>> A few things: >>>> >>>> 1. I am having some difficulty getting it to install in VMWare ESXi >>>> 5. The >>>> floppy image boots, and I get some way into the install process, but SCO >>>> install does not see the virtual CD-ROM drive. Thus, I'm presented with >>>> network install options only. At this point, there are a few options: >>>> >>>> (a) Track down the driver and/or VMWare settings to fix the CD-ROM >>>> visibility, and proceed with the install. >>>> >>>> (b) Set up a SCO network install server, and proceed. >>>> >>>> (c) Try the install on legacy physical hardware instead. > > I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. > > The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided > by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured > as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm > using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). > > This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a > problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, > when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", > load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA > diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: > ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img > > This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the > install process will proceed successfully to completion. > > It should work equally well in VirtualBox. > > Regards, > > -- > Josh Good > From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 2 09:06:08 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 18:06:08 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> References: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> <58B45E05.1080205@gewt.net> <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> Message-ID: <5c531fd2-f1bb-caca-5734-5025ea2ee1e3@kilonet.net> In ESXi 5.0, using the updated HBA driver diskette, I got to this point and it locked up apparently (see below). Gotta love Y2K On 3/1/2017 5:45 PM, Josh Good wrote: > I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. > The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided > by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured > as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm > using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). > > This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a > problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, > when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", > load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA > diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: > ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img > > This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the > install process will proceed successfully to completion. > > It should work equally well in VirtualBox. > > Regards, > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: nhcellemnelfkmhb.png Type: image/png Size: 13646 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 2 09:07:54 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:07:54 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <5c531fd2-f1bb-caca-5734-5025ea2ee1e3@kilonet.net> References: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> <58B45E05.1080205@gewt.net> <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <5c531fd2-f1bb-caca-5734-5025ea2ee1e3@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <04B82D5C-2D84-4C01-B552-91BF988A6004@gewt.net> Erase the year and replace it with 99 and you can proceed. Or at least I could... Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 1, 2017, at 15:06, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > In ESXi 5.0, using the updated HBA driver diskette, I got to this point and it locked up apparently (see below). Gotta love Y2K > > > >> On 3/1/2017 5:45 PM, Josh Good wrote: >> I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. >> The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided >> by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured >> as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm >> using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). >> >> This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a >> problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, >> when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", >> load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA >> diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: >> ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img >> >> This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the >> install process will proceed successfully to completion. >> >> It should work equally well in VirtualBox. >> >> Regards, >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 2 09:13:57 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 18:13:57 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <04B82D5C-2D84-4C01-B552-91BF988A6004@gewt.net> References: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> <58B45E05.1080205@gewt.net> <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <5c531fd2-f1bb-caca-5734-5025ea2ee1e3@kilonet.net> <04B82D5C-2D84-4C01-B552-91BF988A6004@gewt.net> Message-ID: <8439789f-7fe6-f8cf-0954-6ba43a174ced@kilonet.net> LOL - I beat you to it :) Just did that, and it's going now. On 3/1/2017 6:07 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Erase the year and replace it with 99 and you can proceed. Or at least > I could... > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 15:06, Arthur Krewat > wrote: > >> In ESXi 5.0, using the updated HBA driver diskette, I got to this >> point and it locked up apparently (see below). Gotta love Y2K >> >> >> >> On 3/1/2017 5:45 PM, Josh Good wrote: >>> I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. >>> The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided >>> by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured >>> as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm >>> using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). >>> >>> This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a >>> problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, >>> when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", >>> load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA >>> diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: >>> ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img >>> >>> This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the >>> install process will proceed successfully to completion. >>> >>> It should work equally well in VirtualBox. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 2 09:24:03 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 18:24:03 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <8439789f-7fe6-f8cf-0954-6ba43a174ced@kilonet.net> References: <20170227164945.B85704115@lod.com> <58B45E05.1080205@gewt.net> <16b6c61c-cc91-14e3-46d9-e83a198fd2c8@kilonet.net> <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <5c531fd2-f1bb-caca-5734-5025ea2ee1e3@kilonet.net> <04B82D5C-2D84-4C01-B552-91BF988A6004@gewt.net> <8439789f-7fe6-f8cf-0954-6ba43a174ced@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <6c0e91b3-1d2c-65bc-cb1f-720045227825@kilonet.net> And now, get a kernel build error. Looking at it a bit further in a second. On 3/1/2017 6:13 PM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > LOL - I beat you to it :) Just did that, and it's going now. > > > > On 3/1/2017 6:07 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: >> Erase the year and replace it with 99 and you can proceed. Or at >> least I could... >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Mar 1, 2017, at 15:06, Arthur Krewat > > wrote: >> >>> In ESXi 5.0, using the updated HBA driver diskette, I got to this >>> point and it locked up apparently (see below). Gotta love Y2K >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/1/2017 5:45 PM, Josh Good wrote: >>>> I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. >>>> The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided >>>> by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured >>>> as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm >>>> using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). >>>> >>>> This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a >>>> problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, >>>> when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", >>>> load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA >>>> diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: >>>> ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img >>>> >>>> This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the >>>> install process will proceed successfully to completion. >>>> >>>> It should work equally well in VirtualBox. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Thu Mar 2 11:22:26 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 09:22:26 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <6B20BA0A-4CD4-41FA-820E-76F6CE52E6D5@superglobalmegacorp.com> Try this Google query site:vetusware.com "source code" For even more amazement On March 2, 2017 2:01:34 AM GMT+08:00, Arthur Krewat wrote: >Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > >Google it with: > >site:vetusware.com unix source > >Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Thu Mar 2 12:13:12 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 10:13:12 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: <302BAFF3-FC7A-41C5-BEED-5A4B21338EB6@superglobalmegacorp.com> Slightly off or on topic, but since you seem to know, and I've never seen aix 370 in the eild, did it require VM? Did it take advantage of SNA, and allow front ends, along with SNA gateways and 3270's? Or was it more of a hosted TCP/IP accessable system? On March 2, 2017 2:17:00 AM GMT+08:00, Clem Cole wrote: > >On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Ronald Natalie < ron at ronnatalie.com > > wrote: > > >AIX/370 was a real product. > >​Indeed​ it was. > > > > > All of these AIX versions came from the same source code and used the >IBM TCF to allow you to transparently run executables across nodes in >the cluster. > >​Exactly right. TCF - Transparent Computing Facility -- No mean >trick... ​you can mix PS/2 and 370 in the cluster, so root on desk >allowed me root on the mainframe too. What was cool was that the TCF >will look at the executable and find the proper CPU. The big mistake >was that that node id was stored in a single 32 bit word and assigned >per bit, which was a scaling issues. > > >I was at Locus Computing Corp (aka LCC or just "Locus"), who developed >AIX for IBM under contract and TCF was part of it. The direct result >of >the The LOCUS Distributed System Architecture >/dp/0262517191/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488391384&sr=1-1&refineme >nts=p_27%3AGerald+J.+Popek> from UCLA. The book actually describes >much of the AIX/370 work, but starts with the original UCLA work. I >did >not work on the IBM project, although a number of my peers did. I was >higher to help developed TNC - Transparent Network Computing, which is >was used in Intel's Paragon and DEC's TruClusters and a never shipped >HP >Cluster Product. Many of the same ideas but we wanted a separate team >that never saw the IBM code so there could never be any concern about >ownership. The architects like me and Roman, were allowed to talk to >the AIX architects, such as Bruce; but we keep separate development >environments at separate sites. After the IBM work ended, all of the >Locus distributed system folks the struct around went to work on TNC >and the technology go sold off and licensed. What was interesting is >that TNC was open'ed sourced after the Compaq/HP mergers and put into >Linux but I've forgotten the URL (I'll search and follow up). > > >It's a real shame it never went anywhere. It was a very, very cool. > > > > > The only AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and >in my opinion somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. If there was a >TCF-based RT kernel, I never saw it, even inside the IBM labs. > >​That was IBM politics. LCC has the contract for the original AIX >port >to the 370. When the RT was developed, the Austin team was ramped up. >One of our members of the TUHS list who is remaining silent I see is >not >saying why but I know was there ;-) and might known the actual >politics, I never did. But when the AIX/RT port was forked, they >started with AIX/370 code base and removed the TCF code. But LCC >still >had the AIX/370 contract from Enterprise system group to maintain >AIX/370. And also, Locus had the contract from Entry Systems, who all >they wanted TCF. So AIX/386 and AIX/370 as Ron points out were one >code base, one dev team (at LCC in California). > >Dan Cross said: "I had understood was that AIX/370 was actually OSF/1 >based" > > >It maybe that by the end, the user space was based on the OSF/1 user >space code. That was true for HP and DEC also. But I can definitely >state AIX/370 and AIX/386 were one set of source trees and all of was >done by Locus Computing Corporation certainly through the mid 1990s. > > >Clem -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com Thu Mar 2 12:27:35 2017 From: gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com (Gregg Levine) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 21:27:35 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Un-released/internal/special UNIX versions/ports during the years? In-Reply-To: References: <20170225141738.f3uauxhasru7gsb3@ancienthardware.org> Message-ID: Hello! Well before it was withdrawn from marketing, it played in a big pool Namely the mainframes at one of the universities in Norway. And I got this from a VMer I who is best known for writing the pipelines stuff, And sadly that was its only customer. By contrast AIX for RS/6000 gang and its ancestors were well taken care of and its still available. ----- Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com "This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again." On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Ronald Natalie wrote: >> >> AIX/370 was a real product. > > Indeed it was. > > > >> >> All of these AIX versions came from the same source code and used the >> IBM TCF to allow you to transparently run executables across nodes in the >> cluster. > > Exactly right. TCF - Transparent Computing Facility -- No mean trick... > you can mix PS/2 and 370 in the cluster, so root on desk allowed me root on > the mainframe too. What was cool was that the TCF will look at the > executable and find the proper CPU. The big mistake was that that node id > was stored in a single 32 bit word and assigned per bit, which was a scaling > issues. > > I was at Locus Computing Corp (aka LCC or just "Locus"), who developed AIX > for IBM under contract and TCF was part of it. The direct result of the The > LOCUS Distributed System Architecture from UCLA. The book actually > describes much of the AIX/370 work, but starts with the original UCLA work. > I did not work on the IBM project, although a number of my peers did. I was > higher to help developed TNC - Transparent Network Computing, which is was > used in Intel's Paragon and DEC's TruClusters and a never shipped HP Cluster > Product. Many of the same ideas but we wanted a separate team that never saw > the IBM code so there could never be any concern about ownership. The > architects like me and Roman, were allowed to talk to the AIX architects, > such as Bruce; but we keep separate development environments at separate > sites. After the IBM work ended, all of the Locus distributed system > folks the struct around went to work on TNC and the technology go sold off > and licensed. What was interesting is that TNC was open'ed sourced after > the Compaq/HP mergers and put into Linux but I've forgotten the URL (I'll > search and follow up). > > It's a real shame it never went anywhere. It was a very, very cool. > > > >> >> The only AIX that didn’t play was the completely independent (and in >> my opinion somewhat brain damaged) IBM/RT UNIX. If there was a TCF-based >> RT kernel, I never saw it, even inside the IBM labs. > > That was IBM politics. LCC has the contract for the original AIX port to > the 370. When the RT was developed, the Austin team was ramped up. One > of our members of the TUHS list who is remaining silent I see is not saying > why but I know was there ;-) and might known the actual politics, I never > did. But when the AIX/RT port was forked, they started with AIX/370 code > base and removed the TCF code. But LCC still had the AIX/370 contract from > Enterprise system group to maintain AIX/370. And also, Locus had the > contract from Entry Systems, who all they wanted TCF. So AIX/386 and > AIX/370 as Ron points out were one code base, one dev team (at LCC in > California). > > Dan Cross said: "I had understood was that AIX/370 was actually OSF/1 > based" > > It maybe that by the end, the user space was based on the OSF/1 user space > code. That was true for HP and DEC also. But I can definitely state > AIX/370 and AIX/386 were one set of source trees and all of was done by > Locus Computing Corporation certainly through the mid 1990s. > > Clem > > From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 2 13:15:54 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 22:15:54 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] AIX/370 Questions Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Jason Stevens < jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com> wrote: > Slightly off or on topic, but since you seem to know, and I've never seen > aix 370 in the eild, did it require VM? > It could boot on raw HW.​ > Did it take advantage of SNA, and allow front ends, along with SNA > gateways and 3270's? > ​Not sure how to answer this.​ It was an IBM product and could be used with a lot of other IBM's products. Generally speaking it was aimed at the Educational market, although there were some commercial customers, for instance Intel was reputed to do a lot of the 486 simulation on a TCF cluster (I don't know that for sure, that was before I worked for Intel). > > Or was it more of a hosted TCP/IP accessable system? > ​Clearly, if you had a PS/2 in the cluster, that was your access point. I think it was all mixed up in the politics of the day at IBM between Enterprise, Workstations, and Entry systems. TCP/IP and Ethernets were not something IBM wanted to use naturally. But the Educational market did use it and certainly some folks at IBM saw the value. UNIX was needed for the Education market as was TCP/IP so that going to be the pointed head of the stick. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Thu Mar 2 13:51:47 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 11:51:47 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] AIX/370 Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I’ve actually loaded AIX 1.3 for the PS/2 on a model 80 decked out with 16MB of RAM, and an Ethernet board, and honestly It was ‘yet another SYSV’ and it didn’t feel like it had much in common with AIX 3.1 on the RS/6000. As always by the time I had gotten all the needed bits, Linux was a thing, running Unix on a 386 with ESDI disks felt horribly slow, and Linux had much better support for stuff. Although if I had the machine when it was the thing to do it’d have been awesome. Not that I’d probably ever get access to a 370, let alone AIX for the 370 + those i860 boards. The 80 was a great machine, just too bad that I’m sure they called it the model 80 as it must have weighed 80Kg, and I couldn’t take it with me when I left North America. Back when I used to work for a certain bank that loved mainframes, they would always harp on about how Unix & C were not only untested, but simply not ready for an environment like the S/390. As far as they were concerned if it didn’t boot on a mainframe it wasn’t “production grade”. Oddly enough we also ran things like Novel Netware for VMS (Wish I could have imaged those tapes...), although they were kind of OK with AIX on the RS/6000, but never for anything ‘real’. It wasn’t until after I had left that I found out that there actually was mainframe UNIX, and if it would work with our ‘awesome’ global SNA network and zillions of terminals it would have been all the better. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Clem Cole Sent: Thursday, 2 March 2017 11:16 AM To: Jason Stevens Cc: TUHS main list; Ronald Natalie Subject: Re: [TUHS] AIX/370 Questions On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Jason Stevens wrote: Slightly off or on topic, but since you seem to know, and I've never seen aix 370 in the eild, did it require VM? It could boot on raw HW.​   Did it take advantage of SNA, and allow front ends, along with SNA gateways and 3270's? ​Not sure how to answer this.​  It was an IBM product and could be used with a lot of other IBM's products.  Generally speaking it was aimed at the Educational market, although there were some commercial customers, for instance Intel was reputed to do a lot of the 486 simulation on a TCF cluster (I don't know that for sure, that was before I worked for Intel).   Or was it more of a hosted TCP/IP accessable system? ​Clearly, if you had a PS/2 in the cluster, that was your access point.   I think it was all mixed up in the politics of the day at IBM between Enterprise, Workstations, and Entry systems.  TCP/IP and Ethernets were not something IBM wanted to use naturally.    But the Educational market did use it and certainly some folks at IBM saw the value. UNIX was needed for the Education market as was TCP/IP so that going to be the pointed head of the stick. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 2 16:50:27 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 22:50:27 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <6B20BA0A-4CD4-41FA-820E-76F6CE52E6D5@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <6B20BA0A-4CD4-41FA-820E-76F6CE52E6D5@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: <1488437427.2273647.897749176.7C8A0473@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, at 17:22, Jason Stevens wrote: > Try this Google query > > site:vetusware.com "source code" > > For even more amazement > > On March 2, 2017 2:01:34 AM GMT+08:00, Arthur Krewat > wrote: >> Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? >> >> >> >> Google it with: >> >> >> >> site:vetusware.com unix source >> >> >> >> Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? >> > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. A copy of the Cisco IOS code leak? That'll get them in some trouble... -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 2 19:32:10 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ronald Natalie) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 03:32:10 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] AIX/370 Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2F012DBB-A685-47E6-9642-C1AA9F8A38B0@ronnatalie.com> I’m not sure I’d characturize AIX as “just another system V”. TCF was pretty darned slick and it had most of the contemporary 4BSD features at the time. It really didn’t have 3270 or other traditional IBM support on the 370 side. That was the major reason for the TCF. The normal way you worked on the 370 side was to sit at a AIX PS/2 system and either go in on TCP/IP or X or just run the 370 programs on the PS/2 via TCF. From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 2 23:11:02 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 08:11:02 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] AIX/370 Questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:51 PM, wrote: > I’ve actually loaded AIX 1.3 for the PS/2 on a model 80 decked out with > 16MB of RAM, and an Ethernet board, and honestly It was ‘yet another SYSV’ > ​Interesting characterization.... It had all of the primary BSDism in there. As I said it was intended for the Education market., and it would have been lost without it. I never saw anything from a BSD that did not pretty much just recompile on AIX/386 - but I admit I never pushed it very hard, since it was not a primary system for me. > and it didn’t feel like it had much in common with AIX 3.1 on the > RS/6000. As always by the time I had gotten all the needed bits, Linux was > a thing, running Unix on a 386 with ESDI disks felt horribly slow, and > Linux had much better support for stuff. Although if I had the machine > when it was the thing to do it’d have been awesome. Not that I’d probably > ever get access to a 370, let alone AIX for the 370 + those i860 boards. > ​It's too bad you missed one of the coolest tricks that TCF would allow you to do​. If you had a running TCF node (370 or 386) with a full install on it, all you needed to install another node was the boot floppy. The OS would load into memory from the boot floppy, send out a couple of packets on the network (never touching its disk) and the node would join the cluster and immediately be a part of the system. If the was disk was empty, it would start to be populated in the background using replication, if it had data, then the rebuild protocol started -- al behind the scene. It meant a node boot was really the time to perform the cluster management join protocol, which on TCF was fairly fast because it was bounded to 32 nodes. Later TNC clusters the CMS was a lot more complicated. All very, very cool. I do miss some of those ideas. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 2 23:36:23 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 08:36:23 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <1488437427.2273647.897749176.7C8A0473@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <6B20BA0A-4CD4-41FA-820E-76F6CE52E6D5@superglobalmegacorp.com> <1488437427.2273647.897749176.7C8A0473@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: Web server IP comes back as Russia. On 3/2/2017 1:50 AM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017, at 17:22, Jason Stevens wrote: >> Try this Google query >> >> site:vetusware.com "source code" >> >> For even more amazement >> >> On March 2, 2017 2:01:34 AM GMT+08:00, Arthur Krewat >> wrote: >> >> Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? >> >> >> Google it with: >> >> >> site:vetusware.com unix source >> >> >> Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? >> >> >> -- >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > A copy of the Cisco IOS code leak? That'll get them in some trouble... > > -- > Cory Smelosky > b4 at gewt.net > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pnr at planet.nl Thu Mar 2 23:55:44 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:55:44 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <32fbfeec-a3eb-796b-c243-5c6af478ea04@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On 1 Mar 2017, at 21:28 , Clem Cole wrote: > 1.) UCB Regents Position per AT&T/BSDi/UCB - anything through 32V is public domain (see groklaw) I think the USL lawyers feared that a jury might side with the Regents' position and therefore preferred to settle. Making the settlement secret was a clever idea and if it wasn't for Linux happening might have succeeded. Even if the position taken by the USB Regents would not hold up in court, than anything through to and including 32V is still available under the BSD-style license granted by Caldera Inc. (see http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf). It was later established in court that Caldera did not hold copyrights to Unix, but that Novell did at that time. However, Caldera was the licensing agent for Novell and had broad rights to grant licenses (and collect license fees as applicable). Novell had the right to overrule Caldera if it felt such was necessary. It did so when Caldera revoked IBM's license. It did not overrule the "ancient unix" license, even though it was aware of it. Renouncing it 15+ years later probably won't stick. Caldera (later renamed TSG) went bankrupt around 2011 and I'm not sure where the licensing agency went - perhaps it lapsed. Novell was acquired by Attachmate in 2010, which was acquired by British firm Micro Focus in 2014. Presumably they now hold the copyrights to the Unix source code. If so, perhaps they can be convinced to extend the BSD-style license to later versions, e.g. extend it up to SysV/R4. Note I'm not a lawyer and just expressing opinion. Paul From jcapp at anteil.com Fri Mar 3 00:15:18 2017 From: jcapp at anteil.com (Jim Capp) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 09:15:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <23583251.4626.1488464118793.JavaMail.root@zimbraanteil> Many of you are probably aware of this site, but for those who aren't, please check out http://www.groklaw.net/ It is a blog that focused primarily on the law suit of SCO vs. IBM, but has many other interesting reads related to UNIX source code. Cheers, Jim From: "Paul Ruizendaal" To: "TUHS main list" Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2017 8:55:44 AM Subject: Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance? On 1 Mar 2017, at 21:28 , Clem Cole wrote: > 1.) UCB Regents Position per AT&T/BSDi/UCB - anything through 32V is public domain (see groklaw) I think the USL lawyers feared that a jury might side with the Regents' position and therefore preferred to settle. Making the settlement secret was a clever idea and if it wasn't for Linux happening might have succeeded. Even if the position taken by the USB Regents would not hold up in court, than anything through to and including 32V is still available under the BSD-style license granted by Caldera Inc. (see http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf). It was later established in court that Caldera did not hold copyrights to Unix, but that Novell did at that time. However, Caldera was the licensing agent for Novell and had broad rights to grant licenses (and collect license fees as applicable). Novell had the right to overrule Caldera if it felt such was necessary. It did so when Caldera revoked IBM's license. It did not overrule the "ancient unix" license, even though it was aware of it. Renouncing it 15+ years later probably won't stick. Caldera (later renamed TSG) went bankrupt around 2011 and I'm not sure where the licensing agency went - perhaps it lapsed. Novell was acquired by Attachmate in 2010, which was acquired by British firm Micro Focus in 2014. Presumably they now hold the copyrights to the Unix source code. If so, perhaps they can be convinced to extend the BSD-style license to later versions, e.g. extend it up to SysV/R4. Note I'm not a lawyer and just expressing opinion. Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From corey at lod.com Fri Mar 3 05:56:42 2017 From: corey at lod.com (Corey Lindsly) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 11:56:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> > I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. > > The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided > by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured > as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm > using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). > > This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a > problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, > when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", > load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA > diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: > ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img > > This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the > install process will proceed successfully to completion. > > It should work equally well in VirtualBox. > > Regards, > > -- > Josh Good > Good stuff. Thanks. I was able to do the install in ESXi 5 with no problems using this information. Has anyone gotten the networking setup? There is an Intel PRO/1000 NIC driver package on the SCO site (ptf4016c) but it is for UW2.1.3 only and I was not able to get it to go. Sadly, the original 2.1 package ptf4016a appears to be gone. I suppose the next step would be to run through the updates from 2.1 to 2.1.3 unless someone else can share a simpler way to bring up a NIC. --corey From pepe at naleco.com Fri Mar 3 09:24:07 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 00:24:07 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> References: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> Message-ID: <20170302232406.GC1262@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 2, 11:56, Corey Lindsly wrote: > > > I got it to install successfully, in VMware Server 1.0.2. > > > > The solution is to boot normally with the "id.dd" floppy image provided > > by Corey Lindsly, with the ISO image also provided by Corey configured > > as IDE 0:1 (first channel, slave), and with a virtual IDE disk (I'm > > using 8 GB of size) as 0:0 (first channel, master). > > > > This setup leads to the already known IDE driver hanging. It's a > > problem with the IDE driver provided by SCO with UnixWare 2.1. So, > > when the install process asks whether you want to use a "HBA diskette", > > load into your PC emulator's virtual floppy drive the updated "HBA > > diskette" image provided by SCO for UnixWare 2.1.3, which is here: > > ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/upd213/hba213.img > > > > This will stop the UnixWare 2.1 IDE driver from hanging, and the > > install process will proceed successfully to completion. > > > > It should work equally well in VirtualBox. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Josh Good > > > > Good stuff. Thanks. I was able to do the install in ESXi 5 with no > problems using this information. Has anyone gotten the networking setup? > There is an Intel PRO/1000 NIC driver package on the SCO site (ptf4016c) > but it is for UW2.1.3 only and I was not able to get it to go. Sadly, the > original 2.1 package ptf4016a appears to be gone. I suppose the next step > would be to run through the updates from 2.1 to 2.1.3 unless someone else > can share a simpler way to bring up a NIC. I have networking up and running in UnixWare 2.1, on VMware Server 1.0. VMware Server 1.0 virtualizes the "AMD PCNet" PCI ethernet card, and UnixWare 2.1 has built-in drivers for it. Can the virtualization software you are using offer an emulated "AMD PCNet" PCI ethernet card to the virtual machine where you are running UnixWare 2.1? I attach these screenshots for your reference: https://s29.postimg.org/rlnbqb687/screenshot_01_network_driver.png https://s29.postimg.org/cw2hlt3yf/screenshot_02_network_driver.png https://s29.postimg.org/3pk6yiypz/screenshot_03_network_driver.png https://s29.postimg.org/qfjbrihxj/screenshot_04_booting.png https://s29.postimg.org/li5r6efyf/screenshot_05_booting.png https://s29.postimg.org/z0cnios3r/screenshot_06_X11.png https://s29.postimg.org/g1n3c0mkn/screenshot_07_login.png And now, it would be nice to have SSHd running. According to this post, it's doable: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.security.ssh/da7A-ma74zs Does anyone volunteer to compile a package for SSHd in UnixWare 2.1, and share it? Regards, -- Josh Good From krewat at kilonet.net Sat Mar 4 02:22:18 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:22:18 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20170302232406.GC1262@naleco.com> References: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> <20170302232406.GC1262@naleco.com> Message-ID: <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> Install successful on VMware ESXi 6.0u2 IDE hard drive, 2GB, on IDE bus 0, master (0:1) CD drive on IDE bus 0, slave (0:1) Network working using AMD-PCNET (VMware flexible adapter) Same procedure as already posted, using HBA213 floppy image. Cool stuff. Side note: I tried a Buslogic SCSI adapter and 2GB hard drive, but after the install was complete, it hung after reboot, maybe it didn't like the IRQ the card was assigned to: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jkdmflaelgeaigpp.png Type: image/png Size: 38129 bytes Desc: not available URL: From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Sat Mar 4 02:54:00 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:54:00 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> References: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> <20170302232406.GC1262@naleco.com> <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> Message-ID: I almost hate to bring this up at this point, but it seems worthwhile - are SCO products now considered legal to distribute? Or just Novell? I had thought not, but that may well be an outdated understanding of the situation. -Henry On 3 March 2017 at 11:22, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Install successful on VMware ESXi 6.0u2 > > IDE hard drive, 2GB, on IDE bus 0, master (0:1) > CD drive on IDE bus 0, slave (0:1) > > Network working using AMD-PCNET (VMware flexible adapter) > > Same procedure as already posted, using HBA213 floppy image. > > Cool stuff. > > Side note: I tried a Buslogic SCSI adapter and 2GB hard drive, but after > the install was complete, it hung after reboot, maybe it didn't like the > IRQ the card was assigned to: > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jkdmflaelgeaigpp.png Type: image/png Size: 38129 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sat Mar 4 06:06:12 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:06:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? Message-ID: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Warner Losh > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Random832 wrote: >>> My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal to >>> distribute. >> surely there are big chunks of the opensolaris code that are not *very >> much* changed from the original System V code they're based on. Under >> what theory, then, was Sun the copyright holder and therefore able to >> release it under the CDDL? > Their paid-up perpetual license that granted them the right to do that? I wonder, if they do indeed have such a license, if they have the rights to distribute original SysV source under the CDDL? Or does that license only apply to SysV code that they have modified? And if so, _how much_ does it have to be modified, to qualify? Maybe we can get them to distribute SysV under the CDDL... :-) Noel From clemc at ccc.com Sat Mar 4 06:28:27 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:28:27 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: I've been given two different interpretations so I'm not sure who to believe. I really would like to hear a lawyer from Oracle (ney Sun) for Micro Focus (ney - At&t -> Novell) make a statement. I believe the issue is that Sun was given something called "complete rights", similar to what IBM had( which is how OSF was licensed - from the IBM one). This was interpreted to believe they could anything with it with anything >>they<< did. That is to say, if they hacked on the kernel and published there kernel, then the parts that came from AT&T could be also. The question is what happens to the code that got from AT&T but did not use. I'm going to be hypothetical here, Larry correct me to the specifics please as I never saw Solaris sources, but SVR4 had Streams Networking in it. Let's say the Solaris pulled that out like we did at Stellar with SVR3 and put a BBN or BSD style stack back in and never shipped the streams code. The Network stack they did publish would be available, but what about the AT&T version? I have heard different legal folks say it was both still "closed" and others say, it was now opened. I don't know. I'm not willing or have I ever worked for anyone that has believed it was now "free." I do tend to think of 32V and before as generally open technology. I come to that between the UCB regents position, one hand, much less the publishing of books like the Lions' book years ago. There have been publications of how things like SVR3 and SVR4 >>worked<< but I don't know of source being included the same way the Lions text. If that were done, I would be more comfortable. That said, I do feel like its time it >>should<< be made available; but the IP is I guess owned by Micro Focus. Clem On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Warner Losh > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Random832 > wrote: > > >>> My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal > to > >>> distribute. > > >> surely there are big chunks of the opensolaris code that are not > *very > >> much* changed from the original System V code they're based on. > Under > >> what theory, then, was Sun the copyright holder and therefore able > to > >> release it under the CDDL? > > > Their paid-up perpetual license that granted them the right to do > that? > > I wonder, if they do indeed have such a license, if they have the rights to > distribute original SysV source under the CDDL? Or does that license only > apply to SysV code that they have modified? And if so, _how much_ does it > have > to be modified, to qualify? > > Maybe we can get them to distribute SysV under the CDDL... :-) > > Noel > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Sat Mar 4 09:12:41 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:12:41 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170303231241.GA13442@mcvoy.com> On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 03:28:27PM -0500, Clem Cole wrote: > The question is what happens to the code that got from AT&T but did not > use. I'm going to be hypothetical here, Larry correct me to the specifics > please as I never saw Solaris sources, but SVR4 had Streams Networking in > it. Let's say the Solaris pulled that out like we did at Stellar with > SVR3 and put a BBN or BSD style stack back in and never shipped the streams > code. The Network stack they did publish would be available, but what > about the AT&T version? I can't speak to the legal stuff but Solaris shipped with Convergent/Lachman's TCP/IP stack. Briefly if at all. Then Mentat was contracted to do a higher performance TCP/IP which was a bloody mess if I recall correctly. Full of "fast paths" that worked around the STREAMS shortcomings. Sun would have been far far better off doing what you did at Stellar. From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sat Mar 4 09:56:18 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 12:56:18 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1488585378.58ba02a237271@www.paradise.net.nz> I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one of TV or in a play or any such thing. My position on this is the result of hanging around Groklaw during The SCO Group - Caldera renamed and repurposed - versus Linux and the World shenanigans; namely, it's valuable mostly for historical reasons or as some would have it, hysterical raisins. The actual "IP" - intellectual property - has been dispersed now for so many years through so many channels that the actual Unix source tree copyrights don't serve much of the original purpose of copyright any more. I'm sure we can name any number of reimplementations of the various stages of the Unix development - Minix 1.x and Coherent for the V6- 7 interfaces, Schweitzer's Tunix for Unix SysVR3, the BSDs, Linux, etc for various stages of BSD and POSIX, and OpenSolaris for the latter stages of SysVR4 and so on. And since the central Unix source trees have been static - I don't think Novell was much more than a caretaker, correct me if I'm wrong - and the last SysVR4 release of any consequence was Solaris - has Oracle done anything with it? - I think the best thing for all would be the release of the Unix SysV source trees under a suitable open source license. (I've made a similar argument for the IBM/MS OS/2, DEC VAX VMS, and MS Windows and WinNT 3.x and 4.x source trees on various other Internet forums: the horse has bolted, it's a bit pointless welding shut the barn door now. Better to get the credit for being friendly and open, and clear up some residual bugs while you're at it ... ) My 0.02c on this matter, and don't spend it all at once! :) Wesley Parish Quoting Clem Cole : > I've been given two different interpretations so I'm not sure who to > believe. I really would like to hear a lawyer from Oracle (ney Sun) for > Micro Focus (ney - At&t -> Novell) make a statement. > > I believe the issue is that Sun was given something called "complete > rights", similar to what IBM had( which is how OSF was licensed - from > the > IBM one). This was interpreted to believe they could anything with it > with anything >>they<< did. That is to say, if they hacked on the > kernel > and published there kernel, then the parts that came from AT&T could be > also. > > The question is what happens to the code that got from AT&T but did not > use. I'm going to be hypothetical here, Larry correct me to the > specifics > please as I never saw Solaris sources, but SVR4 had Streams Networking > in > it. Let's say the Solaris pulled that out like we did at Stellar with > SVR3 and put a BBN or BSD style stack back in and never shipped the > streams > code. The Network stack they did publish would be available, but what > about the AT&T version? > > I have heard different legal folks say it was both still "closed" and > others say, it was now opened. > > I don't know. I'm not willing or have I ever worked for anyone that has > believed it was now "free." > > I do tend to think of 32V and before as generally open technology. I > come > to that between the UCB regents position, one hand, much less the > publishing of books like the Lions' book years ago. There have been > publications of how things like SVR3 and SVR4 >>worked<< but I don't > know > of source being included the same way the Lions text. If that were > done, > I would be more comfortable. > > That said, I do feel like its time it >>should<< be made available; but > the > IP is I guess owned by Micro Focus. > > Clem > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Noel Chiappa > wrote: > > > > From: Warner Losh > > > > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Random832 > > wrote: > > > > >>> My understanding is that System V source of any sort is not legal > > to > > >>> distribute. > > > > >> surely there are big chunks of the opensolaris code that are not > > *very > > >> much* changed from the original System V code they're based on. > > Under > > >> what theory, then, was Sun the copyright holder and therefore able > > to > > >> release it under the CDDL? > > > > > Their paid-up perpetual license that granted them the right to do > > that? > > > > I wonder, if they do indeed have such a license, if they have the > rights to > > distribute original SysV source under the CDDL? Or does that license > only > > apply to SysV code that they have modified? And if so, _how much_ does > it > > have > > to be modified, to qualify? > > > > Maybe we can get them to distribute SysV under the CDDL... :-) > > > > Noel > > > > > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From usotsuki at buric.co Sat Mar 4 10:29:38 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 19:29:38 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <1488585378.58ba02a237271@www.paradise.net.nz> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1488585378.58ba02a237271@www.paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Mar 2017, Wesley Parish wrote: > And since the central Unix source trees have been static - I don't think > Novell was much more than a caretaker, correct me if I'm wrong - and the > last SysVR4 release of any consequence was Solaris - has Oracle done > anything with it? - I think the best thing for all would be the release > of the Unix SysV source trees under a suitable open source license. > (I've made a similar argument for the IBM/MS OS/2, DEC VAX VMS, and MS > Windows and WinNT 3.x and 4.x source trees on various other Internet > forums: the horse has bolted, it's a bit pointless welding shut the barn > door now. Better to get the credit for being friendly and open, and > clear up some residual bugs while you're at it ... ) I agree pretty much across the board. To be fair, I'd like to start from SysV and create a traditional implementation of that for my own personal neckbeard use, but using a kernel, such as Linux, that has decent modern hardware support. And I've tried doing that, I'm just lost as to where to begin. ;) -uso. From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Sat Mar 4 11:01:22 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 20:01:22 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <1488585378.58ba02a237271@www.paradise.net.nz> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1488585378.58ba02a237271@www.paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: On 3 March 2017 at 18:56, Wesley Parish wrote: > > And since the central Unix source trees have been static - I don't think > Novell was much more than a > caretaker, correct me if I'm wrong - and the last SysVR4 release of any > consequence was Solaris - has > Oracle done anything with it? - I think the best thing for all would be > the release of the Unix SysV > source trees under a suitable open source license. There was an SVR5, even if it was not nearly the popular product that its predecessors were. While development certainly slowed, it contained some amount of technological progression. Obviously at this point development has stopped completely and it probably does make sense to open source that code base. > (I've made a similar argument for the IBM/MS OS/2, > DEC VAX VMS, and MS Windows and WinNT 3.x and 4.x source trees on various > other Internet forums: > the horse has bolted, it's a bit pointless welding shut the barn door now. > Better to get the credit for > being friendly and open, and clear up some residual bugs while you're at > it ... ) Equating VMS, old versions of Windows, etc. isn't quite the same. Even old versions of those products may well include source that contains, or is believed by its owners to contain, novel ideas or novel implementations of existing ideas that may have survived relatively unchanged in newer versions. And because there is at least a reasonably sized user base for all of the products you mentioned, corporate customers have an interest in protecting their investment, and the software creators have an interest in responding to the desires (or perceived desires) of their customers. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see a legal release of the VMS 5 source, or Windows 3 source, or classic Macintosh source. I'm just not holding my breath. I think the community's time would be better spend advocating for source releases of products that are truly dead or all but dead. -Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 4 13:16:08 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 13:16:08 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 Message-ID: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Mid-year 2019 is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Unix and I've been quietly agitating for something to be done to celebrate this. Up to now, there's been little response. The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical Conference on the west coast of the US at this time, so it would make sense to do something in conjunction with this conference. Some suggestions: - a terminal room with a bunch of period terminals: ASR-33s, -37s, VT100s, VT102s, VT220s - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems - some graphical terminals: Sun pizza boxes, a Blit would be great - if possible, some actual real PDP-11s, VAXen - emulated systems: V1 to V7 Unix, 32V, the BSDs etc. In fact there are plenty of Unix versions that we could run in emulated mode. - Unix of course was one of the systems used to implement the Arpanet protcols, so it would be interesting to get some of the real/emulated systems networked together - how about an emulated UUCP network with Usenet on top of it, and some mail/news clients on the emulated systems. - retro workshops/tutorials: how to edit with ed, using nroff, posting a Usenet article, dealing with bang paths. I'm proposing to gather a bunch of people to start the ball rolling on the technical/demonstration side. We'd need people: - with terminals, portable PDP-11s and VAXen, Sun boxen - prepared to set up emulated systems - who can help bring the networking (UUCP, Usenet, Arpanet) back to life - willing to write and run workshops that show off this old technology - to help set up terminal servers and all the RS-232 to telnet stuff Some of this we can start doing now, e.g. rebuild an emulated Arpanet, UUCP, Usenet, get emulated systems up, build front-end telnet interfaces. Is there anybody willing to sign up for this? I think once we have some momentum, we can tell the Usenix people and get some buy-in from them. Post back and/or e-mail me if you can help. Thanks, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From downing.nick at gmail.com Sat Mar 4 13:23:47 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 14:23:47 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1488585378.58ba02a237271@www.paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: Yes. And I just want to point out the systems vendor's worst nightmare: Competition from an earlier version of their own product. History is littered with examples where something was deliberately left to wither and die for this reason. Apple II and IIgs: We all know that the IIgs was deliberately crippled, and then discontinued in favour of the IIc+, as it presented a viable alternative to the 68000-based Macs. 680x0 Macs: Apparently some licensees had 68060 Macs and accelerators in the works, but Apple refused access to the ROMs to add the 68060 support code, because it would have been a viable alternative to the PowerPC 603. IBM OS/2: Was heavily DOS based (I believe it used the INT 21h API with modifications for protected mode), but in fact was eclipsed by later versions of DOS/Windows that were retrofitted with things like DPMI support, hacky but effective in providing a viable alternative to OS/2. BSD and SysIII: For a while it looked like the 32V-derived BSDs were going provide a viable alternative to AT&T's official developments of the same, and it took some heavy handed legal and political manouevring and backroom deals to make sure that did not happen in the end. AMD64 and Itanium: Enough said, a very expensive egg on face episode for Intel. 8086/8088 and iAPX432: Same thing except it was actually Intel's own product that provided a viable alternative to the "official" new version rather than a competitor's development of it. Of course a similar story can be told about 8080/Z80/8085/8086, Intel faced stiff competition from an enhanced version of their own product before wresting back control with the much improved 8086. A nightmare for them. That's the real reason vendors won't open source. Nick On Mar 4, 2017 12:02 PM, "Henry Bent" wrote: On 3 March 2017 at 18:56, Wesley Parish wrote: > > And since the central Unix source trees have been static - I don't think > Novell was much more than a > caretaker, correct me if I'm wrong - and the last SysVR4 release of any > consequence was Solaris - has > Oracle done anything with it? - I think the best thing for all would be > the release of the Unix SysV > source trees under a suitable open source license. There was an SVR5, even if it was not nearly the popular product that its predecessors were. While development certainly slowed, it contained some amount of technological progression. Obviously at this point development has stopped completely and it probably does make sense to open source that code base. > (I've made a similar argument for the IBM/MS OS/2, > DEC VAX VMS, and MS Windows and WinNT 3.x and 4.x source trees on various > other Internet forums: > the horse has bolted, it's a bit pointless welding shut the barn door now. > Better to get the credit for > being friendly and open, and clear up some residual bugs while you're at > it ... ) Equating VMS, old versions of Windows, etc. isn't quite the same. Even old versions of those products may well include source that contains, or is believed by its owners to contain, novel ideas or novel implementations of existing ideas that may have survived relatively unchanged in newer versions. And because there is at least a reasonably sized user base for all of the products you mentioned, corporate customers have an interest in protecting their investment, and the software creators have an interest in responding to the desires (or perceived desires) of their customers. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see a legal release of the VMS 5 source, or Windows 3 source, or classic Macintosh source. I'm just not holding my breath. I think the community's time would be better spend advocating for source releases of products that are truly dead or all but dead. -Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 4 13:29:40 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 13:29:40 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170304032940.GA4111@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 01:01:34PM -0500, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? I'll also mention https://winworldpc.com/library/ and I've spent a few days grabbing stuff from this to add to the hidden archive. Yes, I'm glad it's there so I can grab the stuff and stash it. No, once it's stashed I'm not going to give it out. Yes, there is a significant level of hypocrisy here. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From scj at yaccman.com Sat Mar 4 13:41:18 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 19:41:18 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <50b21d2fb7b1a0458639576ba112e4f164cf7ab2@webmail.yaccman.com> Remember that Unix is mostly driven by software issues, rather than hardware.  In fact, Usenix folks often complained that the various computer museums setting up were almost entirely focused on hardware, and had almost no educational material about how software worked or was written, and the algorithms under the covers that made it all work.  At one point we offered the Boston computer museum $30,000 if they would make an exhibit primarily dealing with software, and they turned us down. Previous anniversaries have included "Old Farts' BOF" and even some talks by previous presidents and other contributors.  At one such celebration there were professional fireworks set off at the (outdoor) banquet in Oregon.   I was on the board when that was done --one of the most interesting board discussions I remember was debating whether we should go with the $10,000 or the $20,000 fireworks show. That said, I think the anniversary is worth honoring in some fashion... Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Warren Toomey" To: Cc: Sent:Sat, 4 Mar 2017 13:16:08 +1000 Subject:[TUHS] Need your help for 2019 Mid-year 2019 is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Unix and I've been quietly agitating for something to be done to celebrate this. Up to now, there's been little response. The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical Conference on the west coast of the US at this time, so it would make sense to do something in conjunction with this conference. Some suggestions: - a terminal room with a bunch of period terminals: ASR-33s, -37s, VT100s, VT102s, VT220s - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems - some graphical terminals: Sun pizza boxes, a Blit would be great - if possible, some actual real PDP-11s, VAXen - emulated systems: V1 to V7 Unix, 32V, the BSDs etc. In fact there are plenty of Unix versions that we could run in emulated mode. - Unix of course was one of the systems used to implement the Arpanet protcols, so it would be interesting to get some of the real/emulated systems networked together - how about an emulated UUCP network with Usenet on top of it, and some mail/news clients on the emulated systems. - retro workshops/tutorials: how to edit with ed, using nroff, posting a Usenet article, dealing with bang paths. I'm proposing to gather a bunch of people to start the ball rolling on the technical/demonstration side. We'd need people: - with terminals, portable PDP-11s and VAXen, Sun boxen - prepared to set up emulated systems - who can help bring the networking (UUCP, Usenet, Arpanet) back to life - willing to write and run workshops that show off this old technology - to help set up terminal servers and all the RS-232 to telnet stuff Some of this we can start doing now, e.g. rebuild an emulated Arpanet, UUCP, Usenet, get emulated systems up, build front-end telnet interfaces. Is there anybody willing to sign up for this? I think once we have some momentum, we can tell the Usenix people and get some buy-in from them. Post back and/or e-mail me if you can help. Thanks, Warren -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 4 14:15:57 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 20:15:57 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1488600957.3778065.900016144.1AD1D2BC@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017, at 19:16, Warren Toomey wrote: > Mid-year 2019 is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Unix and I've > been quietly agitating for something to be done to celebrate this. Up to > now, there's been little response. > > The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical > Conference on the west coast of the US at this time, so it would make > sense > to do something in conjunction with this conference. Some suggestions: > > - a terminal room with a bunch of period terminals: ASR-33s, -37s, > VT100s, > VT102s, VT220s > - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a > terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems > - some graphical terminals: Sun pizza boxes, a Blit would be great > - if possible, some actual real PDP-11s, VAXen > - emulated systems: V1 to V7 Unix, 32V, the BSDs etc. In fact there are > plenty of Unix versions that we could run in emulated mode. > > - Unix of course was one of the systems used to implement the Arpanet > protcols, so it would be interesting to get some of the real/emulated > systems networked together > - how about an emulated UUCP network with Usenet on top of it, and > some mail/news clients on the emulated systems. > > - retro workshops/tutorials: how to edit with ed, using nroff, posting > a Usenet article, dealing with bang paths. > > I'm proposing to gather a bunch of people to start the ball rolling on > the > technical/demonstration side. We'd need people: > - with terminals, portable PDP-11s and VAXen, Sun boxen > - prepared to set up emulated systems > - who can help bring the networking (UUCP, Usenet, Arpanet) back to life > - willing to write and run workshops that show off this old technology > - to help set up terminal servers and all the RS-232 to telnet stuff > > Some of this we can start doing now, e.g. rebuild an emulated Arpanet, > UUCP, > Usenet, get emulated systems up, build front-end telnet interfaces. > > Is there anybody willing to sign up for this? I think once we have some > momentum, we can tell the Usenix people and get some buy-in from them. > > Post back and/or e-mail me if you can help. Thanks, Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) Where on the west coast? -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 4 14:18:46 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 20:18:46 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> References: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> <20170302232406.GC1262@naleco.com> <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <1488601126.3778884.900016664.4834FDB0@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017, at 08:22, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Install successful on VMware ESXi 6.0u2 > > IDE hard drive, 2GB, on IDE bus 0, master (0:1) > CD drive on IDE bus 0, slave (0:1) > > Network working using AMD-PCNET (VMware flexible adapter) > > Same procedure as already posted, using HBA213 floppy image. > > Cool stuff. > > Side note: I tried a Buslogic SCSI adapter and 2GB hard drive, but > after the install was complete, it hung after reboot, maybe it didn't > like the IRQ the card was assigned to: > > > Time to attempt to migrate the qemu VM to vmware! ;) -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jkdmflaelgeaigpp.png Type: image/png Size: 38129 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 4 14:20:55 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 14:20:55 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <1488600957.3778065.900016144.1AD1D2BC@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <1488600957.3778065.900016144.1AD1D2BC@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <20170304042055.GA11501@minnie.tuhs.org> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017, at 19:16, Warren Toomey wrote: > The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical > Conference on the west coast of the US at this time [ 2019 ] On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:15:57PM -0800, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Where on the west coast? No idea yet, their web site doesn't say: https://www.usenix.org/conferences/byname/131 but they seem to alternate east/west coast. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 4 14:49:02 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 20:49:02 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <20170304042055.GA11501@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <1488600957.3778065.900016144.1AD1D2BC@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170304042055.GA11501@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1488602942.3785999.900030904.4191F89A@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017, at 20:20, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017, at 19:16, Warren Toomey wrote: > > The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical > > Conference on the west coast of the US at this time [ 2019 ] > > On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:15:57PM -0800, Cory Smelosky wrote: > > Where on the west coast? > > No idea yet, their web site doesn't say: > https://www.usenix.org/conferences/byname/131 > but they seem to alternate east/west coast. > > Cheers, Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) Oh hey! This year is the next city west...now I have no excuses...;) -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 4 14:56:50 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 20:56:50 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] SCO OpenDesktop 386 2.0.0 In-Reply-To: <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> References: <20170301224529.GB1262@naleco.com> <20170302195643.482CF411D@lod.com> <20170302232406.GC1262@naleco.com> <495d63ca-ea90-5d06-cb96-1b208b916bf5@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <1488603410.3789601.900033128.5EFB8183@webmail.messagingengine.com> What VM hardware version? It's not working for me w/ flexible or e1000. On Fri, Mar 3, 2017, at 08:22, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Install successful on VMware ESXi 6.0u2 > > IDE hard drive, 2GB, on IDE bus 0, master (0:1) > CD drive on IDE bus 0, slave (0:1) > > Network working using AMD-PCNET (VMware flexible adapter) > > Same procedure as already posted, using HBA213 floppy image. > > Cool stuff. > > Side note: I tried a Buslogic SCSI adapter and 2GB hard drive, but > after the install was complete, it hung after reboot, maybe it didn't > like the IRQ the card was assigned to: > > > -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jkdmflaelgeaigpp.png Type: image/png Size: 38129 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pnr at planet.nl Sat Mar 4 18:21:16 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 09:21:16 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: The year 2019 is big for retro computing as all of Unix, the Arpanet and the PDP11 become 50 years old. TENEX as well, but that is off- topic for this list. In many ways these technologies are foundational to today's computing: aren't three-quarters of todays devices built on top of these technologies? Maybe Google, Facebook and other "internet" companies are willing to throw their weight behind some commemoration if it can be made relevant to a wider audience. Perhaps emulators for these old systems that can run in a browser (or as an app) with instructions clear enough for today's web developer is a good way to pay homage. It would be a big job though, probably to big to do in 2.5 years. Paul On 4 Mar 2017, at 4:16 , Warren Toomey wrote: > Mid-year 2019 is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Unix and I've > been quietly agitating for something to be done to celebrate this. Up to > now, there's been little response. > > The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical > Conference on the west coast of the US at this time, so it would make sense > to do something in conjunction with this conference. Some suggestions: > > - a terminal room with a bunch of period terminals: ASR-33s, -37s, VT100s, > VT102s, VT220s > - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a > terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems > - some graphical terminals: Sun pizza boxes, a Blit would be great > - if possible, some actual real PDP-11s, VAXen > - emulated systems: V1 to V7 Unix, 32V, the BSDs etc. In fact there are > plenty of Unix versions that we could run in emulated mode. > > - Unix of course was one of the systems used to implement the Arpanet > protcols, so it would be interesting to get some of the real/emulated > systems networked together > - how about an emulated UUCP network with Usenet on top of it, and > some mail/news clients on the emulated systems. > > - retro workshops/tutorials: how to edit with ed, using nroff, posting > a Usenet article, dealing with bang paths. > > I'm proposing to gather a bunch of people to start the ball rolling on the > technical/demonstration side. We'd need people: > - with terminals, portable PDP-11s and VAXen, Sun boxen > - prepared to set up emulated systems > - who can help bring the networking (UUCP, Usenet, Arpanet) back to life > - willing to write and run workshops that show off this old technology > - to help set up terminal servers and all the RS-232 to telnet stuff > > Some of this we can start doing now, e.g. rebuild an emulated Arpanet, UUCP, > Usenet, get emulated systems up, build front-end telnet interfaces. > > Is there anybody willing to sign up for this? I think once we have some > momentum, we can tell the Usenix people and get some buy-in from them. > > Post back and/or e-mail me if you can help. Thanks, Warren From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 4 18:24:31 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 16:24:31 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Something like this? http://takahirox.github.io/pdp11-js/unixv6.html Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Paul Ruizendaal Sent: Saturday, 4 March 2017 4:22 PM To: TUHS main list Subject: Re: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 The year 2019 is big for retro computing as all of Unix, the Arpanet and the PDP11 become 50 years old. TENEX as well, but that is off- topic for this list. In many ways these technologies are foundational to today's computing: aren't three-quarters of todays devices built on top of these technologies? Maybe Google, Facebook and other "internet" companies are willing to throw their weight behind some commemoration if it can be made relevant to a wider audience. Perhaps emulators for these old systems that can run in a browser (or as an app) with instructions clear enough for today's web developer is a good way to pay homage. It would be a big job though, probably to big to do in 2.5 years. Paul On 4 Mar 2017, at 4:16 , Warren Toomey wrote: > Mid-year 2019 is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Unix and I've > been quietly agitating for something to be done to celebrate this. Up to > now, there's been little response. > > The original Unix user's group, Usenix, will hold its Annual Technical > Conference on the west coast of the US at this time, so it would make sense > to do something in conjunction with this conference. Some suggestions: > > - a terminal room with a bunch of period terminals: ASR-33s, -37s, VT100s, > VT102s, VT220s > - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a > terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems > - some graphical terminals: Sun pizza boxes, a Blit would be great > - if possible, some actual real PDP-11s, VAXen > - emulated systems: V1 to V7 Unix, 32V, the BSDs etc. In fact there are > plenty of Unix versions that we could run in emulated mode. > > - Unix of course was one of the systems used to implement the Arpanet > protcols, so it would be interesting to get some of the real/emulated > systems networked together > - how about an emulated UUCP network with Usenet on top of it, and > some mail/news clients on the emulated systems. > > - retro workshops/tutorials: how to edit with ed, using nroff, posting > a Usenet article, dealing with bang paths. > > I'm proposing to gather a bunch of people to start the ball rolling on the > technical/demonstration side. We'd need people: > - with terminals, portable PDP-11s and VAXen, Sun boxen > - prepared to set up emulated systems > - who can help bring the networking (UUCP, Usenet, Arpanet) back to life > - willing to write and run workshops that show off this old technology > - to help set up terminal servers and all the RS-232 to telnet stuff > > Some of this we can start doing now, e.g. rebuild an emulated Arpanet, UUCP, > Usenet, get emulated systems up, build front-end telnet interfaces. > > Is there anybody willing to sign up for this? I think once we have some > momentum, we can tell the Usenix people and get some buy-in from them. > > Post back and/or e-mail me if you can help. Thanks, Warren -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From schily at schily.net Sat Mar 4 20:04:04 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 11:04:04 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> Clem Cole wrote: > I've been given two different interpretations so I'm not sure who to > believe. I really would like to hear a lawyer from Oracle (ney Sun) for > Micro Focus (ney - At&t -> Novell) make a statement. > > I believe the issue is that Sun was given something called "complete > rights", similar to what IBM had( which is how OSF was licensed - from the > IBM one). This was interpreted to believe they could anything with it > with anything >>they<< did. That is to say, if they hacked on the kernel > and published there kernel, then the parts that came from AT&T could be > also. Aprox. half of the code from Svr4 was written by Sun anyway. AT&T still believed that they owneed all of the code ans required Sunto pay royalties. Sun for this reason started to negotiate a buy out with AT&T. They agreed that Sun pays 3 years of royalties at once and then gets the same rights as AT&T. Shoirt before the contract was signed, AT&T handed over the code to Novell for less than what Sun should pay to AT&T. Sun then continued the negotiation with Novell and finally did the deal that included the right to sub-license the code to an arbitrary number of customers. Thia was around 1994/1995 and it took Sun Lawyers upt to y2000 to decide that the right to sub-licence includess the right to make it OpenSource. In y2000, Sun published aprox. 95%% of the Solaris-ON code but this did not include the source ls.c because it contained 3 lines from Microsoft/Xenix. It also missed the kernel networking code. > The question is what happens to the code that got from AT&T but did not > use. I'm going to be hypothetical here, Larry correct me to the specifics > please as I never saw Solaris sources, but SVR4 had Streams Networking in > it. Let's say the Solaris pulled that out like we did at Stellar with > SVR3 and put a BBN or BSD style stack back in and never shipped the streams > code. The Network stack they did publish would be available, but what > about the AT&T version? > > I have heard different legal folks say it was both still "closed" and > others say, it was now opened. AFAIK, there never was a streams based networking code in Svr4 from AT&T. The "original" code was from Lachman but it was slow so Sun bought new code from Mentat inc for Solaris 2.3 (IIRC). Sun then soon hired all important people from Mentat and enhanced the code, but missed to buy Mentat itself. As a result, Sun could not OpenSource the Mentat networking code. Fortunately, this code was not fast enough for 1/10 GB ETH and needed a major rewrite anyway. So Sun management did give the OK for the rewrite that finally made it possible to Opensource 99% of Solaris-on in June 2005. Let me finally give some information about SCO.... Sun bought a license from SCO for two reasons: - The permission to use the NIC drivers from SCO. Then it tourned out that that SCO did use something similar but incompatible to the Solaris GLC NIC abstraction layer. - The permission to use "lxrun", but then a group of people inside Sun wrote a new subsystem from scratch and caused the other group to become the looser of an internal dispute. A friend is one of the people who did work for the SCO kernel group before SCO was bought by Caldera Linux and later renamed to SCO... The lawsuit was initiated by the Caldera Linux people and not by the "former" SCO people. He is still working for the company that now owns sco.com and that now redirects to the new company name xinuos.com. They still have the ELF standard documents and AT&T UNIX documentation online. Their business is now FreeBSD based as they did not have the momentum to make UnixWare a 64 bit system. While I implemented Joliet and ISO-9660:1999 support for them, I noticed that the code was not very 64 bit clean in general.... Finally something about the way the code way sold: Novell bought not only the source code and the license but the building and the USL people in New Jersey as well. When they later sold UNIX to SCO, they of course sold the USL location and people as well. IIRC, SCO did even present a contract for that fact but the judge did rather believe the oral claims from the Novell people. While I was implementing Joliet and ISOI-9660:1999 I had to discusss things with the former USL people from New Jersey. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From dugo at xs4all.nl Sat Mar 4 21:09:30 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 12:09:30 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On 2017-03-04 04:16, Warren Toomey wrote: > - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a > terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems Getting Arpanet back up is tricky. I think only KLH10 has decent IMP support. Not much of UNIX history runs on that. There is the H316 emulator in simh, but its IMP-host interface would need to be fleshed out and the corresponding host cards do not exist yet in the simh VAX/PDP emulators. > - emulated systems: V1 to V7 Unix, 32V, the BSDs etc. In fact there are > plenty of Unix versions that we could run in emulated mode. > > - Unix of course was one of the systems used to implement the Arpanet > protcols, so it would be interesting to get some of the real/emulated > systems networked together On 2017-03-04 09:21, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > Maybe Google, Facebook and other "internet" companies are willing > to throw their weight behind some commemoration if it can be made > relevant to a wider audience. Archive.org maybe? Like they have done with piles of games? What Jason Scott pushed was the emscripten port of MESS/MAME into JSMESS. > Perhaps emulators for these old systems that can run in a browser > (or as an app) with instructions clear enough for today's web > developer is a good way to pay homage. > > It would be a big job though, probably to big to do in 2.5 years. Yes, they can run in the browser, the whole TUHS archive should run in the browser, interconnected. There are several routes open. Simh can be ported to emscripten or PNaCl, I vaguely remember getting it to boot in the browser with one of those. Subsequent fixing of the terminal output and websockification of the network interfaces was way over my head though, so I tossed that route. There is jor1k and v86, these are javascript emulators capable of running Linux complete with networking over websockets. You can run simh in these. I ran into some speed issues and chrome now throttling it, but the concept works. Bring a fast machine, recent browser in a separate window and a lot of patience and watch paint dry, eh, v6 install at http://oldbsd.org/unixv6install.html I'll try same with pdp7-unix and a faux KSR-33 to hide the speed issues. The 3 modern BSDs can boot up in v86, I didn't try the 08./0.9/1.0 versions and daddy 386BSD yet but it looks doable. Thanks to websockproxy ethernet over websockets is a thing and makes it possible to tie everything together. For UUCP style networking there is a modem cable emulator kernel, module for Linux (nmdm in FreeBSD) that can bridge simh serial devices to TCPSER. TCPSER then looks like a modem to simh. You can map phone numbers to sockets where another TCPSER is listening for inbound "calls". To develop cool disk images from the material in TUHS there is EXPECT/ SEND in current simh. What's very nice about this, is that it can be used to make reproducible installations. An EXPECT/SEND simh ini file fits nicely into your favourite version control software and you don't have to keep many blobs around. Another route would be implementing emulators in javascript. I have seen a few PDP-11/PDP-8 implementations, PCjs is now adding the -10, but that sounds like a big job indeed. From krewat at kilonet.net Sat Mar 4 22:51:30 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 07:51:30 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170304032940.GA4111@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170304032940.GA4111@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <75dbe516-90cc-6e61-e1cd-39866f69d942@kilonet.net> Thanks for the link ... archiving commencing. On 3/3/2017 10:29 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 01:01:34PM -0500, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > I'll also mention https://winworldpc.com/library/ and I've spent > a few days grabbing stuff from this to add to the hidden archive. > > Yes, I'm glad it's there so I can grab the stuff and stash it. > No, once it's stashed I'm not going to give it out. > Yes, there is a significant level of hypocrisy here. > > Cheers, Warren From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Mar 5 01:39:27 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 10:39:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? Message-ID: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Wesley Parish > I think the best thing for all would be the release of the Unix SysV > source trees under a suitable open source license. You may think that; I may think that, we _all_ may think that. But in the legal world, that, and $2 (or whatever the going rate is these days) will get you a cup of coffee. Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually _doing_ something, any talk is ... just that. Any volunteers to make something actually happen? Noel From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sun Mar 5 02:02:10 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 00:02:10 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <581D7AAA-2973-4B5D-B1E4-2FAAEDA0BC37@superglobalmegacorp.com> I've always wanted to buy into a source license then take in unpaid interns and give them access to the code... Although I guess that is pretty subversive? I'll have to email Microfocus again ... On March 4, 2017 11:39:27 PM GMT+08:00, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Wesley Parish > > > I think the best thing for all would be the release of the Unix SysV > > source trees under a suitable open source license. > >You may think that; I may think that, we _all_ may think that. > >But in the legal world, that, and $2 (or whatever the going rate is >these >days) will get you a cup of coffee. > >Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually >_doing_ >something, any talk is ... just that. > >Any volunteers to make something actually happen? > > Noel -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Sun Mar 5 02:28:55 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 11:28:55 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: Not be argumentative, but I do not think SCO matters at this point as I'm under the impression that per IBM/SCO case the US courts have ruled - i.e. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118678589019694632 Court Ruling Gives Novell Copyright in Unix System By KEITH J. WINSTEIN and WILLIAM M. BULKELEY Updated Aug. 11, 2007 12:01 a.m. ET A federal court in Utah ruled that Novell Inc., not SCO Group Inc., is the rightful owner of the copyright in the Unix operating system. Groklaw reports (and, as usual, has the actual decision) that SCO Group has just lost virtually everything left of its lawsuits against IBM and Novell over Linux. According to the ruling issued today by U.S. District Court Judge Dale Kimball: * Novell is the owner of the Unix copyrights. As a result, SCO’s suit gainst Novell for “slander of title” is dismissed. * Novell also has the contractual right to waive any claims of misuse of Unix by IBM (which Novell has repeatedly done). As a result, much if not all of SCO’s suit against IBM will shortly be dismissed. * SCO must pay Novell at least some of the license fees paid under its SCO Source program by Microsoft, Sun Microsystems and other licensees. On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Clem Cole wrote: > > > I've been given two different interpretations so I'm not sure who to > > believe. I really would like to hear a lawyer from Oracle (ney Sun) for > > Micro Focus (ney - At&t -> Novell) make a statement. > > > > I believe the issue is that Sun was given something called "complete > > rights", similar to what IBM had( which is how OSF was licensed - from > the > > IBM one). This was interpreted to believe they could anything with it > > with anything >>they<< did. That is to say, if they hacked on the > kernel > > and published there kernel, then the parts that came from AT&T could be > > also. > > Aprox. half of the code from Svr4 was written by Sun anyway. AT&T still > believed that they owneed all of the code ans required Sunto pay royalties. > > Sun for this reason started to negotiate a buy out with AT&T. They agreed > that > Sun pays 3 years of royalties at once and then gets the same rights as > AT&T. > Shoirt before the contract was signed, AT&T handed over the code to Novell > for > less than what Sun should pay to AT&T. > > Sun then continued the negotiation with Novell and finally did the deal > that > included the right to sub-license the code to an arbitrary number of > customers. > > Thia was around 1994/1995 and it took Sun Lawyers upt to y2000 to decide > that > the right to sub-licence includess the right to make it OpenSource. > > In y2000, Sun published aprox. 95%% of the Solaris-ON code but this did not > include the source ls.c because it contained 3 lines from Microsoft/Xenix. > It also missed the kernel networking code. > > > The question is what happens to the code that got from AT&T but did not > > use. I'm going to be hypothetical here, Larry correct me to the > specifics > > please as I never saw Solaris sources, but SVR4 had Streams Networking in > > it. Let's say the Solaris pulled that out like we did at Stellar with > > SVR3 and put a BBN or BSD style stack back in and never shipped the > streams > > code. The Network stack they did publish would be available, but what > > about the AT&T version? > > > > I have heard different legal folks say it was both still "closed" and > > others say, it was now opened. > > AFAIK, there never was a streams based networking code in Svr4 from AT&T. > The "original" code was from Lachman but it was slow so Sun bought new code > from Mentat inc for Solaris 2.3 (IIRC). Sun then soon hired all important > people from Mentat and enhanced the code, but missed to buy Mentat itself. > > As a result, Sun could not OpenSource the Mentat networking code. > Fortunately, > this code was not fast enough for 1/10 GB ETH and needed a major rewrite > anyway. So Sun management did give the OK for the rewrite that finally > made it > possible to Opensource 99% of Solaris-on in June 2005. > > Let me finally give some information about SCO.... > > Sun bought a license from SCO for two reasons: > > - The permission to use the NIC drivers from SCO. > Then it tourned out that that SCO did use something similar but > incompatible to the Solaris GLC NIC abstraction layer. > > - The permission to use "lxrun", but then a group of people inside > Sun wrote a new subsystem from scratch and caused the other group > to become the looser of an internal dispute. > > A friend is one of the people who did work for the SCO kernel group before > SCO > was bought by Caldera Linux and later renamed to SCO... The lawsuit was > initiated by the Caldera Linux people and not by the "former" SCO people. > > He is still working for the company that now owns sco.com and that now > redirects to the new company name xinuos.com. They still have the ELF > standard > documents and AT&T UNIX documentation online. Their business is now FreeBSD > based as they did not have the momentum to make UnixWare a 64 bit system. > While > I implemented Joliet and ISO-9660:1999 support for them, I noticed that the > code was not very 64 bit clean in general.... > > > Finally something about the way the code way sold: > > Novell bought not only the source code and the license but the building > and the > USL people in New Jersey as well. When they later sold UNIX to SCO, they > of > course sold the USL location and people as well. IIRC, SCO did even present > a contract for that fact but the judge did rather believe the oral claims > from > the Novell people. > > While I was implementing Joliet and ISOI-9660:1999 I had to discusss things > with the former USL people from New Jersey. > > Jörg > > -- > EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 > Berlin > joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: > http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/ > projects/schilytools/files/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Sun Mar 5 02:34:54 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 11:34:54 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Clem Cole wrote: > Not be argumentative, but I do not think SCO matters at this point ​That was probably a little to harsh... except for SCO's own IP... but for the base UNIX IP, i.e. SVR3, R4, etc.. the US courts decided it was Novell's property. ​ The question is what is/was IBM and Sun's license with them associated. So far the courts have said int eh case of IBM it was allowed to put anything in Linux it. What we really need is a definitive statement from microfocus making SVRx available. The other side piece I wonder about, was the AT&T/UI et al was planning and starting to work with Chorus? What happened to that work? Where did it end up? Does anyone know? Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From charles.unix.pro at gmail.com Sun Mar 5 03:41:32 2017 From: charles.unix.pro at gmail.com (Charles Anthony) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 09:41:32 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 3:09 AM, Jacob Goense wrote: > On 2017-03-04 04:16, Warren Toomey wrote: > >> - these connected to real/emulated Unix systems either locally or via a >> terminal server and telnet to remotely emulated systems >> > > Getting Arpanet back up is tricky. I think only KLH10 has decent IMP > support. Not much of UNIX history runs on that. > > There is the H316 emulator in simh, but its IMP-host interface would > need to be fleshed out and the corresponding host cards do not exist > yet in the simh VAX/PDP emulators. > > I did a bit of the fleshing out; it can be found at: https://github.com/charlesUnixPro/simh/ on branch dps8m. The 'ready' bits on the interface needs some work. The "cable" is implemented as UDP packets; probably the code should periodically send packets if the interface is enabled and the other end should keep a timeout counter to detect the other end not ready. -- Charles -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dugo at xs4all.nl Sun Mar 5 03:53:08 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 12:53:08 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote: > Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually > _doing_ > something, any talk is ... just that. Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get complaints and seem to get away with it. eg. https://archive.org/details/ATTUNIXSystemVRelease4Version2 From usotsuki at buric.co Sun Mar 5 04:37:20 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 13:37:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Mar 2017, Jacob Goense wrote: > On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote: >> Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually _doing_ >> something, any talk is ... just that. > > Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get complaints > and seem to get away with it. eg. > > I don't know how they haven't been C&D'd out of existence by now. -uso. From ron at ronnatalie.com Sun Mar 5 04:38:42 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 13:38:42 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <013201d29516$91373820$b3a5a860$@ronnatalie.com> Simple... OCILLA. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Steve Nickolas Sent: Saturday, March 4, 2017 1:37 PM To: Jacob Goense Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org; jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance? On Sat, 4 Mar 2017, Jacob Goense wrote: > On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote: >> Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually >> _doing_ something, any talk is ... just that. > > Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get > complaints and seem to get away with it. eg. > > I don't know how they haven't been C&D'd out of existence by now. -uso. From b4 at gewt.net Sun Mar 5 06:39:33 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 12:39:33 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <06A5F65C-E9EF-45D0-B60C-8EDFB0B85159@gewt.net> They have a DMCA archival exemption. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 4, 2017, at 09:53, Jacob Goense wrote: > >> On 2017-03-04 10:39, jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu wrote: >> Unless someone is prepared to chivvy a rights-holder into actually _doing_ >> something, any talk is ... just that. > > Archive.org just blatantly hosts whatever they find until they get complaints > and seem to get away with it. eg. > > https://archive.org/details/ATTUNIXSystemVRelease4Version2 From dugo at xs4all.nl Sun Mar 5 07:05:34 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2017 22:05:34 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <06A5F65C-E9EF-45D0-B60C-8EDFB0B85159@gewt.net> References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <06A5F65C-E9EF-45D0-B60C-8EDFB0B85159@gewt.net> Message-ID: On 2017-03-04 21:39, Cory Smelosky wrote: > They have a DMCA archival exemption. The librarian exemption is for archiving, not distribution. From asbesto at freaknet.org Sun Mar 5 19:41:02 2017 From: asbesto at freaknet.org (asbesto) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 09:41:02 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Data recovery from magtapes, we're on hackaday! :) Message-ID: <20170305094102.GD31039@freaknet.org> Hi there, in case of someone is in need of data recovery, we managed to do some nice work :) http://hackaday.com/2017/03/03/raiders-of-the-lost-os-reclaiming-a-piece-of-polish-it-history/ love all -- [ ::::::::: 73 de IW9HGS : http://museum.freaknet.org :::::::::::: ] [ Freaknet Medialab :: Poetry Hacklab : Dyne.Org :: Radio Cybernet ] [ NON SCRIVERMI USANDO LETTERE ACCENTATE - NON MANDARMI ALLEGATI ] [ *I DELETE* EMAIL > 100K, ATTACHMENTS, HTML, M$-WORD DOC and SPAM ] From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 5 19:58:08 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 19:58:08 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Data recovery from magtapes, we're on hackaday! :) In-Reply-To: <20170305094102.GD31039@freaknet.org> References: <20170305094102.GD31039@freaknet.org> Message-ID: <20170305095808.GA30029@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 09:41:02AM +0000, asbesto wrote: > Hi there, > in case of someone is in need of data recovery, we managed > to do some nice work :) > http://hackaday.com/2017/03/03/raiders-of-the-lost-os-reclaiming-a-piece-of-polish-it-history/ Great work, I hope you've sent this to cctalk as well. Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 6 01:44:29 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:44:29 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <20170305154429.GA7147@mcvoy.com> So once again this doesn't match my memory. I'm done arguing with Joerg, just noting that I don't believe that his information is accurate. It would be nice to get the real info from someone who was at Sun at the time. On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 11:04:04AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Aprox. half of the code from Svr4 was written by Sun anyway. AT&T still > believed that they owneed all of the code ans required Sunto pay royalties. > > Sun for this reason started to negotiate a buy out with AT&T. They agreed that > Sun pays 3 years of royalties at once and then gets the same rights as AT&T. > Shoirt before the contract was signed, AT&T handed over the code to Novell for > less than what Sun should pay to AT&T. > > Sun then continued the negotiation with Novell and finally did the deal that > included the right to sub-license the code to an arbitrary number of customers. > > Thia was around 1994/1995 and it took Sun Lawyers upt to y2000 to decide that > the right to sub-licence includess the right to make it OpenSource. > > In y2000, Sun published aprox. 95%% of the Solaris-ON code but this did not > include the source ls.c because it contained 3 lines from Microsoft/Xenix. > It also missed the kernel networking code. > > > The question is what happens to the code that got from AT&T but did not > > use. I'm going to be hypothetical here, Larry correct me to the specifics > > please as I never saw Solaris sources, but SVR4 had Streams Networking in > > it. Let's say the Solaris pulled that out like we did at Stellar with > > SVR3 and put a BBN or BSD style stack back in and never shipped the streams > > code. The Network stack they did publish would be available, but what > > about the AT&T version? > > > > I have heard different legal folks say it was both still "closed" and > > others say, it was now opened. > > AFAIK, there never was a streams based networking code in Svr4 from AT&T. > The "original" code was from Lachman but it was slow so Sun bought new code > from Mentat inc for Solaris 2.3 (IIRC). Sun then soon hired all important > people from Mentat and enhanced the code, but missed to buy Mentat itself. > > As a result, Sun could not OpenSource the Mentat networking code. Fortunately, > this code was not fast enough for 1/10 GB ETH and needed a major rewrite > anyway. So Sun management did give the OK for the rewrite that finally made it > possible to Opensource 99% of Solaris-on in June 2005. > > Let me finally give some information about SCO.... > > Sun bought a license from SCO for two reasons: > > - The permission to use the NIC drivers from SCO. > Then it tourned out that that SCO did use something similar but > incompatible to the Solaris GLC NIC abstraction layer. > > - The permission to use "lxrun", but then a group of people inside > Sun wrote a new subsystem from scratch and caused the other group > to become the looser of an internal dispute. > > A friend is one of the people who did work for the SCO kernel group before SCO > was bought by Caldera Linux and later renamed to SCO... The lawsuit was > initiated by the Caldera Linux people and not by the "former" SCO people. > > He is still working for the company that now owns sco.com and that now > redirects to the new company name xinuos.com. They still have the ELF standard > documents and AT&T UNIX documentation online. Their business is now FreeBSD > based as they did not have the momentum to make UnixWare a 64 bit system. While > I implemented Joliet and ISO-9660:1999 support for them, I noticed that the > code was not very 64 bit clean in general.... > > > Finally something about the way the code way sold: > > Novell bought not only the source code and the license but the building and the > USL people in New Jersey as well. When they later sold UNIX to SCO, they of > course sold the USL location and people as well. IIRC, SCO did even present > a contract for that fact but the judge did rather believe the oral claims from > the Novell people. > > While I was implementing Joliet and ISOI-9660:1999 I had to discusss things > with the former USL people from New Jersey. > > J?rg > > -- > EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin > joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From schily at schily.net Mon Mar 6 03:54:28 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 18:54:28 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170304153927.9EAB018C08D@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <58bc50d4.JPVfFYF8i6in8XO1%schily@schily.net> jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) wrote: > > From: Wesley Parish > > > I think the best thing for all would be the release of the Unix SysV > > source trees under a suitable open source license. > Any volunteers to make something actually happen? As mentioned before, Sun in theory had the right, but this did not include the networking code and code that includes code from Xenix (e.g. ls.c). Now that Oracle bought Sun, there is few chance even for that because Oracle is not known to be OSS friendly. The other rights owner was SCO.... SCO has been OSS friendly. SCO created the historical UNIX license and a bit later, I was able to convince SCO to make SCCS OpenSource and got a "final" OK in April 2001. But in May 2001, SCO was sold to Caldera Linux and the new owner was not OSS friendly and canceled the agreement. This caused a delay for making SCCS OpenSource, as I now had to convince Sun and succeeded in December 2006. Now that a judge ignored the contract between Novell and SCO and followed the oral claims from a Novell employee, it seems that somebody would need to convince Novell. I doubt that this will have a chance to work. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From schily at schily.net Mon Mar 6 04:26:23 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 19:26:23 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170305154429.GA7147@mcvoy.com> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <20170305154429.GA7147@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <58bc584f.hFmUe+1hTj9u4sxp%schily@schily.net> Larry McVoy wrote: > So once again this doesn't match my memory. I'm done arguing with Joerg, > just noting that I don't believe that his information is accurate. It > would be nice to get the real info from someone who was at Sun at the > time. This is a really strange way to deal with a different memory. Given that Larry does not even mention what he has in his memory and as his previous claims have only been partially verifyable, his mail must be seen as non-helpful. It however may help to mention that from my memory, Larry was no longer at Sun when Sun bought the additional rights from Novell (which happened IIRC in late 1994). Larry: please try to be constructive. If you believe I am wrong, explain where and if you have different memory, give verifyable statements. My statements are taken from statements from people who have been Sun employees during the time in question and from one of the few SCO employees that survived the SCO story up to xinuos.com. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 6 04:55:09 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 10:55:09 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58bc584f.hFmUe+1hTj9u4sxp%schily@schily.net> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <20170305154429.GA7147@mcvoy.com> <58bc584f.hFmUe+1hTj9u4sxp%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <20170305185509.GA9931@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 07:26:23PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Larry McVoy wrote: > > So once again this doesn't match my memory. I'm done arguing with Joerg, > > just noting that I don't believe that his information is accurate. It > > would be nice to get the real info from someone who was at Sun at the > > time. > > give verifyable statements. I wouldn't have to say anything if you did that. I can't remember a single time you were correct when you were talking about Sun history when I was there. Maybe there was such a time but by all the statements I remember you making were way off the mark. As the person who is making claims, the onus is on you to provide references when you are challenged. I don't want to argue with you and I'm not going to. If you want people to believe you, however, you're gonna need to back up your claims with, as you say, verifyable statements. From mutiny.mutiny at rediffmail.com Mon Mar 6 04:24:33 2017 From: mutiny.mutiny at rediffmail.com (Mutiny ) Date: 5 Mar 2017 18:24:33 -0000 Subject: [TUHS] =?utf-8?q?Source_code_abundance=3F?= In-Reply-To: <58bc50d4.JPVfFYF8i6in8XO1%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <1488738138.S.27583.autosave.drafts.1488738273.25851@webmail.rediffmail.com> 'Now that a judge ignored the contract between Novell and SCO and followed the oral claims from a Novell employee, it seems that somebody would need to convince Novell. I doubt that this will have a chance to work.'sounds very plausible to me. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From schily at schily.net Mon Mar 6 05:10:28 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 20:10:28 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170305185509.GA9931@mcvoy.com> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <20170305154429.GA7147@mcvoy.com> <58bc584f.hFmUe+1hTj9u4sxp%schily@schily.net> <20170305185509.GA9931@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <58bc62a4.PpINGyPGvND/mEDW%schily@schily.net> Larry McVoy wrote: > On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 07:26:23PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > give verifyable statements. > > I wouldn't have to say anything if you did that. I can't remember a > single time you were correct when you were talking about Sun history > when I was there. Maybe there was such a time but by all the statements > I remember you making were way off the mark. > > As the person who is making claims, the onus is on you to provide > references when you are challenged. I don't want to argue with you and > I'm not going to. If you want people to believe you, however, you're > gonna need to back up your claims with, as you say, verifyable statements. If your claims have been verifyable, I of course would have corrected myself. While I was able to verify that you edited the system include files from SunOS/Solaris to make them POSIX compliant, Is was not able to verify that you worked on the kernel code. My conclusion therefore is that we both got our information about the kernel from hearsay. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From schily at schily.net Mon Mar 6 05:15:20 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 20:15:20 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> Clem Cole wrote: > Not be argumentative, but I do not think SCO matters at this point as I'm > under the impression that per IBM/SCO case the US courts have ruled - i.e. > > > > https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118678589019694632 > > Court Ruling Gives Novell Copyright in Unix System > By > KEITH J. WINSTEIN and > > WILLIAM M. BULKELEY > Updated Aug. 11, 2007 12:01 a.m. ET > > A federal court in Utah ruled that Novell Inc., not SCO Group Inc., is the > rightful owner of the copyright in the Unix operating system. Novells claims are not very credible.... I mentioned that the USL laboratories from AT&T (including the people who work there) have been handed over from AT&T to Novell and later to SCO. It is most unlikely that these people did not terminate their contract in case the ownership of the code has not been transfered to the respective new owner of the company. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From imp at bsdimp.com Mon Mar 6 05:25:07 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 12:25:07 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Clem Cole wrote: > >> Not be argumentative, but I do not think SCO matters at this point as I'm >> under the impression that per IBM/SCO case the US courts have ruled - i.e. >> >> >> >> https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118678589019694632 >> >> Court Ruling Gives Novell Copyright in Unix System >> By >> KEITH J. WINSTEIN and >> >> WILLIAM M. BULKELEY >> Updated Aug. 11, 2007 12:01 a.m. ET >> >> A federal court in Utah ruled that Novell Inc., not SCO Group Inc., is the >> rightful owner of the copyright in the Unix operating system. > > Novells claims are not very credible.... > > I mentioned that the USL laboratories from AT&T (including the people who work > there) have been handed over from AT&T to Novell and later to SCO. > > It is most unlikely that these people did not terminate their contract in case > the ownership of the code has not been transfered to the respective new owner > of the company. The plain language of the contract that was on groklaw makes it clear that SCO got the rights to sell Unix, but since they didn't offer Novel enough money, the copyrights were specifically not included. SCO could sell and sublicense, but then had to pay Novel royalties back as the copyright holder instead of a larger up-front payment. The judge, correctly in my view, ruled that this was the proper interpretation of the contract. The testimony of the people that negotiated was needed to clear up the issue raised by SCO about the interpretation of the rather specific language in the contract and addenda. This body of evidence was developed rather extensively through both testimony, as well as evidence of payments by SCO to Novel that supported the view that SCO could sell licenses, but had to pay royalties back to Novel. They did this for several years before stopping and embarking on their ill-fated legal battle. So a judge disagrees with you, as a matter of law and fact, that Novel's claims are not credible. They are the ones that won the day, and won the day rather handily. All the details can be found at http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040319041857760 which includes a large number of exhibits from people that were actually there, who had first-hand knowledge, etc. On the whole it seems quite credible. I know who I believe, given the choice. Warner From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 6 05:55:32 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 14:55:32 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: And frankly, I don't care one way or the other if Novell's position was credible or not. I care that the case was >>decided<< by the a court and held up. The court made a ruling... its' over. stop arguing.. please... That is why we have courts, no matter what country we live in. The basic premise is the same. We do not have to like a courts ruling, we do have the accept them. This is not the first and will not the be last time that people may not agree with the answer given, but we all have move on. For instance, I and many other people (in fact polls have shown in the USA most Americans agree with me), think that OJ was guilty of murder, but what played out, that is not how the court ruled. But is does not matter that many us think he is guilty of murder, the US courts do not; we have the accept it. That was my point... we have moved on with OJ. The UNIX community has moved on post IBM/SCO. Its over, case decided. What SCO did or did not do has not bearing on Sun. So it does not matter in any way about Novell relationship with SCO/credible or otherwise. Sun's license was purely with Novell and the courts ruled that Novell owns that IP -- the courts are clear. We as a community have to accept that (any of us can chose to not like it that mind you, but we have to accept it). And once you have accepted it, the question left is since *Microfocus has the Unix rights from Novell, what are the formal state of the rights from Sun.* I frankly do not think anyone on this list really knows. I know of no formal statement from them or court with a position that can be referenced. What we have been asking is if we know if there is some one at Microfocus we can approach to get such a statement one way or the other. On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Joerg Schilling > wrote: > > Clem Cole wrote: > > > >> Not be argumentative, but I do not think SCO matters at this point as > I'm > >> under the impression that per IBM/SCO case the US courts have ruled - > i.e. > >> > >> > >> > >> https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118678589019694632 > >> > >> Court Ruling Gives Novell Copyright in Unix System > >> By > >> KEITH J. WINSTEIN and > >> > >> WILLIAM M. BULKELEY > >> Updated Aug. 11, 2007 12:01 a.m. ET > >> > >> A federal court in Utah ruled that Novell Inc., not SCO Group Inc., is > the > >> rightful owner of the copyright in the Unix operating system. > > > > Novells claims are not very credible.... > > > > I mentioned that the USL laboratories from AT&T (including the people > who work > > there) have been handed over from AT&T to Novell and later to SCO. > > > > It is most unlikely that these people did not terminate their contract > in case > > the ownership of the code has not been transfered to the respective new > owner > > of the company. > > The plain language of the contract that was on groklaw makes it clear > that SCO got the rights to sell Unix, but since they didn't offer > Novel enough money, the copyrights were specifically not included. SCO > could sell and sublicense, but then had to pay Novel royalties back as > the copyright holder instead of a larger up-front payment. The judge, > correctly in my view, ruled that this was the proper interpretation of > the contract. The testimony of the people that negotiated was needed > to clear up the issue raised by SCO about the interpretation of the > rather specific language in the contract and addenda. This body of > evidence was developed rather extensively through both testimony, as > well as evidence of payments by SCO to Novel that supported the view > that SCO could sell licenses, but had to pay royalties back to Novel. > They did this for several years before stopping and embarking on their > ill-fated legal battle. > > So a judge disagrees with you, as a matter of law and fact, that > Novel's claims are not credible. They are the ones that won the day, > and won the day rather handily. > > All the details can be found at > http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20040319041857760 > which includes a large number of exhibits from people that were > actually there, who had first-hand knowledge, etc. On the whole it > seems quite credible. I know who I believe, given the choice. > > Warner > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 6 07:36:05 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:36:05 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58bc62a4.PpINGyPGvND/mEDW%schily@schily.net> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <20170305154429.GA7147@mcvoy.com> <58bc584f.hFmUe+1hTj9u4sxp%schily@schily.net> <20170305185509.GA9931@mcvoy.com> <58bc62a4.PpINGyPGvND/mEDW%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <20170305213605.GA12048@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 08:10:28PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > While I was able to verify that you edited the system include files from > SunOS/Solaris to make them POSIX compliant, Is was not able to verify that you > worked on the kernel code. My conclusion therefore is that we both got our > information about the kernel from hearsay. And once again you prove yourself to be mis-informed. Would a referreed Usenix paper about some of my kernel work be enough for your royal highness? http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/bitmover/lm/papers/SunOS.ufs_clustering.pdf You, Joerg, have proven yourself to be disrespectful idiot and I've had enough. Why you are tolerated on this list is beyond me. You are no longer welcome in my mailbox and I'll be blissfully unaware of your blather going forward. Should have done this months ago. :0: * ^From:.*schily at schily.net.* /dev/null From mutiny.mutiny at rediffmail.com Mon Mar 6 08:03:17 2017 From: mutiny.mutiny at rediffmail.com (Mutiny ) Date: 5 Mar 2017 22:03:17 -0000 Subject: [TUHS] =?utf-8?q?Source_code_abundance=3F?= In-Reply-To: <20170305213605.GA12048@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1488749788.S.4958.6405.f4-234-211.1488751397.30872@webmail.rediffmail.com> "From: Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com>Sent: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 03:06:28"with such irrational and purely denouncing statements you blame yourself. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Mon Mar 6 10:13:44 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 01:13:44 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <20170306001342.GA21687@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 5, 20:15, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Clem Cole wrote: > > > Not be argumentative, but I do not think SCO matters at this point as I'm > > under the impression that per IBM/SCO case the US courts have ruled - i.e. > > > > > > > > https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118678589019694632 > > > > Court Ruling Gives Novell Copyright in Unix System > > By > > KEITH J. WINSTEIN and > > > > WILLIAM M. BULKELEY > > Updated Aug. 11, 2007 12:01 a.m. ET > > > > A federal court in Utah ruled that Novell Inc., not SCO Group Inc., is the > > rightful owner of the copyright in the Unix operating system. > > Novells claims are not very credible.... > > I mentioned that the USL laboratories from AT&T (including the people who work > there) have been handed over from AT&T to Novell and later to SCO. > > It is most unlikely that these people did not terminate their contract in case > the ownership of the code has not been transfered to the respective new owner > of the company. >From here ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO_Group,_Inc._v._Novell,_Inc. ) we get to here ( http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/SCONovellAssetAg.pdf ). That --horrendous quality-- PDF document states what assets were sold and transferred from Novell to SCO, and what assets where NOT sold nor transferred. And I quote from that PDF: """ ARTICLE I. Section 1.1.(a). Purchase and Sale of Assets. On the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement, Seller will sell, convey, transfer, assign and deliver to Buyer and Buyer will purchase and acquire from Seller on the Closing Date (as defined in Section 1.7), all of Seller's rights, title and interest in and to the assets and properties of Seller relating to the Business (collectively the "Assets") identified on Schedule 1.1.(a) hereto. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Assets to be so purchased shall no include those assets (the "Excluded Assets") set forth on Schedule 1.1.(b). """ """ Schedule 1.1.(b). Section V. Intellectual Property: A. All copyrights and trademarks, except for the trademarks UNIX and UnixWare. B. All Patents. [...] Section VIII. All rights, title and interest to the SVRx Royalties, less the 5% fee for administering the collection thereof pursuant to Section 4.16 hereof. """ It is therefore clear SCO did NOT buy the UNIX System V copyrights from Novell. SCO bought the UnixWare business, and the right to collect UNIX royalties in the name and for the benefit of Novell (except for a 5% fee SCO was to keep of said royalties, in concept of collector of said royalties). This is not an "oral claim" of a "Novell employee" that the Court "chose to believe". This is a written contract. Upheld by the Courts. It is beyond my understanding how would you qualify all that as "Novells claims are not very credible". You were in a recent post asking for "verifiable facts", yet you expound (wrong) opinion against what are, in fact, "verifiable facts". Regards, -- Josh Good From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Mar 6 10:52:39 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:52:39 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Unfortunately, time to limit things Message-ID: <20170306005239.GA17062@minnie.tuhs.org> All, I've been running the TUHS list since 1994 and it's always been an open list. People can say what they want, and I rely on sense and courtesy to ensure good behaviour. I think only once before I've had to hold and vet an individual's postings. However, I've seen undesirable behaviour recently on the list and I've had a substantial amount of private correspondance about it. Therefore, I've decided to hold and vet the postings of a few list members (i.e. >1). I don't take this step lightly; in fact, I've dithered for a while on this. But the new policy is: if you don't show respect to other members on the TUHS list, I will hold and vet your postings. If your postings are respectful then there will be no hold and vet. I will e-mail the people involved. I feel disappointed to have taken this step, but that's the way it is. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pnr at planet.nl Mon Mar 6 10:57:30 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 01:57:30 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Message-ID: <607AF648-CAC0-4FFD-8367-C502B3A0E96E@planet.nl> On 4 Mar 2017, at 9:24 , wrote: > Something like this? > > http://takahirox.github.io/pdp11-js/unixv6.html > Yes. Thank you for reminding me that web emulators already exist. With some googling I found this one: http://skn.noip.me/pdp11/pdp11.html It would seem to have several old Unix systems ready to play with and a nice emulation of the front panel of a 11/45 and a 11/70. It is released under a liberal license (quote from source file): "// This code may be used freely provided the original author name is acknowledged in any modified source code" From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Mon Mar 6 13:44:41 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:44:41 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <607AF648-CAC0-4FFD-8367-C502B3A0E96E@planet.nl> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <607AF648-CAC0-4FFD-8367-C502B3A0E96E@planet.nl> Message-ID: <51EE9B29-09E2-4626-8B71-E5FD7857D0B4@superglobalmegacorp.com> One thing I'd change for starters is the boot block code to just automatically load the right kernel, and get the system to come up normally on its own.... But it's cool. That ooenrisc is pretty cool too! https://s-macke.github.io/jor1k/demos/main.html It apparently has network support as well! On March 6, 2017 8:57:30 AM GMT+08:00, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > >On 4 Mar 2017, at 9:24 , wrote: > >> Something like this? >> >> http://takahirox.github.io/pdp11-js/unixv6.html >> > >Yes. Thank you for reminding me that web emulators already exist. With >some googling I found this one: >http://skn.noip.me/pdp11/pdp11.html > >It would seem to have several old Unix systems ready to play with and >a nice emulation of the front panel of a 11/45 and a 11/70. It is >released >under a liberal license (quote from source file): >"// This code may be used freely provided the original author name is >acknowledged in any modified source code" -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Mon Mar 6 13:50:22 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 22:50:22 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] [TUHS} communication files: interprocess IO before pipes Message-ID: <201703060350.v263oM7u024080@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> It's not really Unix history, but Dartmouth's "communication files" have so often been cited as pipes before Unix, that you may like to know what this fascinating facility actually was. See http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/DTSS/commfiles.pdf From mutiny.mutiny at rediffmail.com Mon Mar 6 17:43:07 2017 From: mutiny.mutiny at rediffmail.com (Mutiny ) Date: 6 Mar 2017 07:43:07 -0000 Subject: [TUHS] =?utf-8?q?Unfortunately=2C_time_to_limit_things?= In-Reply-To: <20170306005239.GA17062@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1488761575.S.5824.9032.f4-234-213.1488786187.7102@webmail.rediffmail.com> thats right. I dislike all the Schilly bashing.'I will e-mail the people involved. I feel disappointed to have taken thisstep, but that's the way it is.'  -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Mon Mar 6 18:05:44 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 01:05:44 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] [TUHS} communication files: interprocess IO before pipes In-Reply-To: <201703060350.v263oM7u024080@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703060350.v263oM7u024080@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <201703060805.v2685ihr000771@freefriends.org> Doug McIlroy wrote: > It's not really Unix history, but Dartmouth's "communication files" > have so often been cited as pipes before Unix, that you may like > to know what this fascinating facility actually was. See > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/DTSS/commfiles.pdf Thanks! That was a very interesting read. As a general remark, the historical discussions here of late have been very interesting (if voluminous :-). I think it's increasingly important to preserve as much of this history as possible. I've enjoyed reading about some of the systems I never worked on, such as ITS. Arnold From pnr at planet.nl Mon Mar 6 21:16:48 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 12:16:48 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <51EE9B29-09E2-4626-8B71-E5FD7857D0B4@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <607AF648-CAC0-4FFD-8367-C502B3A0E96E@planet.nl> <51EE9B29-09E2-4626-8B71-E5FD7857D0B4@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: On 6 Mar 2017, at 4:44 , Jason Stevens wrote: > One thing I'd change for starters is the boot block code to just automatically load the right kernel, and get the system to come up normally on its own.... But it's cool. > > Yes. Thank you for reminding me that web emulators already exist. With > some googling I found this one: > http://skn.noip.me/pdp11/pdp11.html Yes, agree. The main emulation is 2,000 lines of JS, the I/O devices are 1,500 lines. That's quite manageable for making a few changes. Hopefully I will have some time later this year to add 'direct run' emulations to the TUHS site based on this code (assuming Warren agrees). The idea would be that next to Archive and the Tree there would be emulation. A visitor would go to e.g. the V5 page of the Tree and also find a link to run V5 in emulation. From the SIMH and Nankervis sites images for: - V5 - V6 - V7 - 2.9BSD - 2.11BSD appear to be already available (but the SIMH images may include devices not supported by the current Nankervis code). I'm not quite sure if and how networking could be enabled for 2.9BSD and 2.11BSD - at least the network card would need to be emulated and somehow translated to web socket connections. Same goes for adding live UUCP emulation to the V7 demo or live Arpanet emulation to a future NCP Unix demo. From pnr at planet.nl Mon Mar 6 23:25:52 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 14:25:52 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <20170306113704.GA14536@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <607AF648-CAC0-4FFD-8367-C502B3A0E96E@planet.nl> <51EE9B29-09E2-4626-8B71-E5FD7857D0B4@superglobalmegacorp.com> <20170306113704.GA14536@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <153112EE-FD3B-4E41-BCF3-DA03204B62AA@planet.nl> On 6 Mar 2017, at 12:37 , Warren Toomey wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 12:16:48PM +0100, Paul Ruizendaal wrote: >> Hopefully I will have some time later this year to add 'direct run' emulations to the TUHS site based on this code (assuming Warren agrees). The idea would be that next to Archive and the Tree there would be emulation. A visitor would go to e.g. the V5 page of the Tree and also find a link to run V5 in emulation. From the SIMH and Nankervis sites images for: > > Yes please. And an 11/20 for 1st Edition Unix too :-) (my wishlist). > > Thanks! Warren From a quick glance at "u0.s" it would seem that V1 has support for a RK11 disk. Also, I would assume that when the MMU is disabled, that a 11/45 would boot up from a disk image with 11/20 code - at least it is worth a try. Do you have a RK11 disk image with V1 installed handy? From dugo at xs4all.nl Tue Mar 7 00:15:32 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:15:32 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] jor1k was:Re: Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <51EE9B29-09E2-4626-8B71-E5FD7857D0B4@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> <76bc51aa-1046-40a6-b718-f09e23258157@SG2APC01FT010.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <607AF648-CAC0-4FFD-8367-C502B3A0E96E@planet.nl> <51EE9B29-09E2-4626-8B71-E5FD7857D0B4@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: <20ae194033e11ba5833834a6d331843b@xs4all.nl> moved. On 2017-03-06 04:44, Jason Stevens wrote: > That ooenrisc is pretty cool too! > > https://s-macke.github.io/jor1k/demos/main.html Yes, I love it. Unfortunately upstreaming the or1k patches to GCC failed due to copyright assignment issues or it would be running debian now. I run a bare minimum static cross linux from scratch on it. This builds the toolchain, kernel and a few bits like simh https://github.com/dugoh/tcb This continues from above to add more things to sysroot https://github.com/dugoh/srb This fork ties it together https://github.com/dugoh/jor1k Apologies in advance for the horrendous state of my commit history. I abuse github as a scratch pad and CD pipeline, (github -> travis -> gh-pages) and never bothered with any of the courtesies of open source development. > It apparently has network support as well! The network back-end is here https://github.com/benjamincburns/websockproxy Easy to set up if you do Docker and otherwise not that hard. From aap at papnet.eu Tue Mar 7 01:33:18 2017 From: aap at papnet.eu (Angelo Papenhoff) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 16:33:18 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> On 01/03/17, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > > Google it with: > > site:vetusware.com unix source > > Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? > Since we had some discussion about AIX recently I thought I should ask: Many sources claim AIX is Sys V derived. Hoever, the source code (of 4.1.3) does not look like Sys V at all. Does anyone know the history? aap From rminnich at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 01:57:22 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:57:22 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: Yes, the AIX code looks nothing like SYS V. It's been 20+ years since I did a lot of work in AIX, and most of my work was in networking, external pagers, and NFS, and even there you could see it was different (although much of the NFS was clearly the Sun reference code, one giveaway being the Sun copyrights in it :-) I always thought it was an interesting code base -- they seemed to get preemptability right from the start, for example. As it was explained to me, IBM did a full implementation from manuals of both the kernel and the commands. There were lots of little weirdnesses in the commands. mkdir -p, for example, would give you an error if the directory existed -- they got the creation of the tree right, but the error wrong. There were tons of these little gotchas in the commands and it's one thing that made NTP and Condor, for just two examples, a real chore on AIX. I visited the now-closed IBM Palo Alto center in 1991, and they told me an interesting AIX story. Seems to that point, on the mainframes, AIX had run under VM. The native port was either starting or soon to start, and there was some question about channel programming -- mainly, if the people who really knew how it worked were still at IBM, or even still alive. I guess they worked it out, however ;-) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 7 01:57:50 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:57:50 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: Can't speak for the *source trees* them themselves more than I have already, as they came from all over - BL Research, USL, IBM itself, ISC, LCC, UCB, CMU, MIT, etc...; but IBM negotiated a very extensive *SVR3 license* with AT&T and and marketed it primarily an System V based system with "BSD & IBM specfic enhancements". This license agreement was the basis for AIX shipments as well as all OSF shipments. While other places covered it, if you google around for articles from "Unigram/X"(Maureen O'Garia's crew) in the years of 1990-2000 in particular you should find a number of articles that described the transactions and how it effected the "Unix Industry." On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Angelo Papenhoff wrote: > On 01/03/17, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > > > > Google it with: > > > > site:vetusware.com unix source > > > > Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? > > > > Since we had some discussion about AIX recently I thought I should ask: > Many sources claim AIX is Sys V derived. Hoever, the source code (of 4.1.3) > does not look like Sys V at all. Does anyone know the history? > > aap > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Tue Mar 7 02:19:09 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 00:19:09 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: I remember back in the original SCO vs the world days when SGi apparently dumped some 32v and was quickly dumped from Linux, there was some source auditing tool that they used? All I remember is that it used the term 'shards' which of course is popular with the DB kids so it's hard to find... Now that there is an insane dump it'd be interesting to compare actual ancestry vs what we've always been told... On March 6, 2017 11:33:18 PM GMT+08:00, Angelo Papenhoff wrote: >On 01/03/17, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? >> >> Google it with: >> >> site:vetusware.com unix source >> >> Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? >> > >Since we had some discussion about AIX recently I thought I should ask: >Many sources claim AIX is Sys V derived. Hoever, the source code (of >4.1.3) >does not look like Sys V at all. Does anyone know the history? > >aap -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 02:21:02 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:21:02 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:57 AM, ron minnich wrote: > Yes, the AIX code looks nothing like SYS V. It's been 20+ years since I > did a lot of work in AIX, and most of my work was in networking, external > pagers, and NFS, and even there you could see it was different (although > much of the NFS was clearly the Sun reference code, one giveaway being the > Sun copyrights in it :-) I always thought it was an interesting code base > -- they seemed to get preemptability right from the start, for example. As > it was explained to me, IBM did a full implementation from manuals of both > the kernel and the commands. > > There were lots of little weirdnesses in the commands. mkdir -p, for > example, would give you an error if the directory existed -- they got the > creation of the tree right, but the error wrong. There were tons of these > little gotchas in the commands and it's one thing that made NTP and Condor, > for just two examples, a real chore on AIX. > > I visited the now-closed IBM Palo Alto center in 1991, and they told me an > interesting AIX story. Seems to that point, on the mainframes, AIX had run > under VM. The native port was either starting or soon to start, and there > was some question about channel programming -- mainly, if the people who > really knew how it worked were still at IBM, or even still alive. I guess > they worked it out, however ;-) > I once heard that some version of AIX was actually implemented in PL/I. I strongly doubted that, and no one's mentioned it so I assume that's apocryphal? It would be so distinctive that I can't imagine someone NOT mentioning it if it were the case. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Tue Mar 7 02:45:28 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:45:28 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> Channel programming wasn’t really at the time. Maybe the guys at PASC didn’t know, but it was available. Never saw anything written in PL/I there. Now the other 370 mainframe stuff that wasn’t in assembler was written in PL/S which was sort of PL/I but not really. They used it for TSO (suitable for kicking dead whales down the beach) and MVT (multiprocessing with a variable number of turds, part of the virtual toilet access protocol). Of course, the RS/6000 AIX was completely different and somewhat weird. I might buy it being written in PL/S. I spent a lot of time over the years either pursuing security vulnerabilities or patching up ones that I had found. IBM loaned us an RS/6000 and didn’t give me the root password. This took me a while to figure out. I found however that if you turned the key on the front to the service (wrench) position, it would boot up in a canned “diagostic” program. I poked at this a while until I realized that the help program just spawned more and I could shell escape out to a root shell. From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dan Cross Sent: Monday, March 6, 2017 11:21 AM To: ron minnich Cc: TUHS main list Subject: Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance? On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:57 AM, ron minnich wrote: Yes, the AIX code looks nothing like SYS V. It's been 20+ years since I did a lot of work in AIX, and most of my work was in networking, external pagers, and NFS, and even there you could see it was different (although much of the NFS was clearly the Sun reference code, one giveaway being the Sun copyrights in it :-) I always thought it was an interesting code base -- they seemed to get preemptability right from the start, for example. As it was explained to me, IBM did a full implementation from manuals of both the kernel and the commands. There were lots of little weirdnesses in the commands. mkdir -p, for example, would give you an error if the directory existed -- they got the creation of the tree right, but the error wrong. There were tons of these little gotchas in the commands and it's one thing that made NTP and Condor, for just two examples, a real chore on AIX. I visited the now-closed IBM Palo Alto center in 1991, and they told me an interesting AIX story. Seems to that point, on the mainframes, AIX had run under VM. The native port was either starting or soon to start, and there was some question about channel programming -- mainly, if the people who really knew how it worked were still at IBM, or even still alive. I guess they worked it out, however ;-) I once heard that some version of AIX was actually implemented in PL/I. I strongly doubted that, and no one's mentioned it so I assume that's apocryphal? It would be so distinctive that I can't imagine someone NOT mentioning it if it were the case. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 7 02:48:55 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 11:48:55 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:57 AM, ron minnich wrote: > The native port was either starting or soon to start, and there was some > question about channel programming -- mainly, if the people who really knew > how it worked were still at IBM, or even still alive. I guess they worked > it out, however ​AIX/370 ran native at LCC and at a few university customers. The truth is, if you were bought into IBM, you were probably running VM, so it made sense to run it that way. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From john at jfloren.net Tue Mar 7 03:51:37 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 10:51:37 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Need your help for 2019 In-Reply-To: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170304031608.GB1715@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > Mid-year 2019 is the 50th anniversary of the creation of Unix and I've > been quietly agitating for something to be done to celebrate this. Up to > now, there's been little response. > Unix-adjacent, now that Multics is apparently booting in emulation I think it would be an interesting addition as well. I guess the Living Computer Museum has it connected to a real front-panel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jni7wk7bjxA) and hope to get it networked, so they might be interested. As for myself, I'd be happy to throw up a node on my end. I no longer have any real hardware (sold my PDP-11) but depending on the network theme I can stand up a Unix on an rpi in emulation, I could try to boot Multics, or set up a Plan 9 server ("son of Unix"). I think a 50th Anniversary UUCP Network would be very cool, be it over TCP or a bunch of modems. John From rminnich at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 04:00:51 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 18:00:51 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 8:21 AM Dan Cross wrote: > > > I once heard that some version of AIX was actually implemented in PL/I. I > strongly doubted that, and no one's mentioned it so I assume that's > apocryphal? It would be so distinctive that I can't imagine someone NOT > mentioning it if it were the case. > > I spent about 6 years working with IBM and U. Penn on AIX and nothing of that was ever mentioned by anyone. It sounds like a myth. ron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 04:22:17 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 13:22:17 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 1:00 PM, ron minnich wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 8:21 AM Dan Cross wrote: > >> I once heard that some version of AIX was actually implemented in PL/I. I >> strongly doubted that, and no one's mentioned it so I assume that's >> apocryphal? It would be so distinctive that I can't imagine someone NOT >> mentioning it if it were the case. >> > > I spent about 6 years working with IBM and U. Penn on AIX and nothing of > that was ever mentioned by anyone. It sounds like a myth. > I suspected as much. Thanks, folks. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pnr at planet.nl Tue Mar 7 05:06:03 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 20:06:03 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: <92AA9B53-AE8D-4957-9448-BA61A40CC39A@planet.nl> My recollection of reading Groklaw way back when is that TSG had hired "a team of MIT deep divers" to do source code analysis, but I don't recall their methodology ever being disclosed. I do recall some sort of sharding tool being proposed by the Linux' defenders (Eric Raymond?). From memory, the idea was to first parse the source into a normalized form to abstract away white space and variable naming. Then the tool would shard each normalized file into slices of 3 lines and compute a SHA[?] hash for each slice. Finally it would identify hash clashes and figure out if there were ranges of lines with clashing hashes. Human inspection could then identify whether the original lines involved looked like a case of copied source code. I do not recall that this tool was ever used or even built. On 6 Mar 2017, at 17:19 , Jason Stevens wrote: > I remember back in the original SCO vs the world days when SGi apparently dumped some 32v and was quickly dumped from Linux, there was some source auditing tool that they used? All I remember is that it used the term 'shards' which of course is popular with the DB kids so it's hard to find... Now that there is an insane dump it'd be interesting to compare actual ancestry vs what we've always been told... > > On March 6, 2017 11:33:18 PM GMT+08:00, Angelo Papenhoff wrote: > On 01/03/17, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Anyone ever looked at vetusware.com ? > > Google it with: > > site:vetusware.com unix source > > Is all of this stuff archived somewhere else? > > > Since we had some discussion about AIX recently I thought I should ask: > Many sources claim AIX is Sys V derived. Hoever, the source code (of 4.1.3) > does not look like Sys V at all. Does anyone know the history? > > aap > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. From cym224 at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 05:24:42 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 14:24:42 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On 6 March 2017 at 13:00, ron minnich wrote: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 8:21 AM Dan Cross wrote: >> >> I once heard that some version of AIX was actually implemented in PL/I. I >> strongly doubted that, and no one's mentioned it so I assume that's >> apocryphal? It would be so distinctive that I can't imagine someone NOT >> mentioning it if it were the case. > > I spent about 6 years working with IBM and U. Penn on AIX and nothing of > that was ever mentioned by anyone. It sounds like a myth. Also, they would have used PL/S or PLMP or somesuch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PL/S #6-). Interesting, over the years, IBM has used numerous languages for their various OS systems (http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=226253 that, granted, has no UNIX in it). N. From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 7 05:36:13 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 05:36:13 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: <20170306193613.GA18673@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 12:19:09AM +0800, Jason Stevens wrote: > I remember back in the original SCO vs the world days when SGi > apparently dumped some 32v and was quickly dumped from Linux, there was > some source auditing tool that they used? All I remember is that it > used the term 'shards' which of course is popular with the DB kids so > it's hard to find... Now that there is an insane dump it'd be > interesting to compare actual ancestry vs what we've always been > told... Eric Raymond wrote a comparison tool. So did I: http://minnie.tuhs.org/Programs/Ctcompare/index.html That's what I use to build the similarity lists on the Unix Tree. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rminnich at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 06:32:30 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 20:32:30 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <92AA9B53-AE8D-4957-9448-BA61A40CC39A@planet.nl> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <92AA9B53-AE8D-4957-9448-BA61A40CC39A@planet.nl> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:06 AM Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > > My recollection of reading Groklaw way back when is that TSG had hired "a > team of MIT deep divers" to do source code analysis, but I don't recall > their methodology ever being disclosed. > yeah, they only got so far and then got hired away to go look in hawaii for some birth certificate. Or, maybe, they never existed. ron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Tue Mar 7 06:50:15 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 07:50:15 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > They used it for TSO (suitable for kicking dead whales down the beach) ... Now there's an expression I haven't seen for many years. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Mar 7 01:34:53 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 07:34:53 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] [TUHS} communication files: interprocess IO before pipes In-Reply-To: <201703060350.v263oM7u024080@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703060350.v263oM7u024080@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170306153453.GL16343@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 10:50:22PM -0500, Doug McIlroy wrote: > It's not really Unix history, but Dartmouth's "communication files" > have so often been cited as pipes before Unix, that you may like > to know what this fascinating facility actually was. See > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/DTSS/commfiles.pdf If I'm understanding correctly, an I/O on the slave side would cause an event on the master side. So the master was almost like a debugger with break points at open/read/write/lseek/close? That would explain a lot of the complexity. And if the slave does a read(comm, buf, 1<<20) I suspect that the master does multiple writes? As in is there a PIPEBUF analogy? -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Mar 7 06:17:44 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 12:17:44 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170306193613.GA18673@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <20170306193613.GA18673@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170306201744.GU16343@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 05:36:13AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Eric Raymond wrote a comparison tool. So did I: > http://minnie.tuhs.org/Programs/Ctcompare/index.html So have you ever run that on, say, any of the BSDs claimed to be free of AT&T code, vs 32v or V7 or some other pre-dating-free version and summarized all the files/routines that were identical? I guess it's a (very) dead horse but it would show that AT&T had a copyright case. From schily at schily.net Mon Mar 6 19:35:38 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 10:35:38 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <20170303200612.6525F18C08C@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <58ba9114.Jgu1/Lif2hpjgghD%schily@schily.net> <58bc63c8.LvKbzAXNPjG5kPh2%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <58bd2d6a.llkpp0SF7IPa6pOT%schily@schily.net> Clem Cole wrote: > And once you have accepted it, the question left is since *Microfocus has > the Unix rights from Novell, what are the formal state of the rights from > Sun.* We do nothing about what this company thinks of OpenSource. The state of the source that Novell can control or opensource is from 1995 and worth nothing for todays software development. Whether someone is able to convince them to opensource it as a historical act is doubtful as well. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From schily at schily.net Tue Mar 7 02:20:46 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 17:20:46 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: <58bd8c5e.SIdpJ50JQrnMjOIf%schily@schily.net> ron minnich wrote: > Sun copyrights in it :-) I always thought it was an interesting code base > -- they seemed to get preemptability right from the start, for example. As > it was explained to me, IBM did a full implementation from manuals of both > the kernel and the commands. While some of the commands look like they have been taken from AT&T sources, there are bugs that make it obvious that people tried to implement things from Manuals: - uname for AIX-7.1 e.g. prints something that makes you assume you are on AIX-1.7. This is because the uname man page from AT&T is missleading and missunderstand the meaning of "revision" and "version". I remember that around 1990 people called AIX either "Ain't unIX" or "Alien unIX". For the latter there was also the claim that one alien read the AT&T man page and told another alien on the phone how he expects things to be correct. The kernel definitely looks like it was written from scratch. The fact that there are functions like "issig()" make it obvious that the authors did have access to at least the V6 kernel via the Lions book. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 7 08:19:49 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 08:19:49 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170306201744.GU16343@mcvoy.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <20170306193613.GA18673@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170306201744.GU16343@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170306221949.GA32247@minnie.tuhs.org> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 05:36:13AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > Eric Raymond wrote a comparison tool. So did I: > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/Programs/Ctcompare/index.html On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 12:17:44PM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > So have you ever run that on, say, any of the BSDs claimed to be free > of AT&T code, vs 32v or V7 or some other pre-dating-free version and > summarized all the files/routines that were identical? [ I answered Larry by private mail too early this morning, and interpreted his question incorrectly. I'm awake now. ] There was slightly more 32V code in Net/2 that the UCB folk had found, but this was still negligible and could easily have been rewritten. The list of results is at: http://minnie.tuhs.org/Programs/Ctcompare/Ctf/32Vkern_vs_Net2kern.txt Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rminnich at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 08:29:53 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 22:29:53 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: Clem, this reminds me: AIX on the mainframes and RS/6000 were different, weren't they? I only worked with the RS/6000 one. I suspect the Palo Alto people I talked to were getting stonewalled by the mainframe guys when it came to native channel programming. The mainframe VM folks probably thought of native AIX as an existential threat. Much as, ca. 2005, the Power hypervisor guys viewed native Linux as a threat -- they were certainly right in this case, many of us in the DOE labs wanted to get that hypervisor out of our lives. We spent some time at LANL trying to get native Linux from IBM but it was just a little too soon I guess. Funny how history repeats. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 7 08:52:27 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 17:52:27 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58bd8c5e.SIdpJ50JQrnMjOIf%schily@schily.net> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <58bd8c5e.SIdpJ50JQrnMjOIf%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > The kernel definitely looks like it was written from scratch. > > The fact that there are functions like "issig()" make it obvious that the > authors did have access to at least the V6 kernel via the Lions book. ​I can say for a fact that is not how it was. AIX was a port starting with AT&T code originally targeted to run on DEC and Intel Systems. As I said previously when I ran down the history of AIX, the developers had AT&T licenses. As I was reminded in an off line discussion with one of the IBM guys when I was checking to make sure, ISC did the original 386 port for all of AT&T, Intel and IBM (one port - 3 checks). ISC also started the AIX port, with a number of the folks moving to LCC which was a step I left out in my previous email sorry, since it was implied when I said they started with that AT&T 386 stuff (which AT&T got from ISC). Bottom line.... it was not a rewrite, it was always a port. One of the issues that I think many people from the outside looking in, do not fully understand is that many firms struggled with was how difficult it was/is to keep things current (BTW: Linux struggles with today just as much as UNIX ever did - just less marketing $s being spend - it is very hard problem). Companies like DEC, HP and IBM start working with one version of the kernel or worse yet, the command system and enhance it as they need. But time moves forward and their version and the rest of the world start to become different (branch/fork). Linux has been mostly able to keep the kernel the same, but not the command system. Anyway, the question is how do keep your "branch" current. Not only do you have to compete with other "vendors" -- you also have we now call the FOSS community creating and enhancing the tools, so you want to pick up those new tools and or some if not all of the enhancements to those you already have. Plus those enhancement are likely to conflict with you own. Its a struggle and the bigger the firm, it seems like the harder time they have doing it. General you start with one, and just keep folding in. Rarely do you swap out. Both DEC and HP used OSF/1 as time to swap out the command system. DEC swapped out the entire kernel, HP did not. Interestingly enough, IBM, who's license OSF was using, IIRC did not use either part from OSF in it;s entirety, but instead took things back piece by piece. Anyway, I think AIX as a whole was an example of that. I'd have to check with some of my old LCC coworkers about what versions of the command system was used to start with for AIX. I never directly worked on that project so I'm personally not sure. My guess it would have been PWB III time frame was the SCCS starts, with a lot of BSD injected because of the University focus, whatever was kicking around Yorktown, plus whatever ISC had, plus whatever LCC/UCLA had - oh yeah and originally it had to run both on 386s and 360s, so the code user space had some stuff in that was "different" from what you saw on Vaxen. IBM Marketing (just like DEC and HP marketing) technically decided what was in or out, not the techies (although at DEC we were probably a little more devious). But at DEC not matter what was in the code - the "SPD" was the final statement - and that was own by Marketing. I'm pretty sure AIX worked similarly. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 7 08:59:48 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 17:59:48 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:29 PM, ron minnich wrote: > Clem, this reminds me: AIX on the mainframes and RS/6000 were different, > weren't they? I only worked with the RS/6000 one. > ​Yes - they diverged at one point and the System/38 guys diverged again. Picking things up from both lines -- I was telling the story some what amusing story the other nigh about. the legal time team in Rochester, MN being quite different than NY. One thing you learn after having IBM has a customer, is that they were N different companies, and each had their own cultures. It could be quite trying for a small firm like LCC. Our external legal counsel once said, "for such a small firm, you guys have really interesting legal issues." But at that time, LCC was putting things in AIX, Ultrix, Tru64, HP/UX, DG/UX, Prime-ux, Intel, AT&T and a host of others. It was kinda neat setting everyone's dirty laundry though.. you learned a lot. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scj at yaccman.com Tue Mar 7 09:31:37 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:31:37 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see whether its Unix code had been stolen.  A Unix look-alike came to AT&T's attention, and they wanted to get a sense of whether the code had been copied before bringing out the big legal guns.   I was one of several people asked to log into the system and see what I could figure out.  They particularly wanted me to look at their Yacc, because they assumed that would be hard to duplicate. So I spent an interesting hour checking it out.   The first thing I did was to look to see whether some of my bugs or unadvertised features were in the program, and they weren't.   Then I threw a couple of difficult cases at it, and found a couple of bugs in their code.  And besides, it was VERY slow.  So I concluded it was a reimplementation.   I gather that was the consensus of others as well, and AT&T backed off. Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 7 09:32:41 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:32:41 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58BDF199.4070302@gewt.net> Steve Johnson wrote: > I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see whether > its Unix code had been stolen. A Unix look-alike came to AT&T's > attention, and they wanted to get a sense of whether the code had been > copied before bringing out the big legal guns. I was one of several > people asked to log into the system and see what I could figure out. > They particularly wanted me to look at their Yacc, because they assumed > that would be hard to duplicate. > > So I spent an interesting hour checking it out. The first thing I did > was to look to see whether some of my bugs or unadvertised features were > in the program, and they weren't. Then I threw a couple of difficult > cases at it, and found a couple of bugs in their code. And besides, it > was VERY slow. So I concluded it was a reimplementation. I gather > that was the consensus of others as well, and AT&T backed off. > > Steve > > Coherent? From scj at yaccman.com Tue Mar 7 09:44:32 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:44:32 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58BDF199.4070302@gewt.net> Message-ID: <97090944dff12bae96d89cf2e976cfec90d4630b@webmail.yaccman.com> I don't remember.   In fact, I'm not sure I ever knew... Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cory Smelosky" To: Cc:"TUHS main list" Sent:Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:32:41 -0800 Subject:Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance? Steve Johnson wrote: > I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see whether > its Unix code had been stolen. A Unix look-alike came to AT&T's > attention, and they wanted to get a sense of whether the code had been > copied before bringing out the big legal guns. I was one of several > people asked to log into the system and see what I could figure out. > They particularly wanted me to look at their Yacc, because they assumed > that would be hard to duplicate. > > So I spent an interesting hour checking it out. The first thing I did > was to look to see whether some of my bugs or unadvertised features were > in the program, and they weren't. Then I threw a couple of difficult > cases at it, and found a couple of bugs in their code. And besides, it > was VERY slow. So I concluded it was a reimplementation. I gather > that was the consensus of others as well, and AT&T backed off. > > Steve > > Coherent? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Tue Mar 7 10:33:27 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 19:33:27 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1488846807.1116393.902631784.720D15EA@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017, at 18:31, Steve Johnson wrote: > I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see whether > its Unix code had been stolen.  A Unix look-alike came to AT&T's > attention, and they wanted to get a sense of whether the code had been > copied before bringing out the big legal guns.   I was one of > several people asked to log into the system and see what I could > figure out.  They particularly wanted me to look at their Yacc, > because they assumed that would be hard to duplicate. > > So I spent an interesting hour checking it out.   The first thing I > did was to look to see whether some of my bugs or unadvertised > features were in the program, and they weren't.   Then I threw a > couple of difficult cases at it, and found a couple of bugs in their > code.  And besides, it was VERY slow.  So I concluded it was a > reimplementation.   I gather that was the consensus of others as > well, and AT&T backed off. Sounds a lot like Dennis Ritchie's Coherent story: https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/alt.folklore.computers/_ZaYeY46eb4 From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 7 10:42:40 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 10:42:40 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <58BDF199.4070302@gewt.net> References: <58BDF199.4070302@gewt.net> Message-ID: <20170307004240.GA14564@minnie.tuhs.org> > Steve Johnson wrote: > >I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see whether > >its Unix code had been stolen. On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:32:41PM -0800, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Coherent? Dennis told a story about doing this with Coherent: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.os.coherent/syYwL-GZ15U Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 7 10:50:02 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 19:50:02 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > But at that time, LCC was putting things in AIX, Ultrix, Tru64, HP/UX, > DG/UX, Prime-ux, Intel, AT&T and a host of others. It was kinda > neat setting everyone's dirty laundry though.. you learned a lot. ​I left out Solaris and SunOS too. And BTW: Being lucky enough to have hacked on the kernel of almost all of the majors at one time or another, I've been asked an interesting question. Which was the best to work on.. they were all different is the best answer, I give. But the fact is that DG was a source licensee but they did a full kernel rewrite starting I want to say in the late 1980s, early 1990's to build a scalable SMP. It was probably the easiest of all the kernels I ever got to hack on. Very clean, well documented and the locks were easy to understand.​ We did a study for DG to TNC into it, be they never pulled the trigger. We quoted it faster than any other port, because our experience had been that everything we had done on DG/UX had gone so smoothly. But we'll never know. They died shortly after the study was finished, which was a shame. I've sometimes wonder what happened to that IP. It would be interesting to compare it to OSF/1, which was probably the other very cool kernel I hacked on extensively for both Intel and later DEC of course. DG/UX was not quite as modern as Mach from a standpoint of things likes "ports" or being a uKernel - but as a pure well documented and easy to understand SMP UNIX kernel it was hard to beat. I did do a little work with Chorus and still have the doc set, but never worked with enough to have an opinion of how good it was. It showed promise and I know the UI/AT&T guys had hoped to go there at some point. Larry's described Solarius pretty well and my experience match his, but I always thought that the locks were madness IMO - so easy to get wrong. SunOS was a lot simpler and as Larry has said was pretty elegant for what was there. HP/UX was pretty darn bullet proof. The HP folks worked on fault tolerance got rid of panics more than other other UNIX we say, which was pretty amazing, but it was not the easiest kernel to mess with. We did manage to splice the vproc layer and TNC in it and we had a lot of fun with process migration. Its too bad that never shipped. Again, I've wonder about that IP too. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rudi.j.blom at gmail.com Tue Mar 7 14:16:56 2017 From: rudi.j.blom at gmail.com (Rudi Blom) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 11:16:56 +0700 Subject: [TUHS] communication files: interprocess IO before pipes Message-ID: On SCO UNIX 3.2V4 pipes where simulated as follows int fd[2] struct strfdinsert ins; /* * First open the stream clone device "/dev/spx" twice, * obtaining the two file descriptors. */ if ( (fd[0] = open(SPX_DEVICE, O_RDWR)) < 0) { gen_trace(gtr_flag, "-gen_pipe(): -open(fd[0]): %s\n", strerror(errno)); break; } if ( (fd[1] = open(SPX_DEVICE, O_RDWR)) < 0) { gen_trace(gtr_flag, ">gen_pipe(): -open(fd[1]): %s\n", strerror(errno)); close(fd[0]); break; } /* * Now link these two streams together with an * I_FDINSERT ioctl. */ ins.ctlbuf.buf = (char *) &pointer; /* no ctl info, just the ptr */ ins.ctlbuf.maxlen = sizeof(queue_t *); ins.ctlbuf.len = sizeof(queue_t *); ins.databuf.buf = (char *) 0; /* no data to send */ ins.databuf.len = -1; /* magic: must be -1, not 0, for stream pipe */ ins.databuf.maxlen = 0; ins.fildes = fd[1]; /* the fd to connect with fd[0] */ ins.flags = 0; /* nonpriority message */ ins.offset = 0; /* offset of pointer in control buffer */ if (ioctl(fd[0], I_FDINSERT, (char * ) &ins) < 0) { gen_trace(gtr_flag, ">gen_pipe(): -ioctl(I_FDINSERT): %s\n", strerror(errno)); close(fd[0]); close(fd[1]); break; } /* * reset close_on_exec flag */ gen_trace(gtr_flag, ">gen_pipe(): +fcntl()\n"); if ((rc = fcntl(fd[0], F_SETFD, 0)) == -1) gen_trace(gtr_flag, ">gen_pipe(): -fcntl(fd0, close_on_exec): %s\n", strerror(errno)); if ((rc = fcntl(fd[1], F_SETFD, 0)) == -1) gen_trace(gtr_flag, ">gen_pipe(): -fcntl(fd1, close_on_exec): %s\n", strerror(errno)); rc = 0; break; From aap at papnet.eu Tue Mar 7 16:52:59 2017 From: aap at papnet.eu (Angelo Papenhoff) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 07:52:59 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <58bd8c5e.SIdpJ50JQrnMjOIf%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <20170307065259.GA31628@indra.papnet.eu> On 06/03/17, Clem Cole wrote: > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > > > The kernel definitely looks like it was written from scratch. > > > > The fact that there are functions like "issig()" make it obvious that the > > authors did have access to at least the V6 kernel via the Lions book. > > > I can say for a fact that is not how it was. AIX was a port starting > with AT&T code originally targeted to run on DEC and Intel Systems. > > As I said previously when I ran down the history of AIX, the developers had > AT&T licenses. As I was reminded in an off line discussion with one of > the IBM guys when I was checking to make sure, ISC did the original 386 > port for all of AT&T, Intel and IBM (one port - 3 checks). ISC also > started the AIX port, with a number of the folks moving to LCC which was a > step I left out in my previous email sorry, since it was implied when I > said they started with that AT&T 386 stuff (which AT&T got from ISC). > Bottom line.... it was not a rewrite, it was always a port. > > ... > > Companies like DEC, HP and IBM start working with one version of the kernel > or worse yet, the command system and enhance it as they need. But time > moves forward and their version and the rest of the world start to become > different (branch/fork). Linux has been mostly able to keep the kernel > the same, but not the command system. I find this hard to believe. Of course code evolves, but I don't really see anything that looks like original UNIX code in AIX 4.1.3. I would expect at least a slight semblance. Had they really replaced (almost?) all code by the time of AIX 4? aap From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 7 17:09:41 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:09:41 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD Message-ID: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> Hi all, as part of my effort to recreate part of a simulated Usenet, I'm trying to bring up uucp, then mail, then C-news on 4.2BSD boxes. I've got a hardwired serial port between them, and I can see a basic uucp conversation when I do this: munnari.oz# /usr/lib/uucp/uucico -r1 -sseismo -x7 uucp seismo (3/6-8:04-132) DEBUG (ENABLED) . . . uucp seismo (3/6-8:04-132) SUCCEEDED (call to seismo ) imsg >\015\012\020< Shere\000imsg >\020< ROK\000msg-ROK Rmtname seismo, Role MASTER, Ifn - 5, Loginuser - uucp . . . I tried e-mail to seismo!wkt and wkt at seismo.UUCP but it's been deferred. I now need some help with the sendmail config. I did play around with sendmail.cf/mc way back, but it never involved uucp so I'm stuck. Anybody want to help (and dust out those cobwebs at the same time)? Thanks, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 7 17:11:16 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 23:11:16 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <23223414-F635-4026-9FF3-8C596AC68B1F@gewt.net> I'll need to connect up to this UUCP network eventually...will poke at it tomorrow my time if I get a chance. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 6, 2017, at 23:09, Warren Toomey wrote: > > Hi all, as part of my effort to recreate part of a simulated Usenet, > I'm trying to bring up uucp, then mail, then C-news on 4.2BSD boxes. > I've got a hardwired serial port between them, and I can see a basic > uucp conversation when I do this: > > munnari.oz# /usr/lib/uucp/uucico -r1 -sseismo -x7 > uucp seismo (3/6-8:04-132) DEBUG (ENABLED) > . . . > uucp seismo (3/6-8:04-132) SUCCEEDED (call to seismo ) > imsg >\015\012\020< > Shere\000imsg >\020< > ROK\000msg-ROK > Rmtname seismo, Role MASTER, Ifn - 5, Loginuser - uucp > . . . > > I tried e-mail to seismo!wkt and wkt at seismo.UUCP but it's been deferred. > I now need some help with the sendmail config. I did play around with > sendmail.cf/mc way back, but it never involved uucp so I'm stuck. > > Anybody want to help (and dust out those cobwebs at the same time)? > > Thanks, Warren From lars at nocrew.org Tue Mar 7 17:54:12 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 08:54:12 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> (Warren Toomey's message of "Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:09:41 +1000") References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <86varlfrob.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Warren Toomey wrote: > Hi all, as part of my effort to recreate part of a simulated Usenet, > I'm trying to bring up uucp, then mail, then C-news on 4.2BSD boxes. I would like to suggest making an automated script to perform all configuration and build steps. It may be a bit of overhead, but I think it pays off in the long run. A ready to go system image is great for easy deployment, but you will not always remember how you got to that working state. From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 7 18:27:36 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:27:36 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <86varlfrob.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <86varlfrob.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: <20170307082736.GA7695@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 08:54:12AM +0100, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > I would like to suggest making an automated script to perform all > configuration and build steps. It may be a bit of overhead, but I think > it pays off in the long run. I agree, but I've got to get to a working system first! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 7 19:09:08 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 19:09:08 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 05:09:41PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > I tried e-mail to seismo!wkt and wkt at seismo.UUCP but it's been deferred. > I now need some help with the sendmail config. I did play around with > sendmail.cf/mc way back, but it never involved uucp so I'm stuck. Progress. I had to set up L.sys entries for each system to know the other system. Then on each 4.2BSD system I had to uucp "make mkdirs" to make the correct directories in /usr/spool/uucp. On the sendmail front, I edited the uucp-only cad.mc file to state the system name and the other system name (and in reverse for the other system). Then make cad.cf. With all of this in place, I can mail from one system to the other: $ echo hello | mail wkt at seismo.UUCP and then manually do a uucp call with # /usr/lib/uucp/uucico -r1 -sseismo -x7 There are a few things to iron out, but at least thing work :) Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 7 23:25:25 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 08:25:25 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170307065259.GA31628@indra.papnet.eu> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <58bd8c5e.SIdpJ50JQrnMjOIf%schily@schily.net> <20170307065259.GA31628@indra.papnet.eu> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Angelo Papenhoff wrote: > Had they really replaced (almost?) > ​ ​ > all code by the time of AIX 4? > ​I'm not saying it is not possible as it there was certainly precedent at other places.​ As I said, DG did a ground up rewrite for their new kernel at one point. DEC and HP switched to OSF/1 (aka CMU Mach). And I also know that the AIX base was originally considered for OSF/1 but was rejected in favor of OSF/1. I also have not knowledge of a ground up rewrite and I did work with a number of IBM guys for a long time and my firm did a lot work for IBM. I really think if they had completely rewritten it, in the manner of DG and say Stratus; then there would have been much more notice in the community at large. Part of why I am a little suspect is why would they have invested in a rewrite if they already had something that worked for their systems (which they did) -i.e. the business reason behind it and remember IBM was very much driven by their businesses. Stratus needed fault tolerance, so a new kernel was a requirement for them. DG, DEC were all trying to play catch up with Sun and were trying to use their new kernels as way to do so quickly. Thus, I suspect this is an area where large sections of the AIX kernel were replaced, similar to the way BSD evolved, but can not say for sure. You would need some of the folks from Austin to chime in. I did check with some from folks from IBM and LCC at the time and validated as one of them said to me "your memory, is pretty much the same as mine." BTW: even if they did do a whole kernel swap at between version X and Y - that would beg the questions of incompatibility. They would have had the earlier AT&T/BSD code/semantics - and would have had to specifically break it (as BSD 4.2 did in couple of cases). While possible, again, I do have memories of my brothers and sisters at LCC working on the IBM projects with a load of compatibility tests (many which we had written for them). That's not to say, there were not times when the IBM folks interpreted things differently. I do have memories explaining PDP/Minicomputer-isms to the more mainframe thinking folks. But Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 8 01:07:35 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 10:07:35 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <00e101d29754$8e61b220$ab251660$@ronnatalie.com> I believe we have the originator of that quote on this list. Steve? -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dave Horsfall On Mon, 6 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > They used it for TSO (suitable for kicking dead whales down the beach) ... Now there's an expression I haven't seen for many years. From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 8 01:13:31 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 10:13:31 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <00e101d29754$8e61b220$ab251660$@ronnatalie.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> <00e101d29754$8e61b220$ab251660$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <00f001d29755$62245bd0$266d1370$@ronnatalie.com> Speaking of looking for "stolen" code. It can be daunting. For many years my company was in a love-hate relationship with one of our competitors. We started out selling their product. We then parted company and wrote our own. Then we went into joint development for a couple of years. We then parted company again. Then we went to purchase them. They sent me up to do due diligence on the company during the acquisition. It was feared that they had taken code from another competitor and they wanted me to verify that. Didn't find any evidence of that, though I did find some verbatim code of mine that they weren't supposed to have, that was rendered moot by the fact that we were once again going to be the same company. For most of the time in my UNIX career, I was working either for the University or the US Army, so I never had any claim on my code. It went out on various distributions, and I didn't think much about it. Every once and a while I'd be surprised when I came across my code in some deployed system (of all things the NeXT box, for example). From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 01:23:55 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 02:23:55 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > With all of this in place, I can mail from one system to the other: > $ echo hello | mail wkt at seismo.UUCP > > and then manually do a uucp call with # /usr/lib/uucp/uucico -r1 -sseismo -x7 > > There are a few things to iron out, but at least thing work :) Great stuff! It's been ages since I delved into UUCP; first was the "original", then HoneyDanBer. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 8 03:17:09 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 12:17:09 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > It's been ages since I delved into UUCP; first was the > ​ ​ > "original", then HoneyDanBer. > ​Actually this is a great question for this list .. how many implementations were created? 1.) The original 1978 version that shipped with V7 and 32/V (BSD 4.1 and 4.2) 2,) PC-UUCP for DOS came next -- I never knew how much was ripped off from the original, because at the time, the Chesson's G protocol was not well specified. The authors claimed to have reverse engineered it - I will say it worked. 3.) Honey-Dan-Ber rewrite - most popular for a long time 4.) Taylor UUCP first real clone that I know of that I do think was done with out looking at other's source. G protocol had been publicly documented by then and the Trailblazer in fact was shipping with the protocol imbedded in it. Any others that folks know about and how well were they used? Did things like Coherent have a UUCP? Linux and FreeBSD were able to use to Taylor UUCP because it became available by then. Whitesmith's Idris lacked anything like UUCP IIRC (but was based on V6). Same with Thoth originally at Waterloo, but by the time they shipped it as the QNX product it was V7 compliant but I do not remember a UUCP being included in it. Minux lacked a UUCP as I recall, but I'm hazy on that has Andy's crew wrote a lot of the user space. Coherent was a "full" V7 clone and include things like the dev tools including yacc/lex and was released much, much before the Taylor version came out -- so what do they use for uucp if at all? Does anyone remember any other implementations? Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rminnich at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 03:34:17 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 17:34:17 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 Message-ID: I spent a year or so working on this in 1977. I was wondering who wrote it. Funny but: I once had a compile fail on Motorola's MPL compiler, which was written in fortran. It had so many continued comment lines that the 16-bit column number went negative, and I got a fairly obscure error. Anyone remember who wrote it? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jaapna at xs4all.nl Wed Mar 8 03:43:08 2017 From: jaapna at xs4all.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:43:08 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Mar 7, 2017, at 18:17, Clem Cole wrote: > > Does anyone remember any other implementations? The EUUG distributed it's own version, mainly written/maintained by Piet Beertema. It introduced the f-protocol. AT&T shipped an (expensive) commercial version mainly based on HeneyDanBer. (Maybe just a different packaged version of that). jaap -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 235 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 8 03:45:47 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 12:45:47 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <15e2a90f-b41f-b613-5c8a-47c12288de3e@kilonet.net> I ran Taylor UUCP on a small BBS system (3 lines!) I ran from my apartment in Deer Park, NY, circa 1991-1994 - USENET node kilowatt It was on System V R4 by Consensys on a 486-33 and later a 486DX2-66 - but some things were badly broken, so much so that things like UUCP weren't even usable. I don't remember why. Might have had something to do with the devices. So Taylor it was. I have version 1.04 source code. Hooked up to Motorola (mcdhup) in Hauppauge for USENET news and email, using a Telebit Worldblazer, and then disseminated it to various other small USENET nodes. I had quite an interesting routing setup for the mail system included with SVR4 (mailsurr?) that would take the UUCP maps posted in comp.mail.maps, run them through pathalias and construct a complete path to every node in the map. It was the only way I knew of to deal with multiple systems I could connect to that would in turn also connect to multiple other USENET nodes. I had no definitive "smart host". On 3/7/2017 12:17 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Dave Horsfall > wrote: > > It's been ages since I delved into UUCP; first was the > ​ ​ > "original", then HoneyDanBer. > > > ​Actually this is a great question for this list .. how many > implementations were created? > 1.) The original 1978 version that shipped with V7 and 32/V (BSD 4.1 > and 4.2) > 2,) PC-UUCP for DOS came next -- I never knew how much was ripped off > from the original, because at the time, the Chesson's G protocol was > not well specified. The authors claimed to have reverse engineered > it - I will say it worked. > 3.) Honey-Dan-Ber rewrite - most popular for a long time > 4.) Taylor UUCP first real clone that I know of that I do think was > done with out looking at other's source. G protocol had been publicly > documented by then and the Trailblazer in fact was shipping with the > protocol imbedded in it. > > Any others that folks know about and how well were they used? Did > things like Coherent have a UUCP? Linux and FreeBSD were able to use > to Taylor UUCP because it became available by then. Whitesmith's > Idris lacked anything like UUCP IIRC (but was based on V6). Same > with Thoth originally at Waterloo, but by the time they shipped it as > the QNX product it was V7 compliant but I do not remember a UUCP being > included in it. Minux lacked a UUCP as I recall, but I'm hazy on > that has Andy's crew wrote a lot of the user space. Coherent was a > "full" V7 clone and include things like the dev tools including > yacc/lex and was released much, much before the Taylor version came > out -- so what do they use for uucp if at all? > > Does anyone remember any other implementations? > > Clem > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rminnich at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 04:13:54 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:13:54 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I was not clear, evidently, although part of this is my memory's fault :-) There was a fortran compiler on v6, written in assembly. I was wondering who wrote it. On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:34 AM ron minnich wrote: > I spent a year or so working on this in 1977. I was wondering who wrote it. > > Funny but: I once had a compile fail on Motorola's MPL compiler, which was > written in fortran. It had so many continued comment lines that the 16-bit > column number went negative, and I got a fairly obscure error. > > Anyone remember who wrote it? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dugo at xs4all.nl Wed Mar 8 04:30:02 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 19:30:02 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2017-03-07 18:17, Clem Cole wrote: > 1.) The original 1978 version that shipped with V7 and 32/V (BSD 4.1 > and 4.2) From "Casting the Net": In 1976, Mike Lesk at Bell Labs came up with a program called UUCP—“UNIX to UNIX copy.” UUCP enabled users to send mail, transfer files, and execute remote commands. Lesk first called it a “scheme for better distribution” (Mini-Systems Newsletter, January 1977); but only a month later it was referred to as UUCP. First designed to operate over 300 baud lines, UUCP was finally published in February 1978. UUCP was taken up widely and this led to a need for improvements. The next version was written by Lesk and Dave Nowitz, with contributions by Greg Chesson, and appeared in Seventh Edition UNIX in October 1978. From crossd at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 04:30:31 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 13:30:31 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > >> It's been ages since I delved into UUCP; first was the >> ​ ​ >> "original", then HoneyDanBer. >> > > ​Actually this is a great question for this list .. how many > implementations were created? > 1.) The original 1978 version that shipped with V7 and 32/V (BSD 4.1 and > 4.2) > 2,) PC-UUCP for DOS came next -- I never knew how much was ripped off from > the original, because at the time, the Chesson's G protocol was not well > specified. The authors claimed to have reverse engineered it - I will say > it worked. > 3.) Honey-Dan-Ber rewrite - most popular for a long time > 4.) Taylor UUCP first real clone that I know of that I do think was done > with out looking at other's source. G protocol had been publicly > documented by then and the Trailblazer in fact was shipping with the > protocol imbedded in it. > > Any others that folks know about and how well were they used? Did things > like Coherent have a UUCP? Linux and FreeBSD were able to use to Taylor > UUCP because it became available by then. Whitesmith's Idris lacked > anything like UUCP IIRC (but was based on V6). Same with Thoth originally > at Waterloo, but by the time they shipped it as the QNX product it was V7 > compliant but I do not remember a UUCP being included in it. Minux > lacked a UUCP as I recall, but I'm hazy on that has Andy's crew wrote a lot > of the user space. Coherent was a "full" V7 clone and include things like > the dev tools including yacc/lex and was released much, much before the > Taylor version came out -- so what do they use for uucp if at all? > Coherent came with a modified version of Taylor, IIRC. At least in the later versions; I don't know if they had something else earlier. Does anyone remember any other implementations? > One or more microcomputer BBS (Bulletin Board System) platforms had UUCP support to bridge their store-and-forward messaging networks to USENET and send email, etc. The implementation I remember off the top of my head was Waffle, written by Tom Dell. Waffle later became the basis for the "influential" (however one chooses to define that...I think they mean that in the same way as the WeLL is considered influential) Mindvox Community/early ISP in New York City. I'm sure there were others in that niche, but I don't know of any off the top of my head. The whole BBS thing is mildly interesting in its own right, more as a social phenomenon rather than technically, though. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Wed Mar 8 05:00:02 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 11:00:02 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <18537.1488913202@cesium.clock.org> I have a memory of a "standard" collection of patches for bugs in the version of UUCP before HoneyDanBer UUCP that I think were put together and maintained by Steve McGeady (then of Tektronix, later of Intel and other fame) which effectively became a "version" of UUCP. If one wanted to run a stable, effective site on UUCP (and USENET) one applied the patches to the UUCP sources before starting up. Unfortunately, my google-fu has not managed to find a reference or repository of those patches ... Erik Fair From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 8 05:37:28 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 14:37:28 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006901d2977a$41878350$c49689f0$@ronnatalie.com> Dunno. The first I dealt with was the f77 based on the pcc backend. From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of ron minnich Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 1:14 PM To: TUHS main list Subject: Re: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 I was not clear, evidently, although part of this is my memory's fault :-) There was a fortran compiler on v6, written in assembly. I was wondering who wrote it. On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:34 AM ron minnich wrote: I spent a year or so working on this in 1977. I was wondering who wrote it. Funny but: I once had a compile fail on Motorola's MPL compiler, which was written in fortran. It had so many continued comment lines that the 16-bit column number went negative, and I got a fairly obscure error. Anyone remember who wrote it? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 8 05:40:58 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 14:40:58 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: below.. On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:13 PM, ron minnich wrote: > I was not clear, evidently, although part of this is my memory's fault :-) > > There was a fortran compiler on v6, written in assembly. I was wondering > who wrote it. > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:34 AM ron minnich wrote: > >> I spent a year or so working on this in 1977. I was wondering who wrote >> it. >> >> Funny but: I once had a compile fail on Motorola's MPL compiler, which >> was written in fortran. It had so many continued comment lines that the >> 16-bit column number went negative, and I got a fairly obscure error. >> >> Anyone remember who wrote it? >> > A one point the DEC RT11 compiler was moved to V6 and V7 (I want to say around 1978 or 79 ish). It was written in a mix of BLISS-11 and PDP-11 assembly, although the UNIX code was moved over as pure assembly. I do not believe the BLISS-11 runtime was ever directly ported. IIRC, the "port" was done by the "Commercial Union Leasing Corp" guys folks in NYC. The assembly code for same was released to the UNIX community - I think on one of the early USENIX tapes, could be the first one, two or three. One of the things "CULC" guys did was they had to write a PDP-10 simulator so they run the BLISS compiler which only ran as cross compiler from a 36 bit system. I remember the USENIX talk about it at the time, somebody asked the speaker if ITS would boot on the simulator - which got a lot of chuckles. As I remember the process, they ran the PDP-10 version of the BLISS/11 compiler under enough of a TOPS-10 (I think) simulator that they could feed it the sources to the DEC FORTRAN compiler. IIRC a recompile on their 11/45 took overnight or something like that. I remember that they said that the process was not interactive. Like Ron, I remember seeing and using the results the process. I do not remember ever seeing the simulator or the input to the process that created the assembly for the compiler. I also do not remember how much of the compiler sources they had from DEC. They may only have had the runtime source and a few files / "enough" of the upper layers to hack it into working "good enough" for UNIX. If you remember when you used it, the switches were parsed RT-11 style because all that was in the code they did not/could not replace. My guess is that was probably what is was. DEC must published the runtime as "open source" and they picked it up and started hacking. But I don't remember more than that. That said, it was "good enough" port/hack of the compiler and its runtime to make it all work. I probably still have it somewhere on 9-track. As an interesting aside, I just saw the lead (Rich Groves) from the DEC team for that compiler last Wednesday at a social function (he has been quite ill and I'm pleased to see him out and about). They DEC Fortran folks really were an amazing crew and that legacy continues. I fear not enough people really know how far back their legacy goes. In the old days I used to kid Rich, asking him if there were more Fortran developers than there were Fortran users. But the truth is, 40 years into my career, while I still don't want to program in it, as a language, it still very much pays my salary. Ron as you know from your days at the labs, Intel would not nearly be as successful in HPC if not for its developer tools and those tools all have the DEC compiler DNA ground up and injected into them. Clem ​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 8 05:44:46 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 14:44:46 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170307152851.GA16946@mcvoy.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> <00e101d29754$8e61b220$ab251660$@ronnatalie.com> <00f001d29755$62245bd0$266d1370$@ronnatalie.com> <20170307152851.GA16946@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <007901d2977b$47009dc0$d501d940$@ronnatalie.com> > Personally, so long as it wasn't garbage code, I've always been sort of stoked to stumble across my code in strange places. It's fun to think that people found it useful. It wasn't one of my UNIX things, but I had written our own standalone PDP-11 router system (we originally used MIT's C-Gateway but Noel got exiled for a while and it kind of languished so I wrote my own). About a year or two after I wrote it I got a call from NASA: ME: Hello. NASA: We brought a VAX up on our network and now the gateway is printing errors. ME: OK, what sort of error. NASA: Well... we're not sure exactly. ME: (thinking about my error messages) Did it just print out some register in octal or something? NASA: It was from the interlan driver. ME: (now wondering why they're being real cagey about things) What does it say exactly? NASA: It was something about trailers. ME: (thinking)...Oh, is it "TRAILERS MAKE ME BARF?" NASA: Yes, that was it. This was back before BSD used the ARP protocol numbers to negotiate if the other machine wanted to use trailers. It just always did them or not based on an ifconfig option. While trailers were a great idea for the paging structure of the VAX they were a bad idea for my code (which wanted to find the IP header at a fixed place not the beginning of the payload data). From crossd at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 05:53:28 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 14:53:28 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: <006901d2977a$41878350$c49689f0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <006901d2977a$41878350$c49689f0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > Dunno. The first I dealt with was the f77 based on the pcc backend. > Hmm. I've found the source code for that compiler (/usr/source/fort in the v6 distribution) but there doesn't seem to be an attribution. The man page seems to be dated 8/20/73, but again lacks attribution; perhaps Ken wrote it? - Dan C. *From:* TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] *On Behalf Of *ron > minnich > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 7, 2017 1:14 PM > *To:* TUHS main list > *Subject:* Re: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 > > > > I was not clear, evidently, although part of this is my memory's fault :-) > > > > There was a fortran compiler on v6, written in assembly. I was wondering > who wrote it. > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:34 AM ron minnich wrote: > > I spent a year or so working on this in 1977. I was wondering who wrote it. > > > > Funny but: I once had a compile fail on Motorola's MPL compiler, which was > written in fortran. It had so many continued comment lines that the 16-bit > column number went negative, and I got a fairly obscure error. > > > > Anyone remember who wrote it? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 8 05:55:13 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 14:55:13 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > I remember the USENIX talk about it at the time, somebody asked the > speaker if ITS would boot on the simulator - which got a lot of chuckles. ​BTW: for those that never saw ITS, I should have added, part of why this is funny is that ITS has a very famous PDP-11 simulator included as part it.​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pnr at planet.nl Wed Mar 8 06:03:49 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 21:03:49 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: <006901d2977a$41878350$c49689f0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: Yes. On the Unix Tree the first man page for it appears in V3. The "Research Unix Reader" says it appeared in V2 and was written by Thomson and Ritchie jointly. Paul On 7 Mar 2017, at 20:53 , Dan Cross wrote: > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > Dunno. The first I dealt with was the f77 based on the pcc backend. > > > Hmm. I've found the source code for that compiler (/usr/source/fort in the v6 distribution) but there doesn't seem to be an attribution. The man page seems to be dated 8/20/73, but again lacks attribution; perhaps Ken wrote it? > > - Dan C. > > From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of ron minnich > Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 1:14 PM > To: TUHS main list > Subject: Re: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 > > > > I was not clear, evidently, although part of this is my memory's fault :-) > > > > There was a fortran compiler on v6, written in assembly. I was wondering who wrote it. > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:34 AM ron minnich wrote: > > I spent a year or so working on this in 1977. I was wondering who wrote it. > > > > Funny but: I once had a compile fail on Motorola's MPL compiler, which was written in fortran. It had so many continued comment lines that the 16-bit column number went negative, and I got a fairly obscure error. > > > > Anyone remember who wrote it? > > From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 06:41:45 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:41:45 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Clem Cole wrote: > I remember the USENIX talk about it at the time, somebody asked > the speaker if ITS would boot on the simulator - which got a lot > of chuckles. > > > BTW: for those that never saw ITS, I should have added, part of why this > is funny is that ITS has a very famous PDP-11 simulator included as part > it.​ And it's turtles all the way down! -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 8 06:43:07 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 06:43:07 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 07:09:08PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Progress. More progress. I now have mcsun----seismo----munnari with uucp mail between them all. It should be easy to generate systems and their connections from a template. I'll write the scripts soon. I might call for participation in a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the Internet. Mail me your "dibs" for specific nodes. Who wants kremvax? :-) Cheers, Warren P.S A/B/C-news at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/News/ Taylor UUCP at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/TaylorUUCP/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 8 07:05:07 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 16:05:07 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11 In-Reply-To: References: <006901d2977a$41878350$c49689f0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > /usr/source/fort ​Ah - that is the old Research compiler before f77. I'm not even sure it will compile a full Fortran-IV deck. As I said, pretty early into USENIX look in the CULC directory and you should find a FTN compiler and the DEC assembler. That was the compiler many of used until the pcc/f77 showed up. Years later, when DEC released Ultrix, the languages groups formally supported Ultrix. Besides being more modern versions of the compilers, is they supported the old VMS linker, which was ported to both the 11 and the Vax by Paul Winalski. ​ Not only did he get it run on Unix, he got it work with a.out, and macho files too. I don't remember if he could grok ELF with it (he would know - maybe I can convince to join this list). He will carry a lot of DEC history in the middle times, when I was doing startups. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spedraja at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 07:14:33 2017 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 22:14:33 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2017-03-07 18:43 GMT+01:00 Jaap Akkerhuis : > >> On Mar 7, 2017, at 18:17, Clem Cole wrote: >> >> Does anyone remember any other implementations? > My experience was a bit weird. I implemented one UUCP bridge for cc:Mail (Lotus) in my enterprise. More or less between 1990 and 1992. It worked calling (using a modem) every hour to one phone number in Madrid and doing an interchange of messages. Very funny, with some issues with codepages, length of messages, and so. I think that I keep yet the manuals of this application but I'm not sure at all. Regards Sergio Pedraja From spedraja at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 07:14:33 2017 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 22:14:33 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2017-03-07 18:43 GMT+01:00 Jaap Akkerhuis : > >> On Mar 7, 2017, at 18:17, Clem Cole wrote: >> >> Does anyone remember any other implementations? > My experience was a bit weird. I implemented one UUCP bridge for cc:Mail (Lotus) in my enterprise. More or less between 1990 and 1992. It worked calling (using a modem) every hour to one phone number in Madrid and doing an interchange of messages. Very funny, with some issues with codepages, length of messages, and so. I think that I keep yet the manuals of this application but I'm not sure at all. Regards Sergio Pedraja From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Mar 7 09:48:46 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 15:48:46 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <97090944dff12bae96d89cf2e976cfec90d4630b@webmail.yaccman.com> References: <58BDF199.4070302@gewt.net> <97090944dff12bae96d89cf2e976cfec90d4630b@webmail.yaccman.com> Message-ID: <20170306234846.GX16343@mcvoy.com> I'll bet anything this was Coherent, I remember the same story, I think Dennis was involved as well. On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:44:32PM -0800, Steve Johnson wrote: > I don't remember.???? In fact, I'm not sure I ever knew... > > Steve > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Cory Smelosky" > To: > Cc:"TUHS main list" > Sent:Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:32:41 -0800 > Subject:Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance? > > Steve Johnson wrote: > > I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see > whether > > its Unix code had been stolen. A Unix look-alike came to AT&T's > > attention, and they wanted to get a sense of whether the code had > been > > copied before bringing out the big legal guns. I was one of several > > people asked to log into the system and see what I could figure > out. > > They particularly wanted me to look at their Yacc, because they > assumed > > that would be hard to duplicate. > > > > So I spent an interesting hour checking it out. The first thing I > did > > was to look to see whether some of my bugs or unadvertised features > were > > in the program, and they weren't. Then I threw a couple of > difficult > > cases at it, and found a couple of bugs in their code. And besides, > it > > was VERY slow. So I concluded it was a reimplementation. I gather > > that was the consensus of others as well, and AT&T backed off. > > > > Steve > > > > > > Coherent? > -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Mar 7 09:53:19 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 15:53:19 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <20170306234846.GX16343@mcvoy.com> References: <58BDF199.4070302@gewt.net> <97090944dff12bae96d89cf2e976cfec90d4630b@webmail.yaccman.com> <20170306234846.GX16343@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170306235319.GA3819@mcvoy.com> Yeah, the wikipedia page talks about Dennis. And the source is here: http://www.nesssoftware.com/home/mwc/source.php On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:48:46PM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: > I'll bet anything this was Coherent, I remember the same story, I think > Dennis was involved as well. > > On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 03:44:32PM -0800, Steve Johnson wrote: > > I don't remember.???? In fact, I'm not sure I ever knew... > > > > Steve > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Cory Smelosky" > > To: > > Cc:"TUHS main list" > > Sent:Mon, 06 Mar 2017 15:32:41 -0800 > > Subject:Re: [TUHS] Source code abundance? > > > > Steve Johnson wrote: > > > I can attest to at least one case where AT&T attempted to see > > whether > > > its Unix code had been stolen. A Unix look-alike came to AT&T's > > > attention, and they wanted to get a sense of whether the code had > > been > > > copied before bringing out the big legal guns. I was one of several > > > people asked to log into the system and see what I could figure > > out. > > > They particularly wanted me to look at their Yacc, because they > > assumed > > > that would be hard to duplicate. > > > > > > So I spent an interesting hour checking it out. The first thing I > > did > > > was to look to see whether some of my bugs or unadvertised features > > were > > > in the program, and they weren't. Then I threw a couple of > > difficult > > > cases at it, and found a couple of bugs in their code. And besides, > > it > > > was VERY slow. So I concluded it was a reimplementation. I gather > > > that was the consensus of others as well, and AT&T backed off. > > > > > > Steve > > > > > > > > > > Coherent? > > > > -- > --- > Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 8 01:28:51 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 07:28:51 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? In-Reply-To: <00f001d29755$62245bd0$266d1370$@ronnatalie.com> References: <23bbfb06-2de6-a9e1-0786-3f46d17c1192@kilonet.net> <20170306153317.GA23881@indra.papnet.eu> <005c01d29699$10330ef0$30992cd0$@ronnatalie.com> <00e101d29754$8e61b220$ab251660$@ronnatalie.com> <00f001d29755$62245bd0$266d1370$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <20170307152851.GA16946@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 10:13:31AM -0500, Ron Natalie wrote: > For most of the time in my UNIX career, I was working either for the > University or the US Army, so I never had any claim on my code. It went > out on various distributions, and I didn't think much about it. Every once > and a while I'd be surprised when I came across my code in some deployed > system (of all things the NeXT box, for example). Personally, so long as it wasn't garbage code, I've always been sort of stoked to stumble across my code in strange places. It's fun to think that people found it useful. There was a period of time, not sure if it is true now or not, that my rewrite of dd(1) was in use at all the disk drive companies. It has a lot of tweaks in it for benchmarking, it can do random iops, report bandwidth or latency, write a known pattern, verify the pattern, etc. Nothing earth shattering but useful enough that when I talked to people working on drives they'd mention it when we were talking about performance stuff. Neat. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 08:04:23 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:04:23 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Dan Cross wrote: > One or more microcomputer BBS (Bulletin Board System) platforms had UUCP > support to bridge their store-and-forward messaging networks to USENET > and send email, etc. The implementation I remember off the top of my > head was Waffle, written by Tom Dell. [...] Was this the UUCP that was available for CP/M? I found it on the old Walnut Creek CD, moved it over to my CP/M box via SneakerNet (I ran CP/M for years, carefully avoiding DOS/WinDoze) and it worked; it was overlaid to hell and back hence really slow, but it worked. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 08:38:27 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:38:27 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > It should be easy to generate systems and their connections from a > template. I'll write the scripts soon. I might call for participation in > a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the > Internet. Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the modem-less? > Mail me your "dibs" for specific nodes. Who wants kremvax? :-) Or kgbvax, moscvax, ciavax, nsavax... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Mar 8 08:44:24 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:44:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Early Unix manuals (Was: fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11) Message-ID: <20170307224424.75DB618C103@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Paul Ruizendaal > The "Research Unix Reader" Thanks for mentioning that; I'd never heard of it. Very interesting. A query: it seems to have been written with access to a set of manuals for the various early versions of Research Unix. The Unix Tree: http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl has the manual pages for V3 and V4, and V6 and later, but not the other ones. Do the manuals used for the preparatio of that note still exist; and, if so, is there any chance of getting them scanned? (I have a auto-page-feed scanner, and volunteer to do said scanning. Someone else is going to have to do the OCR, and back-conversion to NROFF source, though... :-) Noel From john at jfloren.net Wed Mar 8 08:45:21 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 15:45:21 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > >> It should be easy to generate systems and their connections from a >> template. I'll write the scripts soon. I might call for participation in >> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >> Internet. > > Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the > modem-less? > I've got a serial modem & a phone line I'm not using, so I'd be willing to try stacking my RPi on top of the modem and dialing in to someone else... I've claimed ucbvax so I may be signing my little node up for far too much traffic :) john From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 8 08:58:04 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:58:04 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:38:27AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: > I might call for participation in > > a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the > > Internet. > > Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the > modem-less? Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an Internet-connected server will be able to participate. I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dugo at xs4all.nl Wed Mar 8 08:50:58 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 23:50:58 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <5d8fb7082beac2bb796fa7983d495329@xs4all.nl> On 2017-03-07 23:38, Dave Horsfall wrote: > Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the > modem-less? Working on getting hayes modem emulation to work with simh again. How did dialing work before 81? Tricks with DN interfaces, or..? From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 8 09:01:16 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:01:16 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Early Unix manuals (Was: fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11) In-Reply-To: <20170307224424.75DB618C103@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170307224424.75DB618C103@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170307230116.GA7545@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 05:44:24PM -0500, Noel Chiappa wrote: > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl > > has the manual pages for V3 and V4, and V6 and later, but not the other > ones. Do the manuals used for the preparatio of that note still exist; and, if > so, is there any chance of getting them scanned? I've got photocopies of V1, V2, V5 from Normal Wilson. Dennis had V1 manuals on his website: https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/1stEdman.html V2 manuals at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/Dennis_v2/ V5 mans at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/Dennis_v5/v5man.pdf Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 8 09:14:19 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:14:19 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <3ccb9249-86e5-6e11-8c67-dfaadcfcd359@kilonet.net> Why do all these mail binaries on SVR4 x86 have "kremvax" hard coded into them? /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpqer kremvax /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/tosmtp kremvax /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpd kremvax /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtp kremvax On 3/7/2017 5:38 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > >> It should be easy to generate systems and their connections from a >> template. I'll write the scripts soon. I might call for participation in >> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >> Internet. > Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the > modem-less? > >> Mail me your "dibs" for specific nodes. Who wants kremvax? :-) > Or kgbvax, moscvax, ciavax, nsavax... > From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 09:19:21 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 10:19:21 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <3ccb9249-86e5-6e11-8c67-dfaadcfcd359@kilonet.net> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <3ccb9249-86e5-6e11-8c67-dfaadcfcd359@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Why do all these mail binaries on SVR4 x86 have "kremvax" hard coded into > them? > > /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpqer kremvax > /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/tosmtp kremvax > /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpd kremvax > /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtp kremvax Now you've done it, comrade; that was the secret back door... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 8 09:27:00 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:27:00 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <3ccb9249-86e5-6e11-8c67-dfaadcfcd359@kilonet.net> Message-ID: LMFAO. By the way, that list was done with: for a in `ls usr/lib/mail/surrcmd` ; do echo $a `strings $a | grep kremvax`; done | grep kremvax I did a strings on the smtpd earlier today looking for something else and noticed right near the end was kremvax and started investigating. On 3/7/2017 6:19 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Arthur Krewat wrote: > >> Why do all these mail binaries on SVR4 x86 have "kremvax" hard coded into >> them? >> >> /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpqer kremvax >> /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/tosmtp kremvax >> /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpd kremvax >> /usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtp kremvax > Now you've done it, comrade; that was the secret back door... > From b4 at gewt.net Wed Mar 8 09:46:34 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 15:46:34 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:38:27AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >> I might call for participation in >>> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >>> Internet. >> Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the >> modem-less? > > Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the > dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an > Internet-connected server will be able to participate. > > I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, > so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) I claim UCBVAX unless someone in the East Bay does...else I'll need to fall back to San Jose history ;) > > Cheers, Warren From paul at mcjones.org Wed Mar 8 09:48:27 2017 From: paul at mcjones.org (Paul McJones) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 15:48:27 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Early Unix manuals (Was: fortran compiler, in assembly, for pdp-11) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <08E9CE81-BC77-47D4-B55B-35CB0D6CABB3@mcjones.org> This scanned version includes all the cited manuals: A Research UNIX Reader Annotated Excepts from the Programmer's Manual, 1971-1986 M. Douglas McIlroy https://archive.org/details/a_research_unix_reader > From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) > >> From: Paul Ruizendaal > >> The "Research Unix Reader" > > Thanks for mentioning that; I'd never heard of it. Very interesting. > > > A query: it seems to have been written with access to a set of manuals for the > various early versions of Research Unix. The Unix Tree: > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl > > has the manual pages for V3 and V4, and V6 and later, but not the other > ones. Do the manuals used for the preparatio of that note still exist; and, if > so, is there any chance of getting them scanned? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pechter at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 09:54:02 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 18:54:02 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> Message-ID: <0051f69b-5f80-4dc3-ad76-b8814681e468.maildroid@localhost> Are we going to need pathalias to map them all? Building the maps was so much fun when the 8086 would run out of memory on Xenix. Bill -----Original Message----- From: Cory Smelosky Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Sent: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:47 Subject: Re: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:38:27AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >> I might call for participation in >>> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >>> Internet. >> Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the >> modem-less? > > Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the > dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an > Internet-connected server will be able to participate. > > I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, > so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) I claim UCBVAX unless someone in the East Bay does...else I'll need to fall back to San Jose history ;) > > Cheers, Warren From b4 at gewt.net Wed Mar 8 09:55:25 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 15:55:25 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <0051f69b-5f80-4dc3-ad76-b8814681e468.maildroid@localhost> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> <0051f69b-5f80-4dc3-ad76-b8814681e468.maildroid@localhost> Message-ID: <58BF486D.1090508@gewt.net> William Pechter wrote: > Are we going to need pathalias to map them all? Friend kinda owes me a plotter, so I can make physical copies too! > > Building the maps was so much fun when > the 8086 would run out of memory on Xenix. > > Bill > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cory Smelosky > Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society > Sent: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 18:47 > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD > > Warren Toomey wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:38:27AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >>> I might call for participation in >>>> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >>>> Internet. >>> Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the >>> modem-less? >> Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the >> dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an >> Internet-connected server will be able to participate. >> >> I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, >> so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) > > I claim UCBVAX unless someone in the East Bay does...else I'll need to > fall back to San Jose history ;) > >> Cheers, Warren > From john at jfloren.net Wed Mar 8 10:03:34 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:03:34 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> Message-ID: I'd grabbed it but I'll pass it over to you if you can come up with an appropriate system from New Mexico :) john On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Warren Toomey wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:38:27AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >>> >>> I might call for participation in >>>> >>>> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >>>> Internet. >>> >>> Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the >>> modem-less? >> >> >> Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the >> dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an >> Internet-connected server will be able to participate. >> >> I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, >> so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) > > > I claim UCBVAX unless someone in the East Bay does...else I'll need to fall > back to San Jose history ;) > >> >> Cheers, Warren > > From b4 at gewt.net Wed Mar 8 10:05:16 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 16:05:16 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> <58BF465A.4030902@gewt.net> Message-ID: <58BF4ABC.3060800@gewt.net> John Floren wrote: > I'd grabbed it but I'll pass it over to you if you can come up with an > appropriate system from New Mexico :) I'd be surprised if Los Alamos didn't have a node in HOSTS.TXT. I'll consult my directory of computer networks when I get home. > > john > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: >> Warren Toomey wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:38:27AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >>>> I might call for participation in >>>>> a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on the >>>>> Internet. >>>> Sounds like fun; would this be dialup for authenticity, or TCP for the >>>> modem-less? >>> >>> Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the >>> dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an >>> Internet-connected server will be able to participate. >>> >>> I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, >>> so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) >> >> I claim UCBVAX unless someone in the East Bay does...else I'll need to fall >> back to San Jose history ;) >> >>> Cheers, Warren >> From johnl at johnlabovitz.com Wed Mar 8 11:51:21 2017 From: johnl at johnlabovitz.com (John Labovitz) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 17:51:21 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2DEF9163-44DA-44C7-90F3-FAF63760E495@johnlabovitz.com> On Mar 7, 2017, at 18:17, Clem Cole wrote: > Does anyone remember any other implementations? I ported UUCP and either B or C News to the Mac ca. 1989-1990, using the Lightspeed/THINK C compiler on System 6 or 7. Can’t remember exactly how I read news or mail — maybe I wrote a simple GUI? Regretfully, I never released the code, and don’t have it around any more. —John From crossd at gmail.com Wed Mar 8 13:26:18 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 22:26:18 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP History [was Re: Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD] Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Dan Cross wrote: > > > One or more microcomputer BBS (Bulletin Board System) platforms had UUCP > > support to bridge their store-and-forward messaging networks to USENET > > and send email, etc. The implementation I remember off the top of my > > head was Waffle, written by Tom Dell. [...] > > Was this the UUCP that was available for CP/M? I found it on the old > Walnut Creek CD, moved it over to my CP/M box via SneakerNet (I ran CP/M > for years, carefully avoiding DOS/WinDoze) and it worked; it was overlaid > to hell and back hence really slow, but it worked. > Maybe? Though I tend to doubt it. It looks like Waffle originally ran on the Apple II, but was fairly quickly ported to DOS and then Unix/Xenix. I believe it was written in C, but the source code is not generally available. More information on it is here: http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/WAFFLE/ As I mentioned before, the BBS thing was kind of interesting. What strikes me, however, is how closely the timing lines up with developments in the Unix world. As Jacob mentions earlier, UUCP was "published" in February 1978 and an improved version distributed with 7th Edition in October of that year. The first BBS was announced via an article in the November 1978 edition of Byte magazine (available online, with some information here: https://www.wired.com/2010/02/0216cbbs-first-bbs-bulletin-board/). For those that don't know, the whole idea behind a BBS was that a person with a computer (usually a microcomputer), a modem, and a POTS phone line (usually into the person's house) would run software on the machine that answered the phone when called (assumed the remote caller was using a modem, of course) and presented the remote user with an interface for interacting with the local machine: most often, this was menu based. Most often, the BBS only had one phone line and the functionality was limited: sending and receiving simple messages, uploading and downloading files using protocols like x- y- and zmodem (or kermit!) and maybe playing specially written games. However, some BBSs became quite sophisticated supporting multiple lines, interactive chat, multiplayer games and so forth. Early software was mostly homebrew (the Byte article talks about software *and* hardware), but eventually packaged systems emerged. There was even a commercial marketplace for BBS software. Around 1984, they developed a messaging "network" called Fidonet for routing email and sending files around; the goal was to minimize long-distance telephone charges by relaying things through nodes in the network that were geographically "close" to the next calling region and transmitting things in batch. Think USENET (which predated it by several years) but much smaller in scope. The Internet killed it for the most part, of course, but these things developed quite the following; some are even still running, though most are now accessible via telnet/ssh. Somewhat confusingly, some of the operators seem to think they are some kind of alternative to the "Internet" instead of just another application of the net. It's sort of an odd viewpoint, but I think it comes from not being altogether all that savvy: it was mostly a hobbyist thing. But in the BBS heyday, there was something like 100,000 of them in North America alone. Sorry for the wall of text, but I think the parity between the rise of BBSs and UUCP/USENET is interesting. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 13:45:49 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:45:49 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] UUCP mis-history? Message-ID: http://www.thefullwiki.org/UUCP ``UUCP was originally written at AT&T Bell Laboratories, by Mike Lesk, and early versions of UUCP are sometimes referred to as System V UUCP.'' Err, it was V7, wasn't it? That considerably predates SysV... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 14:05:07 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:05:07 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > Ah sorry, I should have said. it will all be simulated and all the > dialups will be simulated by TCP connections. So anybody with an > Internet-connected server will be able to participate. OK - count me in, otherwise I would've have to have obtained a modem from ePay and hoped it worked over my fibre-optic connection... > I've already registered a few "dibs". I haven't cut any templates yet, > so give me a few weeks and I'll start handing out bootable images :) There were few UUCP sites on Oz, as I recall (we ran ACSnet instead) so unless there is a "famous" Oz one not taken I bags "utzoo" (Henry Spencer's box), and if we get USENET going I'll install C-news. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 8 15:23:14 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:23:14 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] UUCP History [was Re: Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Dan Cross wrote: > Was this the UUCP that was available for CP/M?  I found it on the > old Walnut Creek CD, moved it over to my CP/M box via SneakerNet > (I ran CP/M for years, carefully avoiding DOS/WinDoze) and it > worked; it was overlaid to hell and back hence really slow, but it > worked. > > Maybe? Though I tend to doubt it. It looks like Waffle originally ran on > the Apple II, but was fairly quickly ported to DOS and then Unix/Xenix. > I believe it was written in C, but the source code is not generally > available. More information on it is here: > http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/WAFFLE/ No; that doesn't ring any bells with me. It was definitely for CP/M, for the Australian Microbee, but I have since lost the CD and the floppies. And the most amusing thing about the Microbee (yeah, getting OT here) was that serial comms was done by bit-banging on a parallel port... 9600 half-duplex, or 2400 full-duplex. I tried to bring up KA9Q with a view to getting SLIP working, but no. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From lars at nocrew.org Wed Mar 8 17:01:20 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 08:01:20 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP History [was Re: Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD] In-Reply-To: (Dan Cross's message of "Tue, 7 Mar 2017 22:26:18 -0500") References: Message-ID: <86r328ckvz.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Dan Cross writes: > The Internet killed [FidoNet] for the most part, of course, but these > things developed quite the following; some are even still running, > though most are now accessible via telnet/ssh. Apparently, it's still a thing in Russia. From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 8 17:17:24 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 17:17:24 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <86varkclj1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <86varkclj1.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: <20170308071724.GA9144@minnie.tuhs.org> Warren wrote: > > I might call for participation > > in a uucp/Usenet reconstruction with people running simulated nodes on > > the Internet. On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 07:47:30AM +0100, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > Are modern systems welcome? I always wanted a bang path address! I can't see why not, as long as you can simulate a serial connection with a TCP connection, and can speak uucp. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 8 19:20:52 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 19:20:52 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 06:43:07AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > More progress. I now have mcsun----seismo----munnari > with uucp mail between them all. Even more progress. I wrote a script to generate the uucp systems, and given it a rough test. It's now here: https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp and ready for people to download and try things out. I'm happy for people to make changes, by adding them in as contributors. We should add a file with uucp names, owners and connection details. I'll do that soon. Have at it! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Wed Mar 8 19:47:39 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 17:47:39 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP History [was Re: Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9dc1a36c-43fb-43af-855d-908d8454a2fc@SG2APC01FT014.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Don’t forget for the longest time, if you wanted updated drivers, or anything from a vendor, you had to call their BBS. Lots of long distance calls to California for that.. Or staying up until 3am to get cheaper LD rates. In modern times Synchronet has been ported to Linux and Win32/Win64 machines, and is almost too easy to setup, along with it’s DOVENET which uses FTP to copy messages around. It’s still active to this day. I’m strange so I have an OS/2 Virtual machine, and I use SIO virtual modems on an old copy of Synchronet. Because of y2k issues I can’t send messages, but I can receive them. But since I’m on OS/2 2.00 I can run MS-DOS based doors without issues.... There is also HECnet, a VPN or ip tunnelled DecNET for DEC enthusiasts. However they just keep a separate mailing list, as far as I know there is nothing inside of the network itself. Maybe as a crazy idea we could revive B-NEWS, or C-NEWS or something along those lines.... Something geared to old PDP-11’s running Unix v6? Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Dan Cross Sent: Wednesday, 8 March 2017 5:32 PM To: Dave Horsfall Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Subject: [TUHS] UUCP History [was Re: Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD] On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Dan Cross wrote: > One or more microcomputer BBS (Bulletin Board System) platforms had UUCP > support to bridge their store-and-forward messaging networks to USENET > and send email, etc. The implementation I remember off the top of my > head was Waffle, written by Tom Dell. [...] Was this the UUCP that was available for CP/M?  I found it on the old Walnut Creek CD, moved it over to my CP/M box via SneakerNet (I ran CP/M for years, carefully avoiding DOS/WinDoze) and it worked; it was overlaid to hell and back hence really slow, but it worked. Maybe? Though I tend to doubt it. It looks like Waffle originally ran on the Apple II, but was fairly quickly ported to DOS and then Unix/Xenix. I believe it was written in C, but the source code is not generally available. More information on it is here: http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/WAFFLE/ As I mentioned before, the BBS thing was kind of interesting. What strikes me, however, is how closely the timing lines up with developments in the Unix world. As Jacob mentions earlier, UUCP was "published" in February 1978 and an improved version distributed with 7th Edition in October of that year. The first BBS was announced via an article in the November 1978 edition of Byte magazine (available online, with some information here: https://www.wired.com/2010/02/0216cbbs-first-bbs-bulletin-board/). For those that don't know, the whole idea behind a BBS was that a person with a computer (usually a microcomputer), a modem, and a POTS phone line (usually into the person's house) would run software on the machine that answered the phone when called (assumed the remote caller was using a modem, of course) and presented the remote user with an interface for interacting with the local machine: most often, this was menu based. Most often, the BBS only had one phone line and the functionality was limited: sending and receiving simple messages, uploading and downloading files using protocols like x- y- and zmodem (or kermit!) and maybe playing specially written games. However, some BBSs became quite sophisticated supporting multiple lines, interactive chat, multiplayer games and so forth. Early software was mostly homebrew (the Byte article talks about software *and* hardware), but eventually packaged systems emerged. There was even a commercial marketplace for BBS software. Around 1984, they developed a messaging "network" called Fidonet for routing email and sending files around; the goal was to minimize long-distance telephone charges by relaying things through nodes in the network that were geographically "close" to the next calling region and transmitting things in batch. Think USENET (which predated it by several years) but much smaller in scope. The Internet killed it for the most part, of course, but these things developed quite the following; some are even still running, though most are now accessible via telnet/ssh. Somewhat confusingly, some of the operators seem to think they are some kind of alternative to the "Internet" instead of just another application of the net. It's sort of an odd viewpoint, but I think it comes from not being altogether all that savvy: it was mostly a hobbyist thing. But in the BBS heyday, there was something like 100,000 of them in North America alone. Sorry for the wall of text, but I think the parity between the rise of BBSs and UUCP/USENET is interesting.         - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Wed Mar 8 20:21:45 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:21:45 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307225804.GB7292@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <201703081021.v28ALj7m013587@freefriends.org> Warren Toomey wrote: > I've already registered a few "dibs". I'd like 'gatech' if nobody got it. I was ...!{gatech,emory}!skeeve!arnold until ~ 1997 when I moved to Israel. I was also arnold at skeeve.atl.ga.us with Emory acting as my MX and mail forwarder. I ran 'smail' for many years, I might even have the source around somewhere. Thanks, Arnold P.S. At the very least, it'd be fun to come back up as plain 'skeeve'. From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Wed Mar 8 22:26:37 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 07:26:37 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Source code abundance? Message-ID: <201703081226.v28CQbKY026563@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > [a] case where AT&T attempted to see whether its Unix code had been stolen > Coherent? I doubt it. The only access to Coherent that I am aware of was Dennis's site visit (recounted in Wikipedia, no less). Steve's Yacc adventure probably concerned another company. Besides the affairs of Coherent and Yacc, there was a guy in Massachusetts who sold Unix-tool lookalikes; I don't remember his name. We were suspicious and checked his binaries against our source--bingo! At the same time, our patent lawyer happened to be negotiating cross-licenses with DEC. DEC had engaged the very plagiarist as an expert to support their claim that AT&T's pile of patents didn't measure up to theirs. After a day of bargaining, our lawyer somehow managed to bring casual conversation around to the topic of stolen code and eventually offered the suspect a peek at a real example. He readily agreed that the disassembled binary on the one hand must have been compiled from the source code on the other. In a Perry Mason moment, the lawyer pounced: "Would it surprise you if I told you that this is ours and that is yours?" The discredited expert didn't appear at next day's meeting. The lawyer returned to Murray Hill aglow about his coup. The product soon disappeared from the market. Doug From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 9 00:10:52 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:10:52 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP mis-history? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Lesk's version predates V7 as was pointed out. Which I had forgotten in my counting. The V7 version (or traditional) is what they are referring here I believe and indeed that spread as part of V7 On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > http://www.thefullwiki.org/UUCP > > ``UUCP was originally written at AT&T Bell Laboratories, by Mike Lesk, and > early versions of UUCP are sometimes referred to as System V UUCP.'' > > Err, it was V7, wasn't it? That considerably predates SysV... > > -- > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will > suffer." > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Thu Mar 9 07:20:43 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 22:20:43 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <3ccb9249-86e5-6e11-8c67-dfaadcfcd359@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170308212041.GA25909@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 7, 18:27, Arthur Krewat wrote: > LMFAO. > > By the way, that list was done with: > > for a in `ls usr/lib/mail/surrcmd` ; do echo $a `strings $a | grep > kremvax`; done | grep kremvax > > I did a strings on the smtpd earlier today looking for something else > and noticed right near the end was kremvax and started investigating. > > > On 3/7/2017 6:19 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > >On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > > >>Why do all these mail binaries on SVR4 x86 have "kremvax" hard coded into > >>them? > >> > >>/usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpqer kremvax > >>/usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/tosmtp kremvax > >>/usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtpd kremvax > >>/usr/lib/mail/surrcmd/smtp kremvax > >Now you've done it, comrade; that was the secret back door... It seems to be something "special" about the flavour of SVR4 you are running. That "kremvax" is not there on UnixWare 2.1, see this screenshot: https://s17.postimg.org/il0ehai3j/kremvax.png PD: Do you per chance happen to know how can I install/enable the telnet server on UnixWare 2.1 "Personal Edition"? -- Josh Good From corey at lod.com Thu Mar 9 07:42:31 2017 From: corey at lod.com (Corey Lindsly) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:42:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170308212041.GA25909@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170308214231.DBB1340F7@lod.com> > PD: Do you per chance happen to know how can I install/enable the telnet > server on UnixWare 2.1 "Personal Edition"? > > -- > Josh Good > On my installation, it was enabled by default. What does your /etc/inetd.conf look like? Is inetd running? http://lod.com/sco-screenshot-1.jpg --corey From schily at schily.net Thu Mar 9 08:03:36 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 23:03:36 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> Warren Toomey wrote: > Hi all, as part of my effort to recreate part of a simulated Usenet, > I'm trying to bring up uucp, then mail, then C-news on 4.2BSD boxes. > I've got a hardwired serial port between them, and I can see a basic In case it is if interest... I used modems between 1986 and january 1993 (when I started to use a self built ISDN adaptor that was connected as a piggy back to the Sun-3/50 or Sun-3/60 EPROM socket). During that "modem" time, I started with a 2400 baud modem and soon upgraded to a US-Robotics modem. It turned out that UUCP had several issues and was not very effective with high speed modems. For this reason, I started with the BSD-4.2 UUCP sources and created a new protocol that I called "s" protocol. This protocol was based on the "g" protocol but used larger packet sizes. Here is my comment header for "sio.c": /* * High speed modem protocol with flow control. * * The s protocol was designed to be used with high speed modems which * have no built in protocol spoofing for the g protocol. * * The s protocol is almost the g protocol with a greater packetsize * and some mapping, to allow software flow control to work. * If the operating system is able to do hardware/software flow control * which is not 8-bit transparent, the s protocol will use the * 8-bit data path. If the data path is only 7-bit wide on one or both * directions the s protocol will use additional mapping in the * appropriate direction to ensure an overall 8-bit wide datapath. * * The s protocol relies on a packet driver with some minor changes. * * The modifications on the packet driver are: * - some minor bug-fixes, so packet sizes > 128 bytes will work. * - allow to specify transport routines different from read/write * to enable the mapping of flow control characters. * * These changes will not stop the g protocol to work. * * Author: * J. Schilling, Berlin 1990 * * N.B.: The main code was stolen from the g-protocol. */ Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 08:16:45 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:16:45 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 07:20:52PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp The list of people and sites they have chosen is at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/blob/master/uucp_sites.txt I've just set up "seismo" at simh.tuhs.org:5000, if anybody wants a remote site to connect to. E-mail me your site and IP details. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dave at horsfall.org Thu Mar 9 08:31:55 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 09:31:55 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: I'm surprised no-one's taken decvax, ihnp4, cbosgd... ...!utzoo!dave[.UUCP] one day... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From khm at sciops.net Thu Mar 9 08:33:06 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:33:06 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170308223306.GA83138@wopr> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 08:16:45AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > The list of people and sites they have chosen is at > https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/blob/master/uucp_sites.txt I don't see kremvax listed. If nobody else will, I'll operate a kremvax installation. khm From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 08:54:42 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:54:42 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? Message-ID: <20170308225442.GA15170@minnie.tuhs.org> We are going to need some historical uucp maps so that we can construct our simulated uucp network which bears some resemblance to the past. There is a 1984 map on pages 7 to 14 of http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/AUUGN/AUUGN-V05.4.pdf As Dave mentioned, we need some key sites like ihnp4, cbosgd etc. What other key sites? Any volunteers to run some of them? Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 9 08:59:21 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 17:59:21 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <20170308214231.DBB1340F7@lod.com> References: <20170308214231.DBB1340F7@lod.com> Message-ID: On 3/8/2017 4:42 PM, Corey Lindsly wrote: > On my installation, it was enabled by default. What does your > /etc/inetd.conf look like? Is inetd running? > > http://lod.com/sco-screenshot-1.jpg > > --corey > > Mine too. Maybe it was a package we both chose to install? Server tools? telnet vuw21 Trying 199.89.231.143... Connected to vuw21.kilonet.net. Escape character is '^]'. UnixWare 2.1 (vuw21) (pts/2) login: krewat Password: UnixWare 2.1 vuw21 Copyright 1996 The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright 1984-1995 Novell, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corp. All Rights Reserved. U.S. Pat. No. 5,349,642 Last login: Sat Mar 4 09:40:07 2017 on pts000 You have mail Display Desktop (y/n)? n $ From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 9 09:07:18 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 18:07:18 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: This is one of the reasons Telebit did the whole UUCP "g" acceleration in the Trailblazer/Worldblazer modems. The turn-around time for the small packets being acknowledged was so bad over normal modems that it was painful. So Telebit made the modem do the acknowledgements (IIRC), stream the data over the phone line, and the receiving end would "play along" on the acknowledgements. It was very effective for news especially. On 3/8/2017 5:03 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > During that "modem" time, I started with a 2400 baud modem and soon > upgraded > to a US-Robotics modem. It turned out that UUCP had several issues and was not > very effective with high speed modems. > > ...SNIP... > Jörg > From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 09:10:52 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 09:10:52 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <20170308225442.GA15170@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170308225442.GA15170@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170308231052.GA20076@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 08:54:42AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > There is a 1984 map on pages 7 to 14 of > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/AUUGN/AUUGN-V05.4.pdf In ASCII at http://www.redace.org/html/logical_usenet_map_1984.html Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 9 09:18:25 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 15:18:25 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017, at 15:07, Arthur Krewat wrote: > This is one of the reasons Telebit did the whole UUCP "g" acceleration > in the Trailblazer/Worldblazer modems. > > The turn-around time for the small packets being acknowledged was so bad > over normal modems that it was painful. > > So Telebit made the modem do the acknowledgements (IIRC), stream the > data over the phone line, and the receiving end would "play along" on > the acknowledgements. > > It was very effective for news especially. > > On 3/8/2017 5:03 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > During that "modem" time, I started with a 2400 baud modem and soon > > upgraded > > to a US-Robotics modem. It turned out that UUCP had several issues and was not > > very effective with high speed modems. > > > > ...SNIP... > > Jörg > > > I need to pull my Telebits out now, don't I? ;) -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From john at jfloren.net Thu Mar 9 09:24:25 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:24:25 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <20170308231052.GA20076@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170308225442.GA15170@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308231052.GA20076@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Looks like there are a lot of key systems, at least two dozen... for instance for my lanl-a node to get to decvax, we'd need cmcl2, philabs, and mcnc. (decvax!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!lanl-a was the first short-ish route I could see) On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 08:54:42AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >> There is a 1984 map on pages 7 to 14 of >> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/AUUGN/AUUGN-V05.4.pdf > > In ASCII at http://www.redace.org/html/logical_usenet_map_1984.html > Warren From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 9 09:39:53 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 18:39:53 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: I've still got my Worldblazer, and a Trailblazer that I found in a storage closet at a defense contractor I was consulting for back in the mid 90's. I'm seriously thinking of getting my SVR4.2 system back up and running and seeing if I can get Taylor UUCP to function again. Of course, I didn't make the UUCP maps until the early 90's... but still :) On 3/8/2017 6:18 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017, at 15:07, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> This is one of the reasons Telebit did the whole UUCP "g" acceleration >> in the Trailblazer/Worldblazer modems. >> >> The turn-around time for the small packets being acknowledged was so bad >> over normal modems that it was painful. >> >> So Telebit made the modem do the acknowledgements (IIRC), stream the >> data over the phone line, and the receiving end would "play along" on >> the acknowledgements. >> >> It was very effective for news especially. >> >> On 3/8/2017 5:03 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: >>> During that "modem" time, I started with a 2400 baud modem and soon >>> upgraded >>> to a US-Robotics modem. It turned out that UUCP had several issues and was not >>> very effective with high speed modems. >>> >>> ...SNIP... >>> Jörg >>> > I need to pull my Telebits out now, don't I? ;) > From scj at yaccman.com Thu Mar 9 09:49:52 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 15:49:52 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP mis-history? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4c68621d384bc95d91460a5aa1d646e98e3cd68d@webmail.yaccman.com> The dates blur in my mind, but I think uucp was around in the Labs long before V7.  Might not have been distributed, though. There was a long history in the Bell System of collecting data by phone -- Model 33 teletypes could be left in a mode where a phone call could wake it up and turn on the paper tape reader, and the data could be collected at the other end.  (Remember when long-distance calls were expensive, but much cheaper at night?). This reminds me of a story from that era.  One of the mainframe computers had the ability to place phone calls and a program was run every night to collect data from far-flung teletypes.   The phone call would go through, the modems would synchronize, and the data would be passed.  On day the operators realized that there were two phone numbers in Nebraska that were getting called every weekday night, and the numbers were very similar.  They suspected one was a wrong number, so they listened in on the calls to see which one was real.   The phone rang in Nebraska at 2am and was answered by a sleepy man, with whom the modem cheerfully tried to synchronize.  The man was heard to say "It's all right, Bertha.  It's just that nut with a whistle again!" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Horsfall" To:"The Eunuchs Hysterical Society" Cc: Sent:Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:45:49 +1100 (EST) Subject:[TUHS] UUCP mis-history? http://www.thefullwiki.org/UUCP ``UUCP was originally written at AT&T Bell Laboratories, by Mike Lesk, and early versions of UUCP are sometimes referred to as System V UUCP.'' Err, it was V7, wasn't it? That considerably predates SysV... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 9 10:22:17 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:22:17 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <3C4A1369-67FE-48C8-82B5-369DCB300AA3@gewt.net> Which SVR4.2? Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 8, 2017, at 15:39, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > I've still got my Worldblazer, and a Trailblazer that I found in a storage closet at a defense contractor I was consulting for back in the mid 90's. > > I'm seriously thinking of getting my SVR4.2 system back up and running and seeing if I can get Taylor UUCP to function again. > > Of course, I didn't make the UUCP maps until the early 90's... but still :) > >> On 3/8/2017 6:18 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017, at 15:07, Arthur Krewat wrote: >>> This is one of the reasons Telebit did the whole UUCP "g" acceleration >>> in the Trailblazer/Worldblazer modems. >>> >>> The turn-around time for the small packets being acknowledged was so bad >>> over normal modems that it was painful. >>> >>> So Telebit made the modem do the acknowledgements (IIRC), stream the >>> data over the phone line, and the receiving end would "play along" on >>> the acknowledgements. >>> >>> It was very effective for news especially. >>> >>>> On 3/8/2017 5:03 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: >>>> During that "modem" time, I started with a 2400 baud modem and soon >>>> upgraded >>>> to a US-Robotics modem. It turned out that UUCP had several issues and was not >>>> very effective with high speed modems. >>>> >>>> ...SNIP... >>>> Jörg >>>> >> I need to pull my Telebits out now, don't I? ;) >> > From dave at horsfall.org Thu Mar 9 11:59:40 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 12:59:40 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Arthur Krewat wrote: > This is one of the reasons Telebit did the whole UUCP "g" acceleration > in the Trailblazer/Worldblazer modems. Yep, and they ran like the clappers; I can still remember its "moose call" when it was syncing with the other end. Ah, well I remember the time back at Strangled Tangled and Confused, when we were being chipped by the accountoids for our long-distance modem bills; when I explained to the suits that they were actually our head office (bug reports and resolution etc), a couple of Trailblazers suddenly appeared in our respective machine rooms. $BABBAGE, but how I've hated middle managers since then... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From norman at oclsc.org Thu Mar 9 12:33:27 2017 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 21:33:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? Message-ID: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> Warning Toomey: In ASCII at http://www.redace.org/html/logical_usenet_map_1984.html === That's no UUCP map. It's a USENET map: a map of netnews propagation. No, they're not the same at all: many places that used UUCP to exchange mail didn't participate in netnews. In particular I see a site I used to run with none of its important mail links like ihnp4, and only a link to a system I don't remember at all. I had left that site a few weeks before that map was published, but I stayed in touch with the folks there; had all the mail links been torn down I'd have known. Had someone decided it was worth while dipping a toe into netnews, though (something I never bothered with) I might not. In fact I suspect it would be difficult to find believable maps for UUCP except amongst major forwarders. At its peak it was an extremely informal network, with lots of links that weren't published anywhere because people at site A wanted to keep in touch with those at sites B and C but didn't want to pay the bills to forward mail between B and C, let alone between those sites and places twelve time zones away. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 12:38:13 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 12:38:13 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> References: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> Message-ID: <20170309023813.GA6805@minnie.tuhs.org> > Warning Toomey: > In ASCII at http://www.redace.org/html/logical_usenet_map_1984.html On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:33:27PM -0500, Norman Wilson wrote: > That's no UUCP map. It's a USENET map: a map of netnews > propagation. No, they're not the same at all: many places > that used UUCP to exchange mail didn't participate in > netnews. Ah, my bad. Can we still uses it as a basis for reconstructed topology? Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 9 12:38:33 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 21:38:33 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> References: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> Message-ID: <00af01d2987e$3f69b840$be3d28c0$@ronnatalie.com> In addition, NNTP was, I thimk, in swing there, so some of those links didn't use UUCP either. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Norman Wilson Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 9:33 PM To: tuhs at tuhs.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? Warning Toomey: In ASCII at http://www.redace.org/html/logical_usenet_map_1984.html === That's no UUCP map. It's a USENET map: a map of netnews propagation. No, they're not the same at all: many places that used UUCP to exchange mail didn't participate in netnews. From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 12:42:10 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 12:42:10 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] C News: help! Message-ID: <20170309024210.GA8440@minnie.tuhs.org> OK, C News is a bit more complicated than I expected :) The latest version is at ftp://ftp.cs.toronto.edu/pub/c-news/ AFAIKT and a printable install guide at http://ftp.cc.uoc.gr/infosystems/news/transport/cnews/doc/guide.ps.gz Are there any C News experts out there who might be able to help? Can we encourage Henry or Geoff to help at all? Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Thu Mar 9 12:50:20 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 18:50:20 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> Message-ID: <1027.1489027820@cesium.clock.org> See the Google archive of comp.mail.maps where the UUCP map (connection) pathalias data was regularly published for E-mail routing purposes. People stopped making ASCII maps for the UUCP network because it was too richly connected (too hard, too messy), and because the sites included lat/long location data in their map entries specifically for making geographic maps automatically. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mail.maps/Y_XHTvY8VJA I wrote the specification which included lat/long coordinates with precisely that in mind, though it was some years before it happened. Find a related story about pathalias and use of the Internet for UUCP in https://www.quora.com/What-does-it-feel-like-to-operate-a-supercomputer/answer/Erik-Fair Erik From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 9 13:34:46 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:34:46 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP Recreation Network Message-ID: <1489030486.1828331.905348176.52581013@webmail.messagingengine.com> Okay - let's make this an easy-to-dredge-through thread so I can easily search for stuff later. What means of interconnection are we going to use? I should be able to provide: 1). Actual dial-in (probably not anything above 1200 baud...if I am lucky) 2). SIMH "virtual leased line" dial-in 3). Network mail A map/list of interconnections would be nice. Need a central database somewhere. -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 13:43:33 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 13:43:33 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP Recreation Network In-Reply-To: <1489030486.1828331.905348176.52581013@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1489030486.1828331.905348176.52581013@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <20170309034333.GA14730@minnie.tuhs.org> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 07:34:46PM -0800, Cory Smelosky wrote: > What means of interconnection are we going to use? > A map/list of interconnections would be nice. Need a central database > somewhere. https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/blob/master/uucp_sites.txt for now, it can be improved. Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Thu Mar 9 13:47:34 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:47:34 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP Recreation Network In-Reply-To: <20170309034333.GA14730@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <1489030486.1828331.905348176.52581013@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170309034333.GA14730@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1489031254.1831772.905356984.7FA4DE49@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017, at 19:43, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 07:34:46PM -0800, Cory Smelosky wrote: > > What means of interconnection are we going to use? > > A map/list of interconnections would be nice. Need a central database > > somewhere. > > https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/blob/master/uucp_sites.txt > for now, it can be improved. > > Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) Hmmm. I might markdown-ify that and see if it can go on a github wiki page. Looks like we're using 5000 for external? put me at sj.gewt.net:5000 -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Thu Mar 9 13:51:21 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:51:21 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP Recreation Network In-Reply-To: <1489031254.1831772.905356984.7FA4DE49@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170309034333.GA14730@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <26744.1489031481@cesium.clock.org> Here are some appropriate port numbers: % egrep uucp /etc/services uucp-path 117/udp # UUCP Path Service uucp-path 117/tcp # UUCP Path Service uucp 540/udp # uucpd uucp 540/tcp # uucpd uucp-rlogin 541/udp # uucp-rlogin uucp-rlogin 541/tcp # uucp-rlogin suucp 4031/udp # UUCP over SSL suucp 4031/tcp # UUCP over SSL Erik From crossd at gmail.com Thu Mar 9 14:22:41 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 23:22:41 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] C News: help! In-Reply-To: <20170309024210.GA8440@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170309024210.GA8440@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: I'm sure either or both would be willing to at least answer questions. Geoff is geoff at collyer.net, if that helps. On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 9:42 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > OK, C News is a bit more complicated than I expected :) > > The latest version is at ftp://ftp.cs.toronto.edu/pub/c-news/ AFAIKT > and a printable install guide at > http://ftp.cc.uoc.gr/infosystems/news/transport/cnews/doc/guide.ps.gz > > Are there any C News experts out there who might be able to help? > Can we encourage Henry or Geoff to help at all? > > Cheers, Warren > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cubexyz at gmail.com Thu Mar 9 16:25:32 2017 From: cubexyz at gmail.com (Mark Longridge) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 01:25:32 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] observations on Unix v6's mount command Message-ID: I was trying to look at mini-unix so I mounted the disk image inside unix v6 via: /etc/mount /dev/rk4 /usr/mini-unix and I noticed that if I ran the mount command as a user and not root that /etc/mtab would not be updated (but it was updated as expected as root). Of course /etc/mtab is owned by root :) Then I noticed something else when I did an ls in the /usr directory: drwxrwxrwx 20 31 368 Sep 3 1976 mini-unix Normally I would see things like: drwxrwxr-x 2 bin 48 May 13 1975 adm What does the 31 mean? Mark From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Thu Mar 9 16:32:33 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 22:32:33 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] observations on Unix v6's mount command In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <559.1489041153@cesium.clock.org> The 31 is likely a UID number not found in /etc/passwd Insofar as I know, you can set the ownership of a file to any arbitrary integer within the range of the uid_t (or whatever it was in ye olden days). See chown(8). Erik From arnold at skeeve.com Thu Mar 9 16:36:33 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 23:36:33 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170308223306.GA83138@wopr> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308223306.GA83138@wopr> Message-ID: <201703090636.v296aXUk008811@freefriends.org> Kurt H Maier wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 08:16:45AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > > > The list of people and sites they have chosen is at > > https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/blob/master/uucp_sites.txt > > I don't see kremvax listed. If nobody else will, I'll operate a kremvax > installation. > > khm Ahem - my name is Arnold Robbins - my domain is "Skeeve" ... :-) Please fix the file. Arnold From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Mar 9 17:06:52 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 17:06:52 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] observations on Unix v6's mount command In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170309070652.GA29927@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 01:25:32AM -0500, Mark Longridge wrote: > Then I noticed something else when I did an ls in the /usr directory: > > drwxrwxrwx 20 31 368 Sep 3 1976 mini-unix Probably there is no username associated with uid 31 in the /etc/passwd file. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dave at horsfall.org Thu Mar 9 19:20:17 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 20:20:17 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] UUCP Recreation Network In-Reply-To: <1489031254.1831772.905356984.7FA4DE49@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1489030486.1828331.905348176.52581013@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170309034333.GA14730@minnie.tuhs.org> <1489031254.1831772.905356984.7FA4DE49@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Looks like we're using 5000 for external? put me at sj.gewt.net:5000 aneurin% grep 5000 /etc/services commplex-main 5000/tcp commplex-main 5000/udp It's taken... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From schily at schily.net Thu Mar 9 19:30:09 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 10:30:09 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <58c120a1.g7rF8La2GBRyETlb%schily@schily.net> Arthur Krewat wrote: > This is one of the reasons Telebit did the whole UUCP "g" acceleration > in the Trailblazer/Worldblazer modems. > > The turn-around time for the small packets being acknowledged was so bad > over normal modems that it was painful. > > So Telebit made the modem do the acknowledgements (IIRC), stream the > data over the phone line, and the receiving end would "play along" on > the acknowledgements. > > It was very effective for news especially. If you have been forced to connect to a "traditional UUCP" site, this may have been a useful concept. With a packet size of 64 bytes and max. 3 windows, the protocol was OK for 2400 baud, but not really usable for faster modems. My enhanced packet handler supported dynamic packet sizes between 32 bytes and 4096 bytes and 1..7 windows. Given that I could update the UUCP implementation of my news-feed in the university, this was a better solution than the Telebit protocol spoofing. BTW: UUCP enhancements have been discussed by many people in comp.mail.uucp Active people in that group have been e.g. Ian Lance Taylor various Rick Adams t protocol for TCP/IP Matthias Urlichs e protocol. similar to t protocol Peter Honeyman g protocol description Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From lars at nocrew.org Thu Mar 9 23:02:44 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:02:44 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> (Warren Toomey's message of "Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:16:45 +1000") References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <86bmtabo23.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Warren Toomey writes: > The list of people and sites they have chosen is at > https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/blob/master/uucp_sites.txt > > I've just set up "seismo" at simh.tuhs.org:5000, if anybody wants a > remote site to connect to. E-mail me your site and IP details. I'd like to join this network, but I don't know how to configure a UUCP site. I'm using Taylor UUCP 1.07. I can probably figure things out eventually but if someone has any hints, that would be helpful. I'm looking to use TCP and protocol T, but I don't know if that's appropriate. From john at jfloren.net Fri Mar 10 00:20:13 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 07:20:13 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP Recreation Network In-Reply-To: References: <1489030486.1828331.905348176.52581013@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170309034333.GA14730@minnie.tuhs.org> <1489031254.1831772.905356984.7FA4DE49@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On Mar 9, 2017 02:20, "Dave Horsfall" wrote: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Looks like we're using 5000 for external? put me at sj.gewt.net:5000 aneurin% grep 5000 /etc/services commplex-main 5000/tcp commplex-main 5000/udp It's taken... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." Who cares? They're more suggestions than anything else, and I'm not using commplex, whatever that is. john -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Fri Mar 10 00:48:04 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 09:48:04 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP mis-history? In-Reply-To: <4c68621d384bc95d91460a5aa1d646e98e3cd68d@webmail.yaccman.com> References: <4c68621d384bc95d91460a5aa1d646e98e3cd68d@webmail.yaccman.com> Message-ID: Was it a Cap'n Crunch whistle? Just kidding. On 3/8/2017 6:49 PM, Steve Johnson wrote: > The man was heard to say "It's all right, Bertha. It's just that nut > with a whistle again!" From krewat at kilonet.net Fri Mar 10 00:51:43 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 09:51:43 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <3C4A1369-67FE-48C8-82B5-369DCB300AA3@gewt.net> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <3C4A1369-67FE-48C8-82B5-369DCB300AA3@gewt.net> Message-ID: If I could get the Consensys running that I used to have that would be great, it would be "authentic" to me at least. However, it relies on either an Adaptec 1540 SCSI controller, or the standard ISA WD MFM/RLL controller (and maybe ESDI), which my VMware environments can't support. I'm reluctant to go into running yet another emulator anywhere on my home office network, so it might be Unixware 2.1 which I managed to get running in VMware. On 3/8/2017 7:22 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Which SVR4.2? > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 8, 2017, at 15:39, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> >> I've still got my Worldblazer, and a Trailblazer that I found in a storage closet at a defense contractor I was consulting for back in the mid 90's. >> >> I'm seriously thinking of getting my SVR4.2 system back up and running and seeing if I can get Taylor UUCP to function again. >> >> Of course, I didn't make the UUCP maps until the early 90's... but still :) >> From ron at ronnatalie.com Fri Mar 10 01:01:23 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 10:01:23 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] observations on Unix v6's mount command In-Reply-To: <20170309070652.GA29927@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170309070652.GA29927@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <005101d298e6$053cb3d0$0fb61b70$@ronnatalie.com> When you mount the disk, the mount point displays the inode information of the root directory of the mounted disk. As Warren points out, that directory is owned by user id 31, but your machine has no passwd file entry for that uid. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 10 01:06:44 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 10:06:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Harasing whistlers (Was: UUCP mis-history?) Message-ID: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: "Steve Johnson" > This reminds me of a story from that era. One of the mainframe computers > had the ability to place phone calls and a program was run every night > to collect data from far-flung teletypes [which had been pre-loaded with > data tapes]. ... On day the operators realized that there were two > phone numbers in Nebraska that were getting called every weekday night, > and the numbers were very similar. They suspected one was a wrong > number, so they listened in on the calls to see which one was real. The > phone rang in Nebraska at 2am and was answered by a sleepy man .. The > man was heard to say "It's all right, Bertha. It's just that nut with a > whistle again!" Interesting: I've heard this same story, but told about TIPs and the ARPANET. A computer at BBN was set up to regularly dial all the TIP modem lines, to check that they were working. One line was always down, so they listened in, and heard some human say "it's just that pevert with the whistle again". I wonder which one was the original: anyone know for sure? Noel From ron at ronnatalie.com Fri Mar 10 02:31:17 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 11:31:17 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Harasing whistlers (Was: UUCP mis-history?) In-Reply-To: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <006901d298f2$94c483a0$be4d8ae0$@ronnatalie.com> I don't buy either story. The ORIGINATING modems in the 103 days didn't make any sound. It was the answering modem that whistled. Anyhow, one other TIP/MODEM story (this one was true), we that when we were in college at JHU, the closest TIP was a long distance call from the Baltimore. Mike Muuss placed a collect call to the Pentagon TIP, explaining to the operator that we were calling a computer and if it answered with a tone, it accepted the charges. Worked a few times. Of course,later on Brian Redman and Peter Langston were messing around with a programmable PBX and set the thing to anser the phone: Bell Communications Research (long pause) Yes, Operator! I'll accept the charges. More often than not, the timing was just about right for the operator to say "I have a collect call from Ron Natalie" in the pause. From spedraja at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 03:53:31 2017 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:53:31 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <3C4A1369-67FE-48C8-82B5-369DCB300AA3@gewt.net> Message-ID: Hum... an impressive amount of messages in a short time. I dare to ask something. Many people here appear to be interested in put up an UUCP connection (simulating a modem connection even). Someone even asked about a MAPINFO... In my case I want to put online and available across my firewall a simulated Unix running under SIMH. Would have sense to provide info for a common MAPINFO or for range of adresses for UUCP interchange? It's only an idea. Excuses in advance for my dare if I'm telling something weird. Gracias | Regards - Saludos | Greetings | Freundliche Grüße | Salutations -- Sergio Pedraja -- http://plus.google.com/u/0/101292256663392735405 http://www.linkedin.com/in/sergiopedraja http://www.quora.com/Sergio-Pedraja http://spedraja.wordpress.com ----- No crea todo lo que ve, ni crea que está viéndolo todo ----- "El estado de una Copia de Seguridad es desconocido hasta que intentas restaurarla" (- nixCraft) 2017-03-09 15:51 GMT+01:00 Arthur Krewat : > If I could get the Consensys running that I used to have that would be > great, it would be "authentic" to me at least. > > However, it relies on either an Adaptec 1540 SCSI controller, or the > standard ISA WD MFM/RLL controller (and maybe ESDI), which my VMware > environments can't support. I'm reluctant to go into running yet another > emulator anywhere on my home office network, so it might be Unixware 2.1 > which I managed to get running in VMware. > > > > > On 3/8/2017 7:22 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: >> >> Which SVR4.2? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Mar 8, 2017, at 15:39, Arthur Krewat wrote: >>> >>> I've still got my Worldblazer, and a Trailblazer that I found in a >>> storage closet at a defense contractor I was consulting for back in the mid >>> 90's. >>> >>> I'm seriously thinking of getting my SVR4.2 system back up and running >>> and seeing if I can get Taylor UUCP to function again. >>> >>> Of course, I didn't make the UUCP maps until the early 90's... but still >>> :) >>> > From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 04:37:12 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 10:37:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <1027.1489027820@cesium.clock.org> References: <1027.1489027820@cesium.clock.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Erik E. Fair wrote: > See the Google archive of comp.mail.maps where the UUCP map > (connection) pathalias data was regularly published for E-mail > routing purposes. People stopped making ASCII maps for the UUCP > network because it was too richly connected (too hard, too messy), > and because the sites included lat/long location data in their map > entries specifically for making geographic maps automatically. Probably the closest thing you'll ever get to an "authoritative" map would be to hack pathalias to generate output that can be fed to dot. If you include the pathalias link weights in the output, I'm guessing Graphviz could do a reasonable job of generating a traffic-weighted map (i.e. something that clearly pointed out the major relay hubs). ...!canada!lyndon From sauer at technologists.com Fri Mar 10 05:41:57 2017 From: sauer at technologists.com (Charles H Sauer) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 13:41:57 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history Message-ID: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> I've refrained from jumping into AIX & RT/PC discussions on TUHS. It seems more appropriate to summarize AIX history than try to correct or clarify specifics out of context. I wrote about 5 pages, got feedback, revised accordingly, and posted at https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. Charlie From clemc at ccc.com Fri Mar 10 05:51:59 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 14:51:59 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> Message-ID: Thank you Charlie. Clem On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Charles H Sauer wrote: > I've refrained from jumping into AIX & RT/PC discussions on TUHS. It seems > more appropriate to summarize AIX history than try to correct or clarify > specifics out of context. > > I wrote about 5 pages, got feedback, revised accordingly, and posted at > https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start- > at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. > > Charlie > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 10 06:00:22 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 07:00:22 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <20170308225442.GA15170@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170308225442.GA15170@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > There is a 1984 map on pages 7 to 14 of > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/AUUGN/AUUGN-V05.4.pdf Ah, that brings back memories... It's nice to see my old PDPs "csu40" and "csu60" there. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 10 06:11:03 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 07:11:03 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: <00af01d2987e$3f69b840$be3d28c0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> <00af01d2987e$3f69b840$be3d28c0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > In addition, NNTP was, I thimk, in swing there, so some of those links > didn't use UUCP either. In Australia, we didn't use UUCP at all; it was all ACSnet (or the commercial MHSnet). That same issue of AUUGN describes it. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From pepe at naleco.com Fri Mar 10 06:26:30 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 21:26:30 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170308214231.DBB1340F7@lod.com> Message-ID: <20170309202628.GA27536@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 8, 17:59, Arthur Krewat wrote: > On 3/8/2017 4:42 PM, Corey Lindsly wrote: > >On my installation, it was enabled by default. What does your > >/etc/inetd.conf look like? Is inetd running? > > > >http://lod.com/sco-screenshot-1.jpg > > > >--corey > > > > > > Mine too. Maybe it was a package we both chose to install? Server tools? > > > telnet vuw21 > Trying 199.89.231.143... > Connected to vuw21.kilonet.net. > Escape character is '^]'. > > > UnixWare 2.1 (vuw21) (pts/2) > > login: krewat > Password: > UnixWare 2.1 > vuw21 > Copyright 1996 The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. All Rights Reserved. > Copyright 1984-1995 Novell, Inc. All Rights Reserved. > Copyright 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corp. All Rights Reserved. > U.S. Pat. No. 5,349,642 > Last login: Sat Mar 4 09:40:07 2017 on pts000 > > You have mail > Display Desktop (y/n)? n > $ Yeah, you are both right, I was fooled by not seeing telnetd in the ps output. Turns out telnetd is invoked throught the inetd daemon. $ grep telnet /etc/inetd.conf # Ftp and telnet are standard Internet services. telnet stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/in.telnetd in.telnetd And by the way, the two user limit in the "Personal Edition" of UnixWare 2.1 seems to be real: $ telnet 172.27.101.128 Trying 172.27.101.128... Connected to 172.27.101.128. Escape character is '^]'. UnixWare 2.1 (gollum1) (pts/2) login: jgood Password: UnixWare 2.1 gollum1 Copyright 1996 The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright 1984-1995 Novell, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corp. All Rights Reserved. U.S. Pat. No. 5,349,642 Last login: Tue Mar 9 20:57:05 1999 on pts000 telnetd: set_id() failed: Too many users . Connection closed by foreign host. This thing was released in 1996. Obviously, with this limitation it could not hold a candle to the emerging Linux tsunammi full of free source code. Regards, -- Josh Good From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 10 07:29:29 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:29:29 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Harasing whistlers (Was: UUCP mis-history?) In-Reply-To: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Noel Chiappa wrote: > Interesting: I've heard this same story, but told about TIPs and the > ARPANET. A computer at BBN was set up to regularly dial all the TIP > modem lines, to check that they were working. One line was always down, > so they listened in, and heard some human say "it's just that pevert > with the whistle again". > > I wonder which one was the original: anyone know for sure? Now that takes me back; urban myth, because the calling modem didn't squeak until the called modem did. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From clemc at ccc.com Fri Mar 10 07:45:38 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:45:38 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Historical uucp maps? In-Reply-To: References: <20170309023327.9A4BF4422C@lignose.oclsc.org> <00af01d2987e$3f69b840$be3d28c0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: I was think about your map question, I realized the person you need to rope in is Ches. He did a lot work mapping the uucp network back in the day. He even had really cool maps printed up, which I think I might still have one of them. But he had some really great ones. If he still has them, those would be great for your 50th. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Mar 10 08:28:55 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:28:55 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <86fuimbobi.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> <86fuimbobi.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: <20170309222855.GA23775@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 01:57:05PM +0100, Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > Is it ok to do experimental testing with that host? I've never set up > uucp, so I do not yet know quit what I'm doing. Neither have I! But yes, feel free. In yur SimH .ini file, put (or change) this line to say: attach dz line=0,Connect=simh.tuhs.org:5000 which will connect /dev/tty00 to simh.tuhs.org port 5000. Then set up your L.sys file with a line that says: seismo Any;9 DIR 9600 tty00 "" "" ogin:--ogin:--ogin: uucp ssword: uucp so that the uucp site seismo can be contacted via /dev/tty00. Then you can try doing: # echo hello there | mail seismo\!root # /usr/lib/uucp/uucico -r1 -sseismo -x7 and you should see the debug information with parts of the uucp conversation. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Fri Mar 10 08:54:26 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 17:54:26 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Harasing whistlers (Was: UUCP mis-history?) In-Reply-To: References: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Or it THOUGHT it heard a tone - some people's voices could trigger it. Or the actual bells still ringing for a short period of time after you picked up the handset even. Some of the acoustic couplers I played around with would start signing when people were talking in the same room, or certain music was playing. I did a lot of work with 300 (103 standard) and 1200 baud modems (both 202 and 212 standard), and some of them were very quirky. I'm trying to remember if the 202 initiated any tones on the originating side, but I can't remember. The 202 standard is still in use to transmit caller ID on phone lines between the 1st and 2nd rings. Also, if they were used for dial-back, they could have been set to originate. On 3/9/2017 4:29 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> Interesting: I've heard this same story, but told about TIPs and the >> ARPANET. A computer at BBN was set up to regularly dial all the TIP >> modem lines, to check that they were working. One line was always down, >> so they listened in, and heard some human say "it's just that pevert >> with the whistle again". >> >> I wonder which one was the original: anyone know for sure? > Now that takes me back; urban myth, because the calling modem didn't > squeak until the called modem did. > From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Mar 10 09:19:23 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:19:23 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170309231923.GA28676@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:01:09PM -0700, John Floren wrote: > Well, I'm trying to set up lanl-a, it's at 199.180.255.235:6666 > (theoretically). I've set it up to point at seismo but uucico hangs > waiting for the login prompt. OK, try this: Edit your /etc/remote file to say this for dialer: dialer:dv=/dev/tty00:br#9600: Now try: # tip dialer which should connect out over /dev/tty00 to seismo via the TCP connection. Hit Return a few times to see if there is any response. On your host system, do netstat -a | grep ESTAB and see if there is a TCP connection to simh.tuhs.org:5000. I also forgot. To be able to send e-mail, you need to add seismo to the list of known remote sites in /usr/lib/sendmail.cf: CWseismo Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From john at jfloren.net Fri Mar 10 09:23:34 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:23:34 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170309231923.GA28676@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170309231923.GA28676@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: No luck with tip, and I don't see any net connections. My .ini file contains this: set dz lines=8 set dz 8b attach dz line=0,Connect=simh.tuhs.org:5000 att dz -m 6666 and I can 'telnet simh.tuhs.org 5000' from the host. john On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:01:09PM -0700, John Floren wrote: >> Well, I'm trying to set up lanl-a, it's at 199.180.255.235:6666 >> (theoretically). I've set it up to point at seismo but uucico hangs >> waiting for the login prompt. > > OK, try this: Edit your /etc/remote file to say this for dialer: > > dialer:dv=/dev/tty00:br#9600: > > Now try: > > # tip dialer > > which should connect out over /dev/tty00 to seismo via the TCP connection. > Hit Return a few times to see if there is any response. On your host system, > do netstat -a | grep ESTAB and see if there is a TCP connection to > simh.tuhs.org:5000. > > I also forgot. To be able to send e-mail, you need to add seismo to the > list of known remote sites in /usr/lib/sendmail.cf: > > CWseismo > > Cheers, Warren From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 10 09:35:41 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:35:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them Message-ID: <20170309233541.540E218C120@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Warren Toomey > attach dz line=0,Connect=simh.tuhs.org:5000 > > which will connect /dev/tty00 Provided that /dev/tty00 exists, and the major device type is set to the cdevsw index for the DZ in whatever Unix you are using, and the minor device is set to the correct value to DZ #0, line #0.... :-) Noel From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 10:25:02 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:25:02 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> Message-ID: <68A032B2-ABD9-48EB-B97A-43E94DEB072D@superglobalmegacorp.com> Wow thanks for such a detailed reply! On March 10, 2017 3:41:57 AM GMT+08:00, Charles H Sauer wrote: >I've refrained from jumping into AIX & RT/PC discussions on TUHS. It >seems >more appropriate to summarize AIX history than try to correct or >clarify >specifics out of context. > >I wrote about 5 pages, got feedback, revised accordingly, and posted at >https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. > >Charlie -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 10:31:36 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:31:36 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Harasing whistlers (Was: UUCP mis-history?) In-Reply-To: References: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <777EBBB5-6B7A-43E8-82AF-8FFC26B78C72@superglobalmegacorp.com> It's not hard to whistle a handshake. I've been able to get a modem to connect. Of course actual data is out of the question. It's just loud sharp tones, then just match pitch, the other modem will change a few times and just match it. It was a silly trick whistling to modems, but these days nobody has one. And I can't say I miss dialup. On March 10, 2017 5:29:29 AM GMT+08:00, Dave Horsfall wrote: >On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> Interesting: I've heard this same story, but told about TIPs and the >> ARPANET. A computer at BBN was set up to regularly dial all the TIP >> modem lines, to check that they were working. One line was always >down, >> so they listened in, and heard some human say "it's just that pevert >> with the whistle again". >> >> I wonder which one was the original: anyone know for sure? > >Now that takes me back; urban myth, because the calling modem didn't >squeak until the called modem did. > >-- >Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will >suffer." -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 10:31:36 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:31:36 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Harasing whistlers (Was: UUCP mis-history?) In-Reply-To: References: <20170309150644.6735918C11B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <777EBBB5-6B7A-43E8-82AF-8FFC26B78C72@superglobalmegacorp.com> It's not hard to whistle a handshake. I've been able to get a modem to connect. Of course actual data is out of the question. It's just loud sharp tones, then just match pitch, the other modem will change a few times and just match it. It was a silly trick whistling to modems, but these days nobody has one. And I can't say I miss dialup. On March 10, 2017 5:29:29 AM GMT+08:00, Dave Horsfall wrote: >On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> Interesting: I've heard this same story, but told about TIPs and the >> ARPANET. A computer at BBN was set up to regularly dial all the TIP >> modem lines, to check that they were working. One line was always >down, >> so they listened in, and heard some human say "it's just that pevert >> with the whistle again". >> >> I wonder which one was the original: anyone know for sure? > >Now that takes me back; urban myth, because the calling modem didn't >squeak until the called modem did. > >-- >Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will >suffer." -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steve at quintile.net Fri Mar 10 10:31:57 2017 From: steve at quintile.net (Steve Simon) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 00:31:57 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From john at jfloren.net Fri Mar 10 11:49:45 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:49:45 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: I've now got it working and it made me think a little. In order to do these "serial ports over TCP" things, we basically are putting login prompts out to the Internet. Is it possible to restrict things so the only user allowed on ttyN is 'uucp', or should I just put in iptables rules to only allow traffic from my UUCP peers? john On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 06:43:07AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >> More progress. I now have mcsun----seismo----munnari >> with uucp mail between them all. > > Even more progress. I wrote a script to generate the uucp systems, > and given it a rough test. It's now here: > > https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp > > and ready for people to download and try things out. I'm happy for > people to make changes, by adding them in as contributors. > > We should add a file with uucp names, owners and connection details. > I'll do that soon. > > Have at it! > Warren From b4 at gewt.net Fri Mar 10 11:57:00 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 17:57:00 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170309231923.GA28676@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170309231923.GA28676@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1489111020.2096149.906518064.5C8F309B@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017, at 15:19, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:01:09PM -0700, John Floren wrote: > > Well, I'm trying to set up lanl-a, it's at 199.180.255.235:6666 > > (theoretically). I've set it up to point at seismo but uucico hangs > > waiting for the login prompt. > > OK, try this: Edit your /etc/remote file to say this for dialer: > > dialer:dv=/dev/tty00:br#9600: > > Now try: > > # tip dialer > > which should connect out over /dev/tty00 to seismo via the TCP > connection. > Hit Return a few times to see if there is any response. On your host > system, > do netstat -a | grep ESTAB and see if there is a TCP connection to > simh.tuhs.org:5000. > > I also forgot. To be able to send e-mail, you need to add seismo to the > list of known remote sites in /usr/lib/sendmail.cf: > > CWseismo > > Cheers, Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) I'm trying to do an identical test before bring UUCP up. (but using 4._3_BSD). # grep -i "tty00" /etc/ttys #tty00 "/etc/getty std.9600" unknown on secure # tip dialer /dev/tty00: Permission denied link down # grep -i "dialer" /etc/remote dialer:dv=/dev/tty00:br#9600: sim> show dz0 DZ0 attached to 5000,Line=0,Connect=simh.tuhs.org:5000, 8b, 1 current connection # cat /dev/tty00 Connected to the VAX 11/780 simulator DZ device, line 5 Password: Connected to tLogin incorrect login: he VAX 11/780 simulator DZ device, line 5 Password: Password: Login incorrect Cologin: login: login: Password: login: he VAX 1Login incorrect login: 1/780 simulator DZ device, line 5 Password: assword: What'd I miss? -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From b4 at gewt.net Fri Mar 10 12:03:17 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 18:03:17 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170310020203.GA14221@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170309231923.GA28676@minnie.tuhs.org> <1489111020.2096149.906518064.5C8F309B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170310020203.GA14221@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1489111397.2097044.906524032.79F95B3F@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017, at 18:02, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 05:57:00PM -0800, Cory Smelosky wrote: > > # grep -i "tty00" /etc/ttys > > #tty00 "/etc/getty std.9600" unknown on secure > > > > # tip dialer > > /dev/tty00: Permission denied > > You need to chown uucp /dev/tty00 I think! > > Cheers, Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) That did it. -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 12:04:31 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:04:31 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 9, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Steve Simon wrote: > > Maybe its the same one, but I remeber a special UUCP protocol which had its > MTU and timeouts carefully adjusted to get the best performance across X25. 'f' protocol. It encoded everything into printable ASCII characters to avoid triggering any PAD escape sequence. From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Mar 10 12:06:35 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 12:06:35 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170310020635.GB14221@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 06:49:45PM -0700, John Floren wrote: > I've now got it working and it made me think a little. > > In order to do these "serial ports over TCP" things, we basically are > putting login prompts out to the Internet. Is it possible to restrict > things so the only user allowed on ttyN is 'uucp', or should I just > put in iptables rules to only allow traffic from my UUCP peers? Yes, I'm trying to work on that. There is a way set some DZ lines to listen on port Y and the others on port X. sim> ATTACH DZ X,Line=3,Y,line=4,Z But there isn't a way to bind to localhost AFAICT. So we should be able to run uucico only on certain /dev/tty lines, but this still will require you to iptables block the other port. Unless someone has a way to bind simh DZ lines to localhost? Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Fri Mar 10 12:09:02 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 18:09:02 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170310020635.GB14221@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170310020635.GB14221@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1489111742.2097812.906527728.5E461E40@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017, at 18:06, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 06:49:45PM -0700, John Floren wrote: > > I've now got it working and it made me think a little. > > > > In order to do these "serial ports over TCP" things, we basically are > > putting login prompts out to the Internet. Is it possible to restrict > > things so the only user allowed on ttyN is 'uucp', or should I just > > put in iptables rules to only allow traffic from my UUCP peers? > > Yes, I'm trying to work on that. There is a way set some DZ lines > to listen on port Y and the others on port X. > > sim> ATTACH DZ X,Line=3,Y,line=4,Z > > But there isn't a way to bind to localhost AFAICT. So we should be able > to > run uucico only on certain /dev/tty lines, but this still will require > you to iptables block the other port. > > Unless someone has a way to bind simh DZ lines to localhost? sim> att dz -m 127.0.0.1:5000 Listening on port 127.0.0.1:5000 Modem control activated Trying 127.0.0.1... Connected to localhost. Escape character is '^]'. Connected to the VAX 11/780 simulator DZ device, line 1 [root at lethe] ~# telnet 10.12.10.1 5000 Trying 10.12.10.1... telnet: connect to address 10.12.10.1: Connection refused telnet: Unable to connect to remote host > > Cheers, Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 12:09:47 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:09:47 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 9, 2017, at 6:04 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > >> On Mar 9, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Steve Simon wrote: >> >> Maybe its the same one, but I remeber a special UUCP protocol which had its >> MTU and timeouts carefully adjusted to get the best performance across X25. > > 'f' protocol. It encoded everything into printable ASCII characters to avoid triggering any PAD escape sequence. Performance wise, it might have been the first "steaming" protocol :-) All it was concerned about was 1) don't send anything that looks like a PAD escape sequence, 2) just send bytes at the link. The idea was that the PAD would flow control the session, so uucico just went into dumb mode and shovelled out the bytes. --lyndon From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 12:23:37 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:23:37 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: So if we are going to talk UUCP, how can we not bring up the protocol, and it's beloved behaviour, in certain implementations. 'g' protocol was what everyone ran. 64 byte packets, in a three packet window. By default. But 'g' could really race along, if provoked. The window could slide up to seven! Unless you were running Xenix, where that provoked a core dump. On most systems, increasing the window size meant binary patching uucico. I fuzzily remember 'g' implementations that could handle packets up to 256 bytes, but I can't remember now if the basic (pre-HDB) UUCP could deal with that. HDB cleaned up a lot of things. While complicating the configuration files to no end. In parallel to all this, Rick Adams was pounding the living daylights out of the BSD UUCP code. That which ran on seismo. Then uunet. -- uunet!ncc!lyndon (so many uucp path sigs ...) From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 10 12:51:54 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 13:51:54 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, Steve Simon wrote: > Maybe its the same one, but I remeber a special UUCP protocol which had > its MTU and timeouts carefully adjusted to get the best performance > across X25. And there was yet another variation ("s"?) designed for satellite circuits. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 13:08:40 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:08:40 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <20170310025710.GA12961@mcvoy.com> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> <20170310025710.GA12961@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <0967B8AA-B3F1-4A11-89F9-0B68E84785C3@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 9, 2017, at 6:57 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > Where is Rick these days? He still doing stuff? Lots of fond memories > of that guy and that time. The last time I bumped into him was at Interop circa 1993(?) where he was orbiting the BSDi booth that Rob Kolstad was holding down. I don't know either of them personally, beyond some email interactions. --lyndon From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 13:28:10 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:28:10 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <0967B8AA-B3F1-4A11-89F9-0B68E84785C3@orthanc.ca> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> <20170310025710.GA12961@mcvoy.com> <0967B8AA-B3F1-4A11-89F9-0B68E84785C3@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <48466FFF-81BB-40D0-B944-BA03815A4B80@orthanc.ca> >> Where is Rick these days? He still doing stuff? Lots of fond memories >> of that guy and that time. But he did mostly vanish after Alternet came to be successful. I was never sure about the integrity of that whole Usenet loan thing. --lyndon From crossd at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 13:27:40 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 22:27:40 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> Message-ID: Wow, this is really cool, Charlie. It puts a lot of stuff in perspective. I wonder if you might add a bit more detail about the BSD ports? That's what we ran on our RTs; I seem to recall that product was only available to educational institutions and was referred to as AOS: "Academic Operating System." I do recall that it came with NFS, and possibly AFS version 2? It seemed to be approximately 4.3-Tahoe based. The AFS bit is hazy.... On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Charles H Sauer wrote: > I've refrained from jumping into AIX & RT/PC discussions on TUHS. It seems > more appropriate to summarize AIX history than try to correct or clarify > specifics out of context. > > I wrote about 5 pages, got feedback, revised accordingly, and posted at > https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start- > at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. > > Charlie > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 13:28:56 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:28:56 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <48466FFF-81BB-40D0-B944-BA03815A4B80@orthanc.ca> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> <20170310025710.GA12961@mcvoy.com> <0967B8AA-B3F1-4A11-89F9-0B68E84785C3@orthanc.ca> <48466FFF-81BB-40D0-B944-BA03815A4B80@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <45377547-5300-4449-9F79-BB28DE84DDEC@orthanc.ca> > I was never sure about the integrity of that whole Usenet loan thing. s/Usenet/Usenix/ From crossd at gmail.com Fri Mar 10 13:45:28 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 22:45:28 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, Steve Simon wrote: > > > Maybe its the same one, but I remeber a special UUCP protocol which had > > its MTU and timeouts carefully adjusted to get the best performance > > across X25. > > And there was yet another variation ("s"?) designed for satellite > circuits. It seems that there was a whole slew of protocols at one time. Interestingly, the FreeBSD documentation still includes a fairly extensive description of UUCP (I guess these are really the `info` pages from Taylor UUCP) that describe a number of different protocols: https://docs.freebsd.org/info/uucp/uucp.info.Protocols.html - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Mar 10 06:14:49 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 12:14:49 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> Message-ID: <20170309201449.GH2683@mcvoy.com> Anyone else having trouble loading this page? Tried with/without the trailing dot. Connection timed out. Looks like a DNS problem to me. > https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Mar 10 12:57:10 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:57:10 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <20170310025710.GA12961@mcvoy.com> > In parallel to all this, Rick Adams was pounding the living daylights out of the BSD UUCP code. That which ran on seismo. Then uunet. Where is Rick these days? He still doing stuff? Lots of fond memories of that guy and that time. From b4 at gewt.net Fri Mar 10 13:55:49 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 19:55:49 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <20170309201449.GH2683@mcvoy.com> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> <20170309201449.GH2683@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1489118149.2118966.906592600.7DB20E93@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017, at 12:14, Larry McVoy wrote: > Anyone else having trouble loading this page? Tried with/without the > trailing dot. Connection timed out. Looks like a DNS problem to me. > > > https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. Interesting. Loads here! -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From sauer at technologists.com Fri Mar 10 14:01:36 2017 From: sauer at technologists.com (Charles H Sauer) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 22:01:36 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> Message-ID: <22C6D328D23F4DBFA28210996351B64C@studyvista> Dan, I’m not sure how well I can answer, but I’ll try. I think the responsible organization was known as ACIS (ACademic Information Systems??), with BSD work primarily staffed in the Palo Alto Scientific Center. Back then IBM had “scientific centers” separate from the Research Division – my main contact was with Cambridge, MA and Palo Alto centers, but I think there were 13 centers world wide. I think you’re correct that it was called AOS and likely correct that it was only available to academic institutions. I was primarily aware of usage at Brown, CMU and MIT. The sole RT I had with AOS was at my house, and I didn’t have Internet access at the office, much less at home, so though I was in the thick of the distributed filesystem work, didn’t do any of it hands on on AOS. I was technically responsible for getting the NFS license for AIX and I think you’re right that ACIS put NFS on AOS once we had the license, but would have forgotten that if you hadn’t reminded me. I think the license agreement was put in place in the second half of 1988, but that could easily be off by months or longer. Certainly much of the Andrew work in general and AFS specifically was done with AOS. I assume that all AFS versions were made available on AOS as soon as Kazar et al thought they were ready. Charlie From: Dan Cross Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2017 9:27 PM To: Charles H Sauer Cc: TUHS Subject: Re: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history Wow, this is really cool, Charlie. It puts a lot of stuff in perspective. I wonder if you might add a bit more detail about the BSD ports? That's what we ran on our RTs; I seem to recall that product was only available to educational institutions and was referred to as AOS: "Academic Operating System." I do recall that it came with NFS, and possibly AFS version 2? It seemed to be approximately 4.3-Tahoe based. The AFS bit is hazy.... On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Charles H Sauer wrote: I've refrained from jumping into AIX & RT/PC discussions on TUHS. It seems more appropriate to summarize AIX history than try to correct or clarify specifics out of context. I wrote about 5 pages, got feedback, revised accordingly, and posted at https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. Charlie -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 10 14:40:23 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 20:40:23 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: > On Mar 9, 2017, at 7:45 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > > It seems that there was a whole slew of protocols at one time. g: the original G: a later (HDB?) SVRx version that did 256 byte packets and a seven packet window f: X.25 optimized printable-characters-only x: similar to above? z: Doug Evans wrote this as an alternative to 'f' back when 8-bit paths were not everywhere yet. i: 'internet' stream the data. g, G, and f, we can get definitions for easily enough I think. For 'z' I can track down Doug, but Taylor UUCP should have the details. --lyndon From jim at deitygraveyard.com Fri Mar 10 16:10:42 2017 From: jim at deitygraveyard.com (Jim Carpenter) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 01:10:42 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Dan Cross wrote: >> Any others that folks know about and how well were they used? Did things >> like Coherent have a UUCP? Linux and FreeBSD were able to use to Taylor >> UUCP because it became available by then. Whitesmith's Idris lacked >> anything like UUCP IIRC (but was based on V6). Same with Thoth originally >> at Waterloo, but by the time they shipped it as the QNX product it was V7 >> compliant but I do not remember a UUCP being included in it. Minux lacked >> a UUCP as I recall, but I'm hazy on that has Andy's crew wrote a lot of the >> user space. Coherent was a "full" V7 clone and include things like the dev >> tools including yacc/lex and was released much, much before the Taylor >> version came out -- so what do they use for uucp if at all? > > > Coherent came with a modified version of Taylor, IIRC. At least in the later > versions; I don't know if they had something else earlier. I don't have a running system right now but Coherent 3.2 used V2 config files (L.sys, L-dev, etc.) according to my 1991 manual. A Coherent manual with a 1993 copyright confirms that later versions used Taylor UUCP. My 80286 with Coherent 3.2.1A (last of the 3's and the last to support the '286) and its UUCP was how I connected to my first ISP. ($5/month for mail and news. Who needs SLIP!) Jim From jaapna at xs4all.nl Fri Mar 10 16:34:38 2017 From: jaapna at xs4all.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 07:34:38 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: > On Mar 10, 2017, at 1:31, Steve Simon wrote: > > Maybe its the same one, but I remeber a special UUCP protocol which had its > MTU and timeouts carefully adjusted to get the best performance across X25. Yes. Piet also did the f-protocol jaap -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 235 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From lars at nocrew.org Fri Mar 10 17:11:03 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:11:03 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <20170309222855.GA23775@minnie.tuhs.org> (Warren Toomey's message of "Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:28:55 +1000") References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> <86fuimbobi.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> <20170309222855.GA23775@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <86mvct8v3s.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Warren Toomey wrote: > Lars Brinkhoff wrote: >> Is it ok to do experimental testing with that host? I've never set >> up uucp, so I do not yet know quit what I'm doing. > Neither have I! But yes, feel free. In yur SimH .ini file, put (or change) > this line to say I'm using Taylor UUCP on a somewhat modern system (Ubuntu 12). I managed persuade it to connect to seismo over TCP port 5000 and do a handshake for protocol g. A few packets were sent. Now I'll see if I can inject email messages into this. We're using the exim MTA, and it's does exactly support uucp. From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Fri Mar 10 17:22:06 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 23:22:06 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: <10791.1489130526@cesium.clock.org> The Taylor UUCP is part of pkgsrc (started by NetBSD but supports many, many Unix system platforms; see pkgsrc.org ): http://cdn.netbsd.org/pub/pkgsrc/current/pkgsrc/net/uucp/README.html > The Taylor UUCP package provides everything you need to make a UUCP connection. It currently supports the 'f', 'g' (in all window and packet sizes), 'G', 't' and 'e' protocols, as well a Zmodem protocol, the FX UUCICO 'y' protocol, and two new bidirectional protocols. If you have a Berkeley sockets library, it can make TCP connections. If you have TLI libraries, it can make TLI connections. It supports a new configuration file mechanism. The "t" protocol was for use with TCP over the Internet. Erik From lars at nocrew.org Fri Mar 10 17:27:27 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:27:27 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <10791.1489130526@cesium.clock.org> (Erik E. Fair's message of "Thu, 09 Mar 2017 23:22:06 -0800") References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <10791.1489130526@cesium.clock.org> Message-ID: <8660jh8ucg.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> "Erik E. Fair" writes: > The Taylor UUCP is part of pkgsrc (started by NetBSD but supports > many, many Unix system platforms; see pkgsrc.org ) > > The "t" protocol was for use with TCP over the Internet. Right. I tried "t" first, but seismo didn't accept that. "G" works better. From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Fri Mar 10 18:04:49 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 00:04:49 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? In-Reply-To: <20170228193016.75AE940B9@lod.com> References: Message-ID: <22470.1489133089@cesium.clock.org> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Environment_Real-Time Erik From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Mar 10 19:49:19 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 19:49:19 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built Message-ID: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/Cnews/ Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated system? Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's a separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp. You can get it by doing: git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp.git \ --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. Thanks Geoff! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Mar 10 20:29:18 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:29:18 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and mail maps In-Reply-To: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170310102918.GA24692@minnie.tuhs.org> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 07:49:19PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries. A few people have hit me with a clue bat: we probably should be using the comp.mail.maps database format for our uucp/Usenet sites, as then we can feed them through pathalias to get optimal routes. There are a bunch of 1988 map files here: http://utzoo.superglobalmegacorp.com/usenet/news080f1/b101/comp/mail/maps/ and the file format is detailed here: http://ftp.arnes.si/faq/comp/mail/maps/UUCP_map_for_README Question: do we want to keep as much historical information as possible, and just change the links to reflect our topology? Can we add new lines to append the information needed now, e.g. #N seismo, beno, hugo, maui, noress, perry #C Rick Adams #E seismo!postmaster #I simh.tuhs.org:5000; Warren Toomey Will pathalias ignore unrecognised lines? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dugo at xs4all.nl Fri Mar 10 20:49:03 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 11:49:03 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and mail maps In-Reply-To: <20170310102918.GA24692@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170310102918.GA24692@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <0a5f16e38050416414401477aa960679@xs4all.nl> On 2017-03-10 11:29, Warren Toomey wrote: > A few people have hit me with a clue bat: we probably should be using > the > comp.mail.maps database format for our uucp/Usenet sites, as then we > can > feed them through pathalias to get optimal routes. Sure, nothing wrong with a separate free form txt/md file for dibs, sites still under construction etc.. next to a strict one for pathalias use. From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 22:08:09 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:08:09 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <20170309201449.GH2683@mcvoy.com> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> <20170309201449.GH2683@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <7310CDC1-3695-4C82-A637-C76C8AEBBA40@superglobalmegacorp.com> http://archive.is/yzYFj I can still hit the original fine, although I have issues with some blogs as people seem to love to block all of SE Asia. On March 10, 2017 4:14:49 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: >Anyone else having trouble loading this page? Tried with/without the >trailing dot. Connection timed out. Looks like a DNS problem to me. > >> >https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 22:09:28 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:09:28 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> Message-ID: <9FF9A1E6-DEA5-4619-84AE-08811A070A03@superglobalmegacorp.com> 2nd, as it also appears that AOS was the router backbone of the NSFNet once they started to migrate off of the IMPs On March 10, 2017 11:27:40 AM GMT+08:00, Dan Cross wrote: >Wow, this is really cool, Charlie. It puts a lot of stuff in >perspective. > >I wonder if you might add a bit more detail about the BSD ports? That's >what we ran on our RTs; I seem to recall that product was only >available >to educational institutions and was referred to as AOS: "Academic >Operating System." I do recall that it came with NFS, and possibly AFS >version 2? It seemed to be approximately 4.3-Tahoe based. The AFS bit >is >hazy.... > >On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Charles H Sauer < >sauer at technologists.com > wrote: > > >I've refrained from jumping into AIX & RT/PC discussions on TUHS. It >seems more appropriate to summarize AIX history than try to correct or >clarify specifics out of context. > >I wrote about 5 pages, got feedback, revised accordingly, and posted at >https://notes.technologists.co >-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/> >m/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beginning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-ve >rsions/. > >Charlie -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 22:25:25 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:25:25 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <8B3FAE59-6E18-4EDE-B81A-633963D50BD2@superglobalmegacorp.com> I would put some kind of firewall in front of it, If even to restrict source addressed to well known. There is a LOT of people scanning the internet. I also have a publicly available FTP server and I'll see it on lists of known boxes etc. On March 10, 2017 9:49:45 AM GMT+08:00, John Floren wrote: >I've now got it working and it made me think a little. > >In order to do these "serial ports over TCP" things, we basically are >putting login prompts out to the Internet. Is it possible to restrict >things so the only user allowed on ttyN is 'uucp', or should I just >put in iptables rules to only allow traffic from my UUCP peers? > >john > >On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 06:43:07AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >>> More progress. I now have mcsun----seismo----munnari >>> with uucp mail between them all. >> >> Even more progress. I wrote a script to generate the uucp systems, >> and given it a rough test. It's now here: >> >> https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp >> >> and ready for people to download and try things out. I'm happy for >> people to make changes, by adding them in as contributors. >> >> We should add a file with uucp names, owners and connection details. >> I'll do that soon. >> >> Have at it! >> Warren -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 22:25:25 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:25:25 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <8B3FAE59-6E18-4EDE-B81A-633963D50BD2@superglobalmegacorp.com> I would put some kind of firewall in front of it, If even to restrict source addressed to well known. There is a LOT of people scanning the internet. I also have a publicly available FTP server and I'll see it on lists of known boxes etc. On March 10, 2017 9:49:45 AM GMT+08:00, John Floren wrote: >I've now got it working and it made me think a little. > >In order to do these "serial ports over TCP" things, we basically are >putting login prompts out to the Internet. Is it possible to restrict >things so the only user allowed on ttyN is 'uucp', or should I just >put in iptables rules to only allow traffic from my UUCP peers? > >john > >On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 06:43:07AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >>> More progress. I now have mcsun----seismo----munnari >>> with uucp mail between them all. >> >> Even more progress. I wrote a script to generate the uucp systems, >> and given it a rough test. It's now here: >> >> https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp >> >> and ready for people to download and try things out. I'm happy for >> people to make changes, by adding them in as contributors. >> >> We should add a file with uucp names, owners and connection details. >> I'll do that soon. >> >> Have at it! >> Warren -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dugo at xs4all.nl Fri Mar 10 23:13:06 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 14:13:06 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <9FF9A1E6-DEA5-4619-84AE-08811A070A03@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> <9FF9A1E6-DEA5-4619-84AE-08811A070A03@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: <182b5cdae4f0ceb1673f6ea37a08d64e@xs4all.nl> On 2017-03-10 13:09, Jason Stevens wrote: > 2nd, as it also appears that AOS was the router backbone of the NSFNet > once they started to migrate off of the IMPs You are mixing up starwars characters :-) The AOS boxen replaced the Fuzzballs. From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 10 23:15:58 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 21:15:58 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <182b5cdae4f0ceb1673f6ea37a08d64e@xs4all.nl> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> <9FF9A1E6-DEA5-4619-84AE-08811A070A03@superglobalmegacorp.com> <182b5cdae4f0ceb1673f6ea37a08d64e@xs4all.nl> Message-ID: <800A9915-E0E2-4D19-8067-8DCA6A52CCD4@superglobalmegacorp.com> Oops imps, fuzzballs then AOS... That reminds me I wish I had dumped Roms when I had access to a Cisco AGS.. That almost reminds me to ask about the whole "open" Stanford 68000 board that became the Cisco AGS, and SUN 100.. and I think SGi 1000 On March 10, 2017 9:13:06 PM GMT+08:00, Jacob Goense wrote: >On 2017-03-10 13:09, Jason Stevens wrote: >> 2nd, as it also appears that AOS was the router backbone of the >NSFNet >> once they started to migrate off of the IMPs > >You are mixing up starwars characters :-) >The AOS boxen replaced the Fuzzballs. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sat Mar 11 00:05:25 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:05:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history Message-ID: <20170310140525.A704818C0FB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Jason Stevens > it also appears that AOS was the router backbone of the NSFNet once > they started to migrate off of the IMPs Say what? IMPs were only every used in the ARPANET (and networks built by BBN for private clients using that technology). The first routers used in the NSFNET were things called Fuzzballs - PDP-11's running software from Dave Mills, driving 56KB lines. They eventually decided they needed to step up a level, and a consortium involving IBM won, with IBM RT PC's running AIX driving T1 lines. Noel From clemc at ccc.com Sat Mar 11 00:30:38 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:30:38 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] "Open" Stanford University Network System, et al [was RT/PC-centric AIX history] Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Jason Stevens < jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com> wrote: > > That almost reminds me to ask about the whole "open" Stanford 68000 board > that became the Cisco AGS, and SUN 100.. and I think SGi 1000 > ​Jason -- I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It was a different time, different culture, different rules. Note: Please I'm not accusing you of this, but I worry you are getting dangerous close to an error that I see made by a lot of folks that grew in the time of the GPL and the "Open Source Culture." My apologies in advance if you think I'm going a little too far, but I want to make something clear that seems to have been lost in time and culture. I do not want to be see as harassing or "shaming" in anyway way. I want to make a point for everyone since the words we use do matter (and I realize I screw them up myself often enough).. I am fairly certain that the "SUN board" - aka the Stanford University Network 68000 board, like UNIX itself was licensed IP. You are correct that the schematics (like the UNIX sources) were well known at the time and "open" in the sense that all of the licenses had them. It was not hard to find papers with a much of the design described. In fact Andy had worked on a similar set of boards when he was a CMU a few years earlier for what we called the "distributed front-end" project (the earlier version was much weaker and had started as Intel chip of sometime which I have forgotten and switched to the 68000 at some point - Phil Karn might remember and even have a copy, I think my copy has been lost to time). Anyway, to build and sell a Multibus board based on Andy's design that he did at Stanford as a grad student, you needed a license from Stanford. You are correct a lot of firms, particularly Cisco, later VLSI Technology - ney Sun Micro Systems, Imagen, and host of took out licenses to build that board. Thus a lot of companies built "JAWS" (just another workstation - so called "3M systems" with a disk), or sometimes diskless terminals as Andy had imagined it in his papers, or purpose built boxes such the AGS router and the Imagen printers. But I flinch a little when I see people call the "SUN" an "open" design. It was "well know" but it was not what we might call "Free and Open" today. I admit you just said "open" in your reply to Charlie and may have meant something different; but so many people today leave the "free" off when they say "open." *i.e.* People often incorrect deny that Unix was open as it actually always was from the beginning -- if you had a license, it just was not "free" to get same. My point is that I believe a license for the "SUN" was from Stanford was not "free" either. Same with the the "MIPS" chip technology of a few years later also from Stanford. So, I would have been happier if you had said something that had included the words "licensed from Stanford." Anyway, Research Universities, such as MIT, Stanford and frankly my own CMU, have long been known for charging for licenses (not always mind you). In fact, I laud my other institution, because I have always said the real father of "free and open source" is my old thesis advisor, the late Don Pederson. In the late 1960s, he founded the UCB EE "Industrial Liaison Program" which was the auspicious institution that original "BSD" tape would be released years later. When he first released the first version of "Simulation Program for Integrate Circuit Evaluation" - aka SPICE, in approx 67 time frame "dop" said: *"I always have given away our work. It means we get to go in the back door and talk to the engineers. My colleagues at some of the other places license there work and they have go in the front door like any other salesman."* ​When the CS group was added to EE a few years later, their was history, mechanism, etc. Berkeley had been release source code for a lots of different project. The Berkeley Software Distribution for Unix V6 was just the the drop for UNIX - who knew at the time the life it wold spawn (although I note SPICE is still being used, so even with UNIX's success, SPICE still hold the record for the "longest" used" BSD release code). Anyway, " do ​p" used to love to remind the students of that mantra. And he came up with it 20-25 years before Eric Raymond ever wrote his book and started equating "open" with "Stallmanism." ;-) I hope have a great one, and I hope I did not offend.​ ​ Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brad at anduin.eldar.org Sat Mar 11 00:28:46 2017 From: brad at anduin.eldar.org (Brad Spencer) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 09:28:46 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: (message from Lyndon Nerenberg on Thu, 9 Mar 2017 18:23:37 -0800) Message-ID: Lyndon Nerenberg writes: > So if we are going to talk UUCP, how can we not bring up the protocol, and it's beloved behaviour, in certain implementations. > > 'g' protocol was what everyone ran. 64 byte packets, in a three packet window. By default. But 'g' could really race along, if provoked. The window could slide up to seven! Unless you were running Xenix, where that provoked a core dump. On most systems, increasing the window size meant binary patching uucico. > > I fuzzily remember 'g' implementations that could handle packets up to 256 bytes, but I can't remember now if the basic (pre-HDB) UUCP could deal with that. > > HDB cleaned up a lot of things. While complicating the configuration files to no end. > > In parallel to all this, Rick Adams was pounding the living daylights out of the BSD UUCP code. That which ran on seismo. Then uunet. > > -- uunet!ncc!lyndon (so many uucp path sigs ...) Back a long time ago, I ran OS/9 on a 6809E Tandy Color Computer 3. The relationship to Unix is that it was obviously inspired by it, especially Vx where x <= 6 [or perhaps 4 or 5, the block diagrams describing OS/9 could have described the older Unix systems ]. One of the items I worked on quite extensively was the UUCP implementation. I didn't write the original C code reimplementation that it used, but modified it quite a bit and one of the items I added to it was the ability of the g protocol to handle a bigger packet window and probably to handle bigger packets. At the time I dialed it into UUNET once or twice a day for email and some very small amount of Usenet news. This all would have been in the 1992 - 1994 time frame. So, ya, the UUCP g protocol could be fiddled with somewhat and it would likely work. -- Brad Spencer - brad at anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS http://anduin.eldar.org - & - http://anduin.ipv6.eldar.org [IPv6 only] From dave at horsfall.org Sat Mar 11 01:00:09 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 02:00:09 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: <10791.1489130526@cesium.clock.org> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <10791.1489130526@cesium.clock.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Mar 2017, Erik E. Fair wrote: > The Taylor UUCP is part of pkgsrc (started by NetBSD but supports many, > many Unix system platforms; see pkgsrc.org ): > > http://cdn.netbsd.org/pub/pkgsrc/current/pkgsrc/net/uucp/README.html FreeBSD also has Taylor UUCP; /usr/ports/net/freebsd-uucp: This is a port of the Taylor UUCP Unix-to-Unix Copy Program suite of utilities. This source was formerly a part of the FreeBSD base system, and this package is based on the final version of that source code, so it includes all previous FreeBSD customizations. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Sat Mar 11 01:34:35 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 02:34:35 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <7310CDC1-3695-4C82-A637-C76C8AEBBA40@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <06D4621236AA4E76A87D603786775B68@studyvista> <20170309201449.GH2683@mcvoy.com> <7310CDC1-3695-4C82-A637-C76C8AEBBA40@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: On March 10, 2017 4:14:49 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: > Anyone else having trouble loading this page? Tried with/without the > trailing dot. Connection timed out. Looks like a DNS problem to me. > https://notes.technologists.com/notes/2017/03/08/lets-start-at-the-very-beg > inning-801-romp-rtpc-aix-versions/. Works OK here from Australia. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Sat Mar 11 01:45:14 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 07:45:14 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and mail maps In-Reply-To: <20170310102918.GA24692@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <6652.1489160714@cesium.clock.org> Warren, The UUCP map data from comp.mail.maps is a two level format: one for pathalias(1) and the rest for various programs. Pathalias will ignore any line beginning in '#' - those are comments to it. Some of those comments have a format specification which other programs can effectively grep for and parse. So, yes, you can add or modify any line beginning in '#' - pathalias won't care. Given the Google archive of comp.mail.maps, you can pick your snapshot of the state of the UUCP network. The last one seems to be 1998. Erik From john at jfloren.net Sat Mar 11 03:50:14 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 10:50:14 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <8B3FAE59-6E18-4EDE-B81A-633963D50BD2@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <8B3FAE59-6E18-4EDE-B81A-633963D50BD2@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 5:25 AM, Jason Stevens wrote: > I would put some kind of firewall in front of it, If even to restrict source > addressed to well known. There is a LOT of people scanning the internet. I > also have a publicly available FTP server and I'll see it on lists of known > boxes etc. > That's the plan. I now have lanl-a and unmvax up and talking to each other. If anyone would like to set up a bi-directional connection with lanl-a, contact me off-list and I'll put you in my firewall / add a serial connection to you. I'll try to get C-News going soon too. john From john at jfloren.net Sat Mar 11 03:52:09 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 10:52:09 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Thanks Warren and Geoff, Two problems: 1. 403 forbidden on that tarball 2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? Thanks! John On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: > OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated > systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/Cnews/ > > Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated system? > > Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's a > separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp. You can get it > by doing: > > git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp.git \ > --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch > > Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll > leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. > > Thanks Geoff! > Warren From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 11 06:07:06 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 15:07:06 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <20170310140525.A704818C0FB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170310140525.A704818C0FB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <002401d299d9$e52b2a50$af817ef0$@ronnatalie.com> Well, the other big network that used imps was the MILNET. I had the dubious distinction of having the only router (other than the "mail bridges") that was on the MILNET after they split the ARPANET. And indeed, the NSA, BRL, and a few others had IMP based systems (we even had TACs at BRL). > The first routers used in the NSFNET were things called Fuzzballs - PDP-11's running software from Dave Mills, driving 56KB lines. Dave was certainly PI on that project, but a lot of the work was done by Mike Petry and Louis Mamakos at the Unviersity of Maryland. Cornell (Scott Brim) had the operational responsibility to keep the initial NSFNet backbone going > They eventually decided they needed to step up a level, and a consortium involving IBM won, with IBM RT PC's running AIX driving T1 lines. MERIT was the prime contracator. They indeed were backed by IBM (Jakob Recktor primarily). In fact, the computers didn't drive the T1 lines directly. Fearing their commo cards weren't fast enough to drive a T1 at full speed, they used muxes to break the T1 into 500K lines and set up some virtual circuits to provide a bit more interesting networking technogy. I was actually on the committee that evaluated those bids. I just found all that stuff filed away when I moved recently. There were six proposals considered. Of the six, three were thought to be actually implementable: UCAR (with BBN), MERIT (with IBM), and NyserNet (Cisco? I'm having a hard time remembering). There were also three other proposals including one from DEC which really wasn't all that well thought out (I don't recall the other two). The pane was me, Jake Fienler (SRI NIC), Jon Postel, and a few others. My old boss from BRL, Steve Wulff, was the NSF honcho in charge. He went on to Cisco after his stint at NSF. I can remember that after the technical eval, we looked at the bid prices. If I remember it was $45MM for Nyser, $30MM for UCAR, and $15MM for Merit. From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 11 06:10:33 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 15:10:33 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history In-Reply-To: <002401d299d9$e52b2a50$af817ef0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170310140525.A704818C0FB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <002401d299d9$e52b2a50$af817ef0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <002601d299da$60479570$20d6c050$@ronnatalie.com> Some more came back to me. It was Hans Werner-Braun at Merit and it wasn't AIX, it was AOS (essentially, an educational only 4BSD variant for the RS/6000). -Ron From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 11 06:34:24 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 15:34:24 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> > 'g' protocol was what everyone ran. 64 byte packets, in a three packet window. By default. But 'g' could really race along, if provoked. The window could slide up to seven! Unless you were running Xenix, where > that provoked a core dump. On most systems, increasing the window size meant binary patching uucico. Anybody remember the Telebit trailblazer modems that snooped on the g protocol going through them? From downing.nick at gmail.com Sat Mar 11 07:14:12 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 08:14:12 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: To get files into a 4.3BSD SIMH system the easiest way is with a Python script that blockifies the file by outputting a 32 bits length (say 0x400), then that many bytes, then the length again, and repeat for next block until done. There is also a Perl version floating around which is popular for canned SIMH scripts/packages. Then you mount this file on tm0 (if I recall) in SIMH and then in the emulated system it appears at /dev/mt0. I normally use tar in conjunction but it's not necessary (note star is a highly compatible tar implementation, I think it is by Joerg from this list, although I use actual 4.3BSD tar compiled for Linux and I think gnu tar also works mostly). I can send the details later, I am using phone atm. Nick On Mar 11, 2017 4:52 AM, "John Floren" wrote: > Thanks Warren and Geoff, > > Two problems: > > 1. 403 forbidden on that tarball > > 2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? > > Thanks! > > John > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: > > OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated > > systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/Cnews/ > > > > Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated > system? > > > > Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's a > > separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp. You can get > it > > by doing: > > > > git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp.git \ > > --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch > > > > Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll > > leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. > > > > Thanks Geoff! > > Warren > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Sat Mar 11 07:30:06 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:30:06 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: This method seems unnecessarily complex. If you have libpcap networking, attach xu (4.3bsd de0) to your ethernet interface and you can bring it up (ifconfig de0) and talk to any machine on the local network except the one hosting the SIMH instance. If you set up SIMH tap networking you can talk to the hosting machine ( https://github.com/simh/simh/blob/master/0readme_ethernet.txt). If you set up your router (route add default x.x.x.x 1) you can talk to any host on the internet numerically. Now you can get files via ftp, rcp, etc. You could also attach a tar file as any block device - RQ, RL, whatever - and have tar read directly from the block device, which does not require any sort of padding or modification of the original file. I believe that 4.3's tar will understand most tar files, but if you have problems you can always create (or recreate) a tar file using the "o" option to output as an old style archive. -Henry On 10 March 2017 at 16:14, Nick Downing wrote: > To get files into a 4.3BSD SIMH system the easiest way is with a Python > script that blockifies the file by outputting a 32 bits length (say 0x400), > then that many bytes, then the length again, and repeat for next block > until done. There is also a Perl version floating around which is popular > for canned SIMH scripts/packages. Then you mount this file on tm0 (if I > recall) in SIMH and then in the emulated system it appears at /dev/mt0. I > normally use tar in conjunction but it's not necessary (note star is a > highly compatible tar implementation, I think it is by Joerg from this > list, although I use actual 4.3BSD tar compiled for Linux and I think gnu > tar also works mostly). I can send the details later, I am using phone atm. > Nick > > On Mar 11, 2017 4:52 AM, "John Floren" wrote: > >> Thanks Warren and Geoff, >> >> Two problems: >> >> 1. 403 forbidden on that tarball >> >> 2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? >> >> Thanks! >> >> John >> >> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: >> > OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated >> > systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/Cnews/ >> > >> > Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated >> system? >> > >> > Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's a >> > separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp. You can get >> it >> > by doing: >> > >> > git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp.git \ >> > --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch >> > >> > Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll >> > leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. >> > >> > Thanks Geoff! >> > Warren >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 11 07:34:50 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 07:34:50 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170310213450.GA6781@minnie.tuhs.org> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:52:09AM -0700, John Floren wrote: > Thanks Warren and Geoff, > > Two problems: > 1. 403 forbidden on that tarball > 2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? My bad, permissions fixed. Assuming you have downloaded the git repository and you have a directory you want converted into a tarball to feed into the site5 system: $ bsdtar cf - | ./mktape /dev/stdin > site5.tap Then inside the simulated system # mt rew # tar vxf /dev/rmt12 Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 11 07:38:00 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 07:38:00 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: <8B3FAE59-6E18-4EDE-B81A-633963D50BD2@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <8B3FAE59-6E18-4EDE-B81A-633963D50BD2@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: <20170310213800.GB6781@minnie.tuhs.org> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 08:25:25PM +0800, Jason Stevens wrote: > I've now got it working and it made me think a little. > In order to do these "serial ports over TCP" things, we basically are > putting login prompts out to the Internet. Is it possible to restrict > things so the only user allowed on ttyN is 'uucp', or should I just > put in iptables rules to only allow traffic from my UUCP peers? > john Use the 4.3BSD branch. In these systems, I've set the serial ports as insecure in /etc/ttys, so people can't login as root. Then, remove all users from the password file (with vipw) except root and uucp. Or, keep one non-root user for you to login as. If you leave vax780 running in 'screen', you can still login as root there. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From schily at schily.net Fri Mar 10 19:57:56 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 10:57:56 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> Message-ID: <58c278a4.ewB208CtdygoBGPV%schily@schily.net> Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > > On Mar 9, 2017, at 7:45 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > > > > It seems that there was a whole slew of protocols at one time. > > g: the original > G: a later (HDB?) SVRx version that did 256 byte packets and a seven packet window > f: X.25 optimized printable-characters-only > x: similar to above? > z: Doug Evans wrote this as an alternative to 'f' back when 8-bit paths were not everywhere yet. > i: 'internet' stream the data. > > g, G, and f, we can get definitions for easily enough I think. For 'z' I can track down Doug, but Taylor UUCP should have the details. I have: g: The original protocol from the 1970s G: enhanced g-protocol introduced by Svr4 d: Protocol for DataKit connections. e: Protocol for TCP links from HDB UUCP, similar to t-protocol. BSD UUCP used an implementation from Arne Ludwig. f: Seven Bit protocol with checksums on the entire file at a time No protocol flow control, but XON/XOFF It only uses the characters between \040 and \176 (' '..'~') Written by Piet Beertema, CWI, Amsterdam, Sep 1984 Modified for X.25 by Robert Elz, Melbourne Univ, Mar 1985 F: flow control protocol similar to f-protocol. Written by Piet Beertema, CWI, Amsterdam, Sep 1984 Modified for X.25 by Robert Elz, Melbourne Univ, Mar 1985 Probably created from f-protocol by Carsten Borman TU-Berlin or by me (Jörg Schilling) h: A protocol similar to the t-protocol with no error checking. Apparently used for HST modems. s: High 's'peed protocol based on the g-protocol. Variable block sizes 32..4096 bytes, up to 7 windows Written by me (Jörg Schilling) t: Protocol for TCP links from BSD Most likely from Rick Adams x: Protocol for X.25 links Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From krewat at kilonet.net Sat Mar 11 07:42:16 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:42:16 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <9f7848d6-7c35-99b4-b393-9ccc3cbbd37c@kilonet.net> Absolutely! We were talking about that earlier in the list, maybe not this subject line though. On 3/10/2017 3:34 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: >> 'g' protocol was what everyone ran. 64 byte packets, in a three packet > window. By default. But 'g' could really race along, if provoked. The > window could slide up to seven! Unless you were running Xenix, where >> that provoked a core dump. On most systems, increasing the window size > meant binary patching uucico. > > Anybody remember the Telebit trailblazer modems that snooped on the g > protocol going through them? > > > From downing.nick at gmail.com Sat Mar 11 07:51:33 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 08:51:33 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: In the dark mists of time I did have libpcap going and a 2.11BSD system networked, but I haven't gotten around to figuring out how to make that happen again. For my current experiments networking is overkill, I just want a simple way to copy a file between host and target. Indeed a lot of simulators provide just such a program, although I guess that's harder in SIMH because of its large scope. The block device method might be better though. I was unfamiliar with how disklabels and how geometry worked in BSD, so I wasn't too sure if this would work. It would be great if someone could try it. In the meantime my method is tested and known to work, for bidirectional transfer. I'm at my PC now so I'm attaching both the blocking script (file2mt.py) and the deblocking script (mt2file.py). I have some simh scripts for bringing up a 4.3BSD system but unfortunately they use mkdisttap.pl (similar to file2mt.py) so I don't have a working example of file2mt.py that I can just paste in, but I am happy to provide more specific instructions if what I've posted already hasn't been enough. cheers, Nick On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Henry Bent wrote: > This method seems unnecessarily complex. If you have libpcap networking, > attach xu (4.3bsd de0) to your ethernet interface and you can bring it up > (ifconfig de0) and talk to any machine on the local network except the one > hosting the SIMH instance. If you set up SIMH tap networking you can talk to > the hosting machine > (https://github.com/simh/simh/blob/master/0readme_ethernet.txt). If you set > up your router (route add default x.x.x.x 1) you can talk to any host on the > internet numerically. Now you can get files via ftp, rcp, etc. > > You could also attach a tar file as any block device - RQ, RL, whatever - > and have tar read directly from the block device, which does not require any > sort of padding or modification of the original file. > > I believe that 4.3's tar will understand most tar files, but if you have > problems you can always create (or recreate) a tar file using the "o" option > to output as an old style archive. > > -Henry > > On 10 March 2017 at 16:14, Nick Downing wrote: >> >> To get files into a 4.3BSD SIMH system the easiest way is with a Python >> script that blockifies the file by outputting a 32 bits length (say 0x400), >> then that many bytes, then the length again, and repeat for next block until >> done. There is also a Perl version floating around which is popular for >> canned SIMH scripts/packages. Then you mount this file on tm0 (if I recall) >> in SIMH and then in the emulated system it appears at /dev/mt0. I normally >> use tar in conjunction but it's not necessary (note star is a highly >> compatible tar implementation, I think it is by Joerg from this list, >> although I use actual 4.3BSD tar compiled for Linux and I think gnu tar also >> works mostly). I can send the details later, I am using phone atm. >> Nick >> >> On Mar 11, 2017 4:52 AM, "John Floren" wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Warren and Geoff, >>> >>> Two problems: >>> >>> 1. 403 forbidden on that tarball >>> >>> 2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> John >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: >>> > OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated >>> > systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/Cnews/ >>> > >>> > Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated >>> > system? >>> > >>> > Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's a >>> > separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp. You can get >>> > it >>> > by doing: >>> > >>> > git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp.git \ >>> > --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch >>> > >>> > Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll >>> > leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. >>> > >>> > Thanks Geoff! >>> > Warren > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: file2mt.py Type: text/x-python Size: 487 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mt2file.py Type: text/x-python Size: 371 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lyndon at orthanc.ca Sat Mar 11 08:10:09 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 14:10:09 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: > On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > > Anybody remember the Telebit trailblazer modems that snooped on the g > protocol going through them? The company I was at was one of the early resellers of the Trailblazer. I have fond memories of hauling one out for an on-site demo for a company running some flavour of 3B2. We hooked it up to a serial port, cu-ed out to our office server, and then I did a simple cat of a large text file to show off the throughput. While the sysadmins drooled, a growing cohort of office workers started piling up outside the office door asking if the server was down. The serial port interrupt load was enough to take out all the rest of the terminals in the office ;-) --lyndon (We didn't get the sale. And AT&T stopped referring their customers to us.) From corey at lod.com Sat Mar 11 08:26:18 2017 From: corey at lod.com (Corey Lindsly) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 14:26:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20170310222618.D374940B9@lod.com> > The company I was at was one of the early resellers of the Trailblazer. = > I have fond memories of hauling one out for an on-site demo for a = > company running some flavour of 3B2. We hooked it up to a serial port, = > cu-ed out to our office server, and then I did a simple cat of a large = > text file to show off the throughput. Anyone remember using cu ~%put / ~%take commands to transfer files across dial-up lines on systems that didn't speak uucp? No error correction, just blast those bytes. Binary files through an acoustic coupler modem were always a particularly tricky proposition. Fun times. --corey From john at jfloren.net Sat Mar 11 08:48:13 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 15:48:13 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: <20170310213450.GA6781@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170310213450.GA6781@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Thanks... I guess I could use some directions on how to get it set up, I've edited the cnews config files to what I think is correct, but if I postnews, then do newsrun and sendbatches and uucico, I don't see anything on the other end. john On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:52:09AM -0700, John Floren wrote: >> Thanks Warren and Geoff, >> >> Two problems: >> 1. 403 forbidden on that tarball >> 2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? > > My bad, permissions fixed. Assuming you have downloaded the git repository > and you have a directory you want converted into a tarball to feed into > the site5 system: > > $ bsdtar cf - | ./mktape /dev/stdin > site5.tap > > Then inside the simulated system > > # mt rew > # tar vxf /dev/rmt12 > > Cheers, Warren From pechter at gmail.com Sat Mar 11 09:09:28 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 18:09:28 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] uucp setup Message-ID: One note for those who've been away from 4.x for a while... If you're using a console window for editing and you just wonder why the full screen of the VT100 doesn't show up -- it's because the getty is set down at 1200 baud for the good old LA120 DECwriter III. Set /etc/ttys to 18console or 12console and it's expects 9600baud and then vi will let you use full screen to edit. Been a while since I ran a fake Vax under Unix. Bill From mah at mhorton.net Sat Mar 11 10:05:56 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:05:56 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code In-Reply-To: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Where can I find source code for various versions of netnews? In particular I'm looking for B news 2.10.1. A historian is trying to track down where the ">" was first used in quoting news or email. It's not in 2.10 (I do have that source code) but I suspect it's in 2.10.1. If anyone recalls where this originated, please let me know. Thanks! Mary Ann From mah at mhorton.net Sat Mar 11 10:14:29 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:14:29 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] UUCP: working systems, come and get them In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307090908.GA9793@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170307204307.GA23160@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308092052.GA13593@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170308221645.GA10033@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <027b8c3a2b930b0fb649c5ea1c43cb64@mhorton.net> Please save cbosgd for me. It may be awhile before I get around to doing anything with it. There was never a cbosgd!mah, but now I have a shot at it :) Mary Ann On 2017-03-08 14:31, Dave Horsfall wrote: > I'm surprised no-one's taken decvax, ihnp4, cbosgd... > > ...!utzoo!dave[.UUCP] one day... From lm at mcvoy.com Sat Mar 11 10:15:14 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 16:15:14 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170311001514.GE30430@mcvoy.com> Wouldn't this have happened first in email, like Mail or mailx? Hard to say, I'd guess sometime in the 1980's? On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 04:05:56PM -0800, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > Where can I find source code for various versions of netnews? > > In particular I'm looking for B news 2.10.1. > > A historian is trying to track down where the ">" was first used in quoting > news or email. It's not in 2.10 (I do have that source code) but I suspect > it's in 2.10.1. > > If anyone recalls where this originated, please let me know. > > Thanks! > > Mary Ann -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 11 13:01:51 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 13:01:51 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170311030151.GB29281@minnie.tuhs.org> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 04:05:56PM -0800, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > Where can I find source code for various versions of netnews? > In particular I'm looking for B news 2.10.1. 2.10.3 is at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/News/bnews.tar.gz Looks like 2.10.1 is at http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=2.9BSD/usr/contrib/news/ Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 11 13:08:19 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 13:08:19 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Move the uucp/news stuff off-list? Message-ID: <20170311030819.GA30550@minnie.tuhs.org> All, there might be a flurry of e-mails as the uucp/news stuff gets set up. I think we should move the actual setup messages off-list and keep TUHS for anecdotes & questions about the old systems. Sound OK? If so, I can set up another list. I noticed that seismo is not as well connected (historically) as decvax, so I've turned seismo into decvax, and I now have three systems on three physically different boxes: munnari ----------- decvax ---------- inhp4 at home simh.tuhs.org minnie.tuhs.org behind NAT 5000 5000 I'm happy to pass either decvax or inhp4 onto someone if someone else really wants one of them. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 11 13:09:53 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 19:09:53 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Move the uucp/news stuff off-list? In-Reply-To: <20170311030819.GA30550@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170311030819.GA30550@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1489201793.3331826.907670648.5A456765@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017, at 19:08, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, there might be a flurry of e-mails as the uucp/news stuff gets > set up. I think we should move the actual setup messages off-list and > keep TUHS for anecdotes & questions about the old systems. Sound OK? > If so, I can set up another list. > > I noticed that seismo is not as well connected (historically) as decvax, > so I've turned seismo into decvax, and I now have three systems on three > physically different boxes: > > munnari ----------- decvax ---------- inhp4 > at home simh.tuhs.org minnie.tuhs.org > behind NAT 5000 5000 > > I'm happy to pass either decvax or inhp4 onto someone if someone > else really wants one of them. > > Cheers, Warren > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) I vote for a separate list. -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Sat Mar 11 13:13:54 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 22:13:54 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code Message-ID: <201703110313.v2B3Ds0q017958@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > Wouldn't [> in quoted mail] have happened first in email, like Mail or mailx? Mailx doesn't do it now, so it probably didn't do it then. doug From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 11 14:09:17 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:09:17 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] "Open" Stanford University Network System, et al [was RT/PC-centric AIX history] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Totally not offended as I only ask as I know someone here will know more than I do, and sadly the terms for so many things drift, or people like to rebrand things old as new, when it isn't or drift like how openvms was anything but open. Needless to say the licensing is why there never was any rise of this board being made in Taiwan, and why m68k Minix wasn't ubiquitous. I've read that Cisco had basically stolen the IP and was forced to pay for it, plus donate lots of free routers and support. As we are on the path of a old uucp, I was looking through dynamips, a Cisco MIPS and PowerPC emulator, just wondering out loud about the start, and how it seems do much of that known days is like UNIX source, known by the knowing. I'm very thankful for the list and authoritive answers! I'm just glad my old playing with simh+ 4.3/4.3 BSD is going somewhere! On March 10, 2017 10:30:38 PM GMT+08:00, Clem Cole wrote: > > >On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Jason Stevens < >jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com >> >wrote: > > > >That almost reminds me to ask about the whole "open" Stanford 68000 >board that became the Cisco AGS, and SUN 100.. and I think SGi 1000 > > >​Jason -- I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It was a >different >time, different culture, different rules. Note: Please I'm not >accusing >you of this, but I worry you are getting dangerous close to an error >that I see made by a lot of folks that grew in the time of the GPL and >the "Open Source Culture." My apologies in advance if you think I'm >going a little too far, but I want to make something clear that seems >to >have been lost in time and culture. I do not want to be see as >harassing or "shaming" in anyway way. I want to make a point for >everyone since the words we use do matter (and I realize I screw them >up >myself often enough).. > > > > > > >I am fairly certain that the "SUN board" - aka the Stanford University >Network 68000 board, like UNIX itself was licensed IP. You are >correct >that the schematics (like the UNIX sources) were well known at the time >and "open" in the sense that all of the licenses had them. It was not >hard to find papers with a much of the design described. In fact Andy >had worked on a similar set of boards when he was a CMU a few years >earlier for what we called the "distributed front-end" project (the >earlier version was much weaker and had started as Intel chip of >sometime which I have forgotten and switched to the 68000 at some point >- Phil Karn might remember and even have a copy, I think my copy has >been lost to time). > > > >Anyway, to build and sell a Multibus board based on Andy's design that >he did at Stanford as a grad student, you needed a license from >Stanford. You are correct a lot of firms, particularly Cisco, later >VLSI Technology - ney Sun Micro Systems, Imagen, and host of took out >licenses to build that board. Thus a lot of companies built "JAWS" >(just another workstation - so called "3M systems" with a disk), or >sometimes diskless terminals as Andy had imagined it in his papers, or >purpose built boxes such the AGS router and the Imagen printers. > > >But I flinch a little when I see people call the "SUN" an "open" >design. >It was "well know" but it was not what we might call "Free and Open" >today. > > >I admit you just said "open" in your reply to Charlie and may have >meant >something different; but so many people today leave the "free" off when >they say "open." i.e. People often incorrect deny that Unix was open >as it actually always was from the beginning -- if you had a license, >it >just was not "free" to get same. My point is that I believe a license >for the "SUN" was from Stanford was not "free" either. Same with the >the "MIPS" chip technology of a few years later also from Stanford. > > >So, I would have been happier if you had said something that had >included the words "licensed from Stanford." > > > > >Anyway, Research Universities, such as MIT, Stanford and frankly my own >CMU, have long been known for charging for licenses (not always mind >you). In fact, I laud my other institution, because I have always >said >the real father of "free and open source" is my old thesis advisor, the >late Don Pederson. In the late 1960s, he founded the UCB EE >"Industrial Liaison Program" which was the auspicious institution that >original "BSD" tape would be released years later. When he first >released the first version of "Simulation Program for Integrate Circuit >Evaluation" - aka SPICE, in approx 67 time frame "dop" said: > > > >"I always have given away our work. It means we get to go in the back >door and talk to the engineers. My colleagues at some of the other >places license there work and they have go in the front door like any >other salesman." > > > >​When the CS group was added to EE a few years later, their was >history, >mechanism, etc. Berkeley had been release source code for a lots of >different project. The Berkeley Software Distribution for Unix V6 was >just the the drop for UNIX - who knew at the time the life it wold >spawn >(although I note SPICE is still being used, so even with UNIX's >success, >SPICE still hold the record for the "longest" used" BSD release code). >Anyway, " >do >​p" used to love to remind the students of that mantra. And he came >up >with it 20-25 years before Eric Raymond ever wrote his book and started >equating "open" with "Stallmanism." ;-) > >I hope have a great one, and I hope I did not offend.​ >​ > >Clem -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mah at mhorton.net Sat Mar 11 12:21:30 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 18:21:30 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code In-Reply-To: <20170311001514.GE30430@mcvoy.com> References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170311001514.GE30430@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: So you'd think, but it appears it came first in netnews. Mail/mailx has ~m which indents with a tab, not a ">". Most likely in summer of 1983, between 2.10 and 2.10.1. On 03/10/2017 04:15 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > Wouldn't this have happened first in email, like Mail or mailx? > Hard to say, I'd guess sometime in the 1980's? > > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 04:05:56PM -0800, Mary Ann Horton wrote: >> Where can I find source code for various versions of netnews? >> >> In particular I'm looking for B news 2.10.1. >> >> A historian is trying to track down where the ">" was first used in quoting >> news or email. It's not in 2.10 (I do have that source code) but I suspect >> it's in 2.10.1. >> >> If anyone recalls where this originated, please let me know. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Mary Ann From crossd at gmail.com Sat Mar 11 14:20:24 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 23:20:24 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170311001514.GE30430@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > So you'd think, but it appears it came first in netnews. Mail/mailx has ~m > which indents with a tab, not a ">". Most likely in summer of 1983, > between 2.10 and 2.10.1. Wasn't it possible to customize this in .mailrc? Something like, `set indentprefix="> "`? I'm afraid that doesn't answer the question, but I'm not sure mailx/Mail as the vector is unreasonable. Is it possible someone coming from the ARPAnet mailing list world found Unix and brought the practice in? I'm curious what the standard was on ITS or TOPS-20, for instance. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 11 14:57:57 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:57:57 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: This is what I've been using for years... http://gunkies.org/wiki/Mkdisttap.pl I've been keeping interesting source code tapes here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/Source%20Code/ And various binaries I've built under simh: 4.2 https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/4.2%20BSD/ 4.3 https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/4.3%20BSD/ 4.3 UWisc https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/4.3%20BSD%20Uwisc/ On March 11, 2017 5:14:12 AM GMT+08:00, Nick Downing wrote: >To get files into a 4.3BSD SIMH system the easiest way is with a Python >script that blockifies the file by outputting a 32 bits length (say >0x400), then that many bytes, then the length again, and repeat for >next >block until done. There is also a Perl version floating around which is >popular for canned SIMH scripts/packages. Then you mount this file on >tm0 (if I recall) in SIMH and then in the emulated system it appears at >/dev/mt0. I normally use tar in conjunction but it's not necessary >(note >star is a highly compatible tar implementation, I think it is by Joerg >from this list, although I use actual 4.3BSD tar compiled for Linux and >I think gnu tar also works mostly). I can send the details later, I am >using phone atm. >Nick > >On Mar 11, 2017 4:52 AM, "John Floren" < john at jfloren.net > > wrote: > > >Thanks Warren and Geoff, > >Two problems: > >1. 403 forbidden on that tarball > >2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? > >Thanks! > >John > >On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Warren Toomey < wkt at tuhs.org > > wrote: >> OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated >> systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/ > Cnews/ >> >> Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated >system? >> >> Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's >a >> separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/ > 4bsd-uucp. You can get it >> by doing: >> >> git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/ > 4bsd-uucp.git \ >> --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch >> >> Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll >> leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. >> >> Thanks Geoff! >> Warren -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 11 14:57:57 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:57:57 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] C-news is built In-Reply-To: References: <20170310094919.GA22414@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: This is what I've been using for years... http://gunkies.org/wiki/Mkdisttap.pl I've been keeping interesting source code tapes here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/Source%20Code/ And various binaries I've built under simh: 4.2 https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/4.2%20BSD/ 4.3 https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/4.3%20BSD/ 4.3 UWisc https://sourceforge.net/projects/bsd42/files/Package%20Tapes/4.3%20BSD%20Uwisc/ On March 11, 2017 5:14:12 AM GMT+08:00, Nick Downing wrote: >To get files into a 4.3BSD SIMH system the easiest way is with a Python >script that blockifies the file by outputting a 32 bits length (say >0x400), then that many bytes, then the length again, and repeat for >next >block until done. There is also a Perl version floating around which is >popular for canned SIMH scripts/packages. Then you mount this file on >tm0 (if I recall) in SIMH and then in the emulated system it appears at >/dev/mt0. I normally use tar in conjunction but it's not necessary >(note >star is a highly compatible tar implementation, I think it is by Joerg >from this list, although I use actual 4.3BSD tar compiled for Linux and >I think gnu tar also works mostly). I can send the details later, I am >using phone atm. >Nick > >On Mar 11, 2017 4:52 AM, "John Floren" < john at jfloren.net > > wrote: > > >Thanks Warren and Geoff, > >Two problems: > >1. 403 forbidden on that tarball > >2. What's the best way to get these files into a running 4.3 system? > >Thanks! > >John > >On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:49 AM, Warren Toomey < wkt at tuhs.org > > wrote: >> OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated >> systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/ > Cnews/ >> >> Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated >system? >> >> Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's >a >> separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/ > 4bsd-uucp. You can get it >> by doing: >> >> git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/ > 4bsd-uucp.git \ >> --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch >> >> Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll >> leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. >> >> Thanks Geoff! >> Warren -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 11 15:29:26 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 13:29:26 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD In-Reply-To: References: <20170307070941.GA2012@minnie.tuhs.org> <58c07fb8.F7Cd/seulkX9W1t/%schily@schily.net> <1489015105.2992185.905166496.635E712B@webmail.messagingengine.com> <3C4A1369-67FE-48C8-82B5-369DCB300AA3@gewt.net> Message-ID: VMWare can do the standard ‘ide’/WD-1003 type interface, you either have to edit the VMX/master VMDK, or set the right ‘OS’ type during install. Try MS-DOS or ‘Legacy OS/2’. >From my old notes: First, edit the .vmdk file.  You are looking for the line: ddb.adapterType = “buslogic” And you change the buslogic to ide like this: # Extent description RW 16777216 VMFS “UnixWare 7.1.1-flat.vmdk” # The Disk Data Base #DDB ddb.adapterType = “ide” ddb.geometry.cylinders = “1044” ddb.geometry.heads = “255” ddb.geometry.sectors = “63” ddb.longContentID = “8f535bb60df8d73a86c24853fffffff The next thing is to alter the vmx file.  By default the hard disk will be on scsi0 and you’ll see something like this: scsi0.present = “TRUE” scsi0:0.deviceType = “scsi-hardDisk” scsi0:0.fileName = “UnixWare 7.1.1.vmdk” scsi0:0.present = “TRUE” And what we do is rename the scsi0:0 to ide0:0 ide0:0.present = “TRUE” ide0:0.deviceType = “disk” ide0:0.fileName = “UnixWare 7.1.1.vmdk” scsi0:0.present = “TRUE” And you should be good to go.  The other (much easier) alternative is to try to use the legacy OS/2 profile as it’ll install an IDE disk by default. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Arthur Krewat Sent: Thursday, 9 March 2017 10:52 PM To: Cory Smelosky Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD If I could get the Consensys running that I used to have that would be great, it would be "authentic" to me at least. However, it relies on either an Adaptec 1540 SCSI controller, or the standard ISA WD MFM/RLL controller (and maybe ESDI), which my VMware environments can't support. I'm reluctant to go into running yet another emulator anywhere on my home office network, so it might be Unixware 2.1 which I managed to get running in VMware. On 3/8/2017 7:22 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Which SVR4.2? > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Mar 8, 2017, at 15:39, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> >> I've still got my Worldblazer, and a Trailblazer that I found in a storage closet at a defense contractor I was consulting for back in the mid 90's. >> >> I'm seriously thinking of getting my SVR4.2 system back up and running and seeing if I can get Taylor UUCP to function again. >> >> Of course, I didn't make the UUCP maps until the early 90's... but still :) >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 11 16:35:49 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 14:35:49 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] MacOS X is Unix (tm) In-Reply-To: <003501d265f1$910085e0$b30191a0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <52C99F50-E24A-4BBF-A129-180A1271B4E3@kdbarto.org> <586a3a23.udW0nRrOopzHoQbP%schily@schily.net> <8168FD75-9C3E-47C1-9BA8-EADAD7D33C38@kdbarto.org> <586bb9dc.iVkFRSLWnXd79ger%schily@schily.net> <586be7b3.TVbwM5I7Y6v2DJC8%schily@schily.net> <003501d265f1$910085e0$b30191a0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <42c7a24a-b1f0-4efb-b7fd-2956ccb8321b@SG2APC01FT117.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> NT on the Alpha was... interesting. The C compiler was a team effort between Microsoft and Dec, but it really really had issues. I had to compile just about anything on /OD ie, no optimizations for anything to really be workable across 2 machines. The joke being that once they had a solid C compiler, in Visual C++ 6.0 / Visual Basic 6.0 Digitial went to Compaq, and they killed NT Alpha as it was always a threat to Compaq i386 servers. Alpha servers running NT were basically for people that had gotten themselves in a corner, and needed higher performance, price be damned... And Windows NT 4.0 Entperprise on 8way and UP NT boxes were not cheap by any stretch. I’ve only seen one in use, and it was a giant DEC Alpha with at the time for 1998 insane specs that would be trivial today... But it was running MS SQL 7.0 for some airline ticking place that used old starship captains as their mascot. Qemu can run the MIPS version Windows NT, which is once you’ve installed it, from a user perspective really no different from the i386 version of Windows NT. The last version of Internet Explorer for the MIPS is version 3.0, which to say is ancient is an understatement. Naturally on the Pathworks CD I have, it only has an i386 and Alpha client. DEC didn’t think you’d dare use Cterm on a PowerPC or MIPS running NT. Not that it really matters these days, outside of HECnet. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Ron Natalie Sent: Thursday, 5 January 2017 2:57 AM To: 'Clem Cole'; 'Joerg Schilling' Cc: 'TUHS main list'; david at kdbarto.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] MacOS X is Unix (tm) Yeah, we were kind of unique in developing a few products that cut across many UNIX architectures: Sun 4.1.3 / Solaris 2.0 DEC Alpha HP 9000 (in various incarnations) SGI in various incarnations (Oxygen, O2, Onyx, …) Intel processors in both 32 and 64 bit modes Ardent Stellar G1000 MIPS (both MIPS’s native workstation and the DEC SPIM machine) Some i860 machines from IBM and Oki IBM RS6000 Cray YMP. The latter was the one that really had some issues.    The thing really only had char and word.   Int, short, and long were all 64 bits.    That one discovered a portability hack.   At least I had put a diagnostic in to catch the fact I hadn’t implemented such a case in the generic code.    I got a call from the guy doing to port (he had to go to the Cray offices) to tell me that the first thing the product said was “You’ve got to be kidding.” Later we bopped back and forth between various NT-based systems including Intel at 32 and 64 bits (don’t get me started about the inane DWORD_PTR type which is not a pointer nor a double word) and on the iTanium (which we dubbed the iTanic).   Never got around to trying the NT Alpha. Not only type sizing issues but having to worry about byte order, etc… I still remember finding a #define notyet 1 in one piece of code on the Ardent…that onewas scary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Sat Mar 11 21:04:17 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:04:17 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Linux displacing UnixWare on the PC architecture Message-ID: <20170311110417.GE27536@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 9, 21:26, Josh Good wrote: > > And by the way, the two user limit in the "Personal Edition" of UnixWare > 2.1 seems to be real: > > $ telnet 172.27.101.128 > Trying 172.27.101.128... > Connected to 172.27.101.128. > Escape character is '^]'. > > > UnixWare 2.1 (gollum1) (pts/2) > > login: jgood > Password: > UnixWare 2.1 > gollum1 > Copyright 1996 The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. All Rights > Reserved. > Copyright 1984-1995 Novell, Inc. All Rights Reserved. > Copyright 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corp. All Rights Reserved. > U.S. Pat. No. 5,349,642 > Last login: Tue Mar 9 20:57:05 1999 on pts000 > telnetd: set_id() failed: Too many users > . > Connection closed by foreign host. > > > This thing was released in 1996. Obviously, with this limitation it could > not hold a candle to the emerging Linux tsunammi full of free source code. On the subject of Linux displacing UnixWare on the PC architecture in the mid-90's, I've found this most illuminating Usenet thread from 1994, whose participants include Alan Cox, Theo Tso, and some Novell Product Managers: http://tech-insider.org/linux/research/1994/1025.html And what came after that, as they say, is history. -- Josh Good From steffen at sdaoden.eu Sat Mar 11 23:13:17 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 14:13:17 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] B-news source code In-Reply-To: <201703110313.v2B3Ds0q017958@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703110313.v2B3Ds0q017958@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170311131317.N-9PL%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Doug McIlroy wrote: |> Wouldn't [> in quoted mail] have happened first in email, like Mail \ |> or mailx? | |Mailx doesn't do it now, so it probably didn't do it then. It seems to have entered Mail not before 1988, when Edward Wang replaced the fixed "\t" prefix with a "tabstr" variable (he credits Tom Newcomb, newcomb at arpa, for this). In 1989 he changed "tabstr" to "indentprefix" and quotes "to be Sun compatible". --steffen From dwalker at doomd.net Sun Mar 12 01:36:14 2017 From: dwalker at doomd.net (Derrik Walker v2.0) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:36:14 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] MacOS X is Unix (tm) In-Reply-To: <42c7a24a-b1f0-4efb-b7fd-2956ccb8321b@SG2APC01FT117.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> References: <52C99F50-E24A-4BBF-A129-180A1271B4E3@kdbarto.org> <586a3a23.udW0nRrOopzHoQbP%schily@schily.net> <8168FD75-9C3E-47C1-9BA8-EADAD7D33C38@kdbarto.org> <586bb9dc.iVkFRSLWnXd79ger%schily@schily.net> <586be7b3.TVbwM5I7Y6v2DJC8%schily@schily.net> <003501d265f1$910085e0$b30191a0$@ronnatalie.com> <42c7a24a-b1f0-4efb-b7fd-2956ccb8321b@SG2APC01FT117.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Message-ID: <564ffade-fef9-55a8-9f02-8e1e12c16002@doomd.net> I still have a stack of the "Mac OS X: Sends other UNIX boxes to /dev/null" posters someplace. What a blast from the past! - Derrik -- -- Derrik Derrik Walker v2.0, RHCE dwalker at doomd.net "Those UNIX guys, they think weird!" -- John C. Dvorak -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3703 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From paul.winalski at gmail.com Sun Mar 12 02:33:24 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 11:33:24 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] MacOS X is Unix (tm) In-Reply-To: <42c7a24a-b1f0-4efb-b7fd-2956ccb8321b@SG2APC01FT117.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> References: <52C99F50-E24A-4BBF-A129-180A1271B4E3@kdbarto.org> <586a3a23.udW0nRrOopzHoQbP%schily@schily.net> <8168FD75-9C3E-47C1-9BA8-EADAD7D33C38@kdbarto.org> <586bb9dc.iVkFRSLWnXd79ger%schily@schily.net> <586be7b3.TVbwM5I7Y6v2DJC8%schily@schily.net> <003501d265f1$910085e0$b30191a0$@ronnatalie.com> <42c7a24a-b1f0-4efb-b7fd-2956ccb8321b@SG2APC01FT117.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Message-ID: On 3/11/17, jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com wrote: > NT on the Alpha was... interesting. The C compiler was a team effort > between Microsoft and Dec, but it really really had issues. I had to compile > just about anything on /OD ie, no optimizations for anything to really be > workable across 2 machines. The joke being that once they had a solid C > compiler, in Visual C++ 6.0 / Visual Basic 6.0 Digitial went to Compaq, and > they killed NT Alpha as it was always a threat to Compaq i386 servers. The C compiler for Windows NT on Alpha was a hybrid--the front end was the basically unmodified from Visual C++, and the code generator was the GEM back end that all of DEC's compilers for Alpha used. There was an intermediate language translator that converted the output from the VC++ front end to GEM IL. DEC's GEM team had no access to the VC++ front end source code--we worked from the Microsoft IL specification. A lot of the early instability of the Alpha NT C compiler was due to cases where the IL spec was vague, or where things didn't work quite as advertised. Technically, it was an interesting project to work on (sometimes in the old Chinese curse sense of "interesting"). -Paul W. From spedraja at gmail.com Sun Mar 12 03:50:05 2017 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:50:05 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Move the uucp/news stuff off-list? In-Reply-To: <1489201793.3331826.907670648.5A456765@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170311030819.GA30550@minnie.tuhs.org> <1489201793.3331826.907670648.5A456765@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: 2017-03-11 4:09 GMT+01:00 Cory Smelosky : > > > I vote for a separate list. > > -- > Cory Smelosky Vote the same. Gracias | Regards - Saludos | Greetings | Freundliche Grüße | Salutations -- Sergio Pedraja From krewat at kilonet.net Sun Mar 12 04:55:04 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 13:55:04 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Move the uucp/news stuff off-list? In-Reply-To: References: <20170311030819.GA30550@minnie.tuhs.org> <1489201793.3331826.907670648.5A456765@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <03ca18ba-3bf7-1592-4e09-a5e9be1ada39@kilonet.net> Me too... I'm in. On 3/11/2017 12:50 PM, SPC wrote: > 2017-03-11 4:09 GMT+01:00 Cory Smelosky : >> >> I vote for a separate list. >> >> -- >> Cory Smelosky > Vote the same. > > Gracias | Regards - Saludos | Greetings | Freundliche Grüße | Salutations From mah at mhorton.net Sun Mar 12 05:07:26 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 11:07:26 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode Message-ID: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> I just heard from a historian named Piotr Klaban with an interesting historical sidelight. Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th anniversary of the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's MIME. Piotr points out that uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. I checked and, while I don't have any email archives from that time frame at Berkeley, I was able to find the 4BSD archive on minnie that dates the uuencode.1c man page at 6/1/80. We didn't call them attachments back then, just sending binary files by email. (Prior to then it was common to just include the text of the file raw in the email, which only worked for ASCII files.) It was a few years later when cc:Mail and Microsoft Mail started calling uuencoded files embedded in email "attachments". When MIME came out in 1992 I became a champion of SMTP/MIME as a standard - it was a big improvement. But uuencod predated MIME by 12 years. Mary Ann From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 12 07:08:48 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 07:08:48 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Move the uucp/news stuff off-list? In-Reply-To: <03ca18ba-3bf7-1592-4e09-a5e9be1ada39@kilonet.net> References: <20170311030819.GA30550@minnie.tuhs.org> <1489201793.3331826.907670648.5A456765@webmail.messagingengine.com> <03ca18ba-3bf7-1592-4e09-a5e9be1ada39@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170311210848.GA27263@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 01:55:04PM -0500, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Me too... I'm in. OK, the list is https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uucp E-mail me to get added to the list. Arthur, I'll add you. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From paul.winalski at gmail.com Sun Mar 12 09:01:59 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:01:59 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: On 3/11/17, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th anniversary of > the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's MIME. Piotr points out > that uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. Is it possible to send multi-part email bodies using uuencode, as it is with MIME? -Paul W. From mah at mhorton.net Sun Mar 12 09:05:13 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 15:05:13 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: Possible? Yes. Convenient? No. You could cat several uuencode files together and send them in one email. You'd have to edit them on the receiving end into separate files and uudecode them separately. In practice, you'd uuencode a tarball. MIME was a major advance, and what's telling is that 25 years later, SMTP/MIME is still the standard. Mary Ann On 03/11/2017 03:01 PM, Paul Winalski wrote: > On 3/11/17, Mary Ann Horton wrote: >> Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th anniversary of >> the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's MIME. Piotr points out >> that uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. > Is it possible to send multi-part email bodies using uuencode, as it > is with MIME? > > -Paul W. From crossd at gmail.com Sun Mar 12 11:14:40 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:14:40 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > Possible? Yes. Convenient? No. > > You could cat several uuencode files together and send them in one email. > You'd have to edit them on the receiving end into separate files and > uudecode them separately. In practice, you'd uuencode a tarball. > > MIME was a major advance, and what's telling is that 25 years later, > SMTP/MIME is still the standard. > This is so interesting. Not to be argumentative about it but I felt it was actually something of a regression. Something like making a file available via an FTP server (possible in an executable but unreadable directory with an obscure name) or just in some directory in an organization where a filesystem was shared and sending a pointer to the file via email seemed much more efficient, particularly if one was sending to multiple recipients. Attaching files to email as MIME components felt like trying to turn email into a filesystem, and SMTP into a file transfer protocol. The way I saw it, email was email and we already had file transfer protocols.... It seemed like MIME really took off when Microsoft embraced it; before that, plain ol' text seemed much more common. My sense at the time was that networked filesystems and services like FTP (or the then-nascent HTTP) were far less commonplace on the MS platform, so email as a content distribution mechanism was more natural in that world. I was somewhat dismayed at the inability to make Windows users see the light; in retrospect, of course, this just means that I myself was missing something critical. Mary Ann, why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really curious about the reasoning from folks involved with such things at the time. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sun Mar 12 16:28:57 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 14:28:57 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <47519b01-0ef1-412e-8048-4494cd5d13f9@SG2APC01FT011.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> As much as I despise the whole ‘email server is my file server’, the thing is that email clients are cross platform, and an easy way to get data in and out of a server, and out to other people. SMTP+UUENCODE/MIME is basically the best peer to peer network that is still going strong, since RFC 821 in 1982! Naturally other email systems existed prior to this, but SMTP let you easily send across the internet, in a method that basically still works to this day, although servers have become more selective on who they talk to, thanks to the rise of SPAM.. I just fired up 4.3 BSD Uwsic, and setup an external DNS, and right away I’m able to send an email, and I’m able to receive it on gmail: From: The Not Ready for Prime Time Super User root at csl3.wisc.edu Compared to what a disaster FTP turned out with it’s active/passive port games, SMTP with it’s relay based nature is still the easiest way to send & receive data. Add in something like Microsoft Exhcange, which has persistent and shared data stores, it’s quite easily to setup ‘public folders’ and keep binaries in there. Of course you’d be crazy to put ancient email servers directly onto the internet, but you can easily setup forwarding/spooling gateways like postfix, to process inbound mail, and deliver it to your ancient UNIX/VMS/MacOS/Windows server of choice. I route mine through MS Office 365, but backend on Exchange 5.5 as I can use the Outlook client on MS-DOS, MacOS, and OS/2 to easily get files around if needed. Add in stunnel, and you can even use ‘modern’ IMAP clients against Exchange 5.5... Not that I’d recommend you doing something like this... lol Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Dan Cross Sent: Sunday, 12 March 2017 9:16 AM To: Mary Ann Horton Cc: TUHS main list Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: Possible?  Yes.  Convenient?  No. You could cat several uuencode files together and send them in one email.  You'd have to edit them on the receiving end into separate files and uudecode them separately.  In practice, you'd uuencode a tarball. MIME was a major advance, and what's telling is that 25 years later, SMTP/MIME is still the standard. This is so interesting. Not to be argumentative about it but I felt it was actually something of a regression. Something like making a file available via an FTP server (possible in an executable but unreadable directory with an obscure name) or just in some directory in an organization where a filesystem was shared and sending a pointer to the file via email seemed much more efficient, particularly if one was sending to multiple recipients. Attaching files to email as MIME components felt like trying to turn email into a filesystem, and SMTP into a file transfer protocol. The way I saw it, email was email and we already had file transfer protocols.... It seemed like MIME really took off when Microsoft embraced it; before that, plain ol' text seemed much more common. My sense at the time was that networked filesystems and services like FTP (or the then-nascent HTTP) were far less commonplace on the MS platform, so email as a content distribution mechanism was more natural in that world. I was somewhat dismayed at the inability to make Windows users see the light; in retrospect, of course, this just means that I myself was missing something critical. Mary Ann, why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really curious about the reasoning from folks involved with such things at the time.         - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tfb at tfeb.org Sun Mar 12 23:53:55 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 13:53:55 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <546F4B1E-5995-43BD-BC36-3CD26EED455C@tfeb.org> > On 11 Mar 2017, at 19:07, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > When MIME came out in 1992 I became a champion of SMTP/MIME as a standard - it was a big improvement. But uuencod predated MIME by 12 years. Somewhere I may have a copy of a rant I wrote in about 1995 called 'MIME as a disease vector'. It argued that the single biggest thing that MIME did was to establish the Windows/Office monopoly, and that this was why MS were so enthusiastic about it. It did this by making it trivial for a Windows user to send documents in Office formats which, if you wanted to read or modify them, required you to use Windows. Thus the disease (proprietary formats and monopolies) was effectively spread by MIME. I still think it's essentially correct, although I would not now use such loaded wording, and also clearly this was just inevitable: MIME or some equivalent way of sending typed binary data by email was useful, and this undesirable consequence unavoidable. Looking at things from the other side of the Windows monopoly period it all looks less horrible as well: Windows didn't end up killing Unix even. --tm From pepe at naleco.com Mon Mar 13 01:04:12 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:04:12 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? Message-ID: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> Hello all. I was perusing the list of officially branded UNIX systems, according to the "UNIX 03" specification and tests done by the Open Group, and I found there listed something called "Huawei EulerOS 2.0". https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/xy.htm Intriguing, ain't it? So I went to Wikipedia, to see what it has to say about such a beast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#EulerOS And I quote: "EulerOS 2.0 for the x86-64 architecture were certified as UNIX 03 compliant. The UNIX 03 conformance statement shows that the standard C compiler is from the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), and that the system is a Linux distribution of the Red Hat family." So, Linux (some variety of it, very closely resembling Red Hat) is now a "officially branded" UNIX. I think Mr. Stallman can now say: mission accomplished. GNU *is* now UNIX. (Linux the kernel might not be a FSF project, but it certainly is under the GNU General Public License.) -- Josh Good From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 13 01:10:03 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 11:10:03 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode Message-ID: <20170312151003.3A80618C09B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Dan Cross > why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really curious about > the reasoning from folks involved with such things at the time. This was N layers up from my zone of responsibility when I was on the IESG (which was the internetwork layer), and I don't recall any discussion about it on the IESG (although if you really care, there might be minutes - I don't recall when IESG minutes started, though, perhaps this was before that). That lack of any memory may be nothing more than a sign of my fading memory, but it could mean it wasn't a very contentious topic. FWIW, here's my current analysis of the issues; I doubt my analysis then would have been substantially different. The fundamental thing that email does is send something - originally a section of text - from party A to party B in a way that requires no previous setup or interaction: party B can be anyone in the entire universe of entities which support that service. MIME is an extension of this model to carry other types of data: images, etc. There is a very good analogy to the pre-existing real-world mail system: that too allows one to send things to anyone without prior special arrangement, and it supports not only transferring text, but also sending more than that - physical objects. This pre-existing system argues that this model of operation is i) useful, and ii) issues raised by it have probably mostly been worked through. So the extension of email to carry more than just text seems like a very plausible extension. For the 'average' user, the ability to include images in email is a huge improvement over any alternative. Any kind of 'pull' model (in which the receiver has to do something to retrieve the data later from some sort of server) requires access to such a server on the part of the sender; use of a 'push' model (in which data is sent in the same way as text, as part of a single transfer) is clearly better. Security issues raised by sending binary data through email are a separate question, but I note that those issues will mostly still exist no matter how the binary data is transferred. (E.g. the binary might contain a virus no matter whether it's transferred via SMTP or FTP.) The ability of email to send to anyone does raise issues in this context, but this margin is not big enough to fully explore them. I also do get a little uncomfortable when email is used instead of a file transfer system, for very large files, etc, etc. The thing is that the email system was not designed to transfer really huge objects (although the size allowed has been going up over time). The store-and-forward model of the email system is not really ideal for huge objects, etc, etc. But having said all that, the extension of the email model to send content other than pure text - images, etc - still seems like a good idea to me. Noel From cym224 at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 02:21:35 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 12:21:35 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? In-Reply-To: <22470.1489133089@cesium.clock.org> References: <20170228193016.75AE940B9@lod.com> <22470.1489133089@cesium.clock.org> Message-ID: On 10 March 2017 at 03:04, Erik E. Fair wrote: > See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Environment_Real-Time Thank you, Erik, and very interesting (being an old embedded-systems guy). I am chasing down the references. N. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 13 02:35:29 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 12:35:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? Message-ID: <20170312163529.0F31C18C09B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> On 10 March 2017 at 03:04, Erik E. Fair wrote: > See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Environment_Real-Time I'd love to get ahold of a copy of PDP-11 MERT (which surely holds no significant trade secrets by now) to play with, since it seems like a very historic, and possibly influential (given what was published about it in the BSTJ, and elsewhere), but so far I have not been able to find it. I had a lead to one of the authors (who's now in a very different line of work), but so far I have yet to find the time to try and run that one down, to see if anything came of it. If anyone knows of such, please let me know! Noel From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 13 03:42:08 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 13:42:08 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: I think it might actually predates 6/1/80 by 6-9 months because I was at Tek a year earlier and you and I started corresponding that first summer I was at Tek. I remember that you had sent me a copy of it shortly after you wrote it. So I think there is a chance that that might be a slightly later version. Clem On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > I just heard from a historian named Piotr Klaban with an interesting > historical sidelight. > > Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th anniversary of > the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's MIME. Piotr points out that > uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. > > I checked and, while I don't have any email archives from that time frame > at Berkeley, I was able to find the 4BSD archive on minnie that dates the > uuencode.1c man page at 6/1/80. We didn't call them attachments back then, > just sending binary files by email. (Prior to then it was common to just > include the text of the file raw in the email, which only worked for ASCII > files.) It was a few years later when cc:Mail and Microsoft Mail started > calling uuencoded files embedded in email "attachments". > > When MIME came out in 1992 I became a champion of SMTP/MIME as a standard > - it was a big improvement. But uuencod predated MIME by 12 years. > > Mary Ann > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Mon Mar 13 04:13:55 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 14:13:55 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode Message-ID: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. But allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was dubious at best. Not only did it require recipients to obtain special software to read some messages; it also posed a security threat. I still use mailx precisely because it will only display plain text. With active text such as HTML, it is all too easy to mistakenly brush over a phishing link. Outfits like Constant Contact do their nonprofit clients a disservice by sending stuff that I won't even peek at. And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. Doug From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 13 04:22:18 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 11:22:18 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170312182218.GE2685@mcvoy.com> Back when I was at Sun the attachment thing was all the rage. Yet I developed a system, I did my important stuff in roff, I'd attach the typeset version but I'd make the main message be nroff | colcrt - output. Why? Because while all the "cool kids" liked the attachments, the execs (they'd be the guys I was trying to convince) just read whatever the text said. If they wanted to see the other stuff they forwarded to their admin who knew how to print it. I was measurably more effective at getting the execs to do what I wanted than other engineers. On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 02:13:55PM -0400, Doug McIlroy wrote: > Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. > But allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was > dubious at best. Not only did it require recipients to obtain > special software to read some messages; it also posed a > security threat. > > I still use mailx precisely because it will only display plain text. > With active text such as HTML, it is all too easy to mistakenly > brush over a phishing link. Outfits like Constant Contact do their > nonprofit clients a disservice by sending stuff that I won't even > peek at. And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want > to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. > > Doug -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 13 04:26:10 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 14:26:10 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote: > And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want > to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. > ​Or when your HR and Legal dept sends legal documents (like tax info and patent disclosures ) using XPS instead of PS or PDF and wonder why much of the company can not or will not read it when "legal can read it just fine." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul.winalski at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 04:33:36 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 14:33:36 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On 3/12/17, Doug McIlroy wrote: > Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. > But allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was > dubious at best. Not only did it require recipients to obtain > special software to read some messages; it also posed a > security threat. > > I still use mailx precisely because it will only display plain text. Back in the day plain ASCII wasn't really secure, either. There were bugs in the firmware of the VT100 and other smartish terminals that would cause strange behavior if certain malformed control sequences were received. For example, causing the bell (actually a loud beep) to sound continuously until the terminal was power-cycled. There was one sequence that stored bad data into the user preferences area of the EPROM. That bricked the terminal by causing it to go into a reset/crash loop. DEC ended up modifying VMS Mail to filter out ASCII control characters by default when it displayed email messages. You could still display the unfiltered text, but you had to explicitly ask for that to be done. -Paul W. From ajv-ewherachem at vsta.org Mon Mar 13 04:57:10 2017 From: ajv-ewherachem at vsta.org (Andy Valencia) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 18:57:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode Message-ID: <20170312185710.3EA294005D@vsta.org> > Back in the day plain ASCII wasn't really secure, either. No need to use the past tense. I had a need to assess how much damage one could do if allowed to feed arbitrary text into xterm. I came away sobered. Do not--ever--use a mail agent which will plumb unfiltered text through to an xterm. nmh, for one: http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?36056 Andy From ron at ronnatalie.com Mon Mar 13 05:35:49 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ronald Natalie) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 15:35:49 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX? In-Reply-To: <20170312163529.0F31C18C09B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170312163529.0F31C18C09B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Being just down the road, AT&T gave us a lot of their own branded compute equipment, a 3B20, a couple of 3B5’s, and countless 3B2’s. The 3B2 was amusing as I tried to work the power switch and it told me I didn’t have sufficient permissions. The 3B20 you powered down by turning the switch to standby and holding a button down (this is very akin to how you put the original arpanet 303 broadband modems into loopback). The 3B5 was distinguished in that even though I was in the basement of a 7 story building, the roof leaked into our machine room. One day in attempt to find the leak, we had the campus fire department pump water in various places in the building courtyard. We finally found the leak was a broken drain pipe, but not before about a hundred gallons of water flowed into the machine room ceiling and directly on top of the 3B5. The 3B5 took a licking, but like the timex, kept on ticking. From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 13 05:38:41 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 06:38:41 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] uucp protocol nits In-Reply-To: <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> References: <59797EE8-FAC3-4403-B9D1-109DA0CD5EB2@quintile.net> <878D7FE6-A2F2-41E8-90CC-500B369F6EB4@orthanc.ca> <68DD5665-BA7D-4995-9CE4-4EED65A5F862@orthanc.ca> <003e01d299dd$b5346e20$1f9d4a60$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > Anybody remember the Telebit trailblazer modems that snooped on the g > protocol going through them? Not quite sure what you meant by "snooping" (spyware?), but they emulated the "g" protocol and went like the clappers. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 13 06:04:36 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:04:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode Message-ID: <20170312200436.947D318C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Doug McIlroy > Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. But > allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was dubious at > best. Sorry, I'm not sure I'm completely clear what you mean there? Do you mean 'non-ASCII-text objects were processed by the mail system without being told to do so explicitly, by the user'? That, combined with the below, is indeed a problem. > it also posed a security threat. The problem isn't really so much the ability to have attachments, as that people defined attachment types with open-ended capabilities, up to and including what I call 'active content' - i.e. content which includes code which is to be run. (Yes, yes, I know - even without that, it's possible to feed 'dumb' applications bad data, and do an intrusion; I seem to recall there was one of those with JPEG's, so even plain images were not perfectly safe. And someone just provided an example of an with plain ASCII. But those holes are much harder to find/use, whereas active content is a security hole the size of a trans-Atlantic liner.) Without an _incredibly_ secure OS (something on the order of late-stage Multics, when the security had been beefed up even over the original design [the jargon to search for is 'AIM', if you're interested], or better), bringing in 'active content' from _outside_ the system, and running it, is daylight madness - it's an invitation to disaster. This is true no matter _how_ such content comes in: via HTTP, with a Web browser; via SMTP, with e-mail, whatever. Dave Moon coined a phrase, based on an old anti-drug movie: 'TECO madness: A moment of convenience, a lifetime of regret.' These active contents all, to me, fall into that category. They _seem_ like a good idea, and provide interesting capabilities - until some cracker uses one to wipe your hard drive. > With active text such as HTML, it is all too easy to mistakenly brush > over a phishing link. HTML email is another of my pet peeves/hot buttons - it's just another vector for active conent. So, for the 'convenience' of being able to send email in multiple fonts ('eye candy', I derisively call it), we get to let malefactors send in viruses that can wipe a hard drive. To me, this kind of thing is professional malpractice, on a par with building cars that catch on fire, or buildings that collapse. People need to suffer incredibly severe penalties for propogating this kind of nonsense; maybe then software engineers will stop valuing convenience over regret. Noel From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 13 07:10:58 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:10:58 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, Paul Winalski wrote: > Is it possible to send multi-part email bodies using uuencode, as it is > with MIME? Not directly, but I guess you could fudge it as multiple SHAR files. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From random832 at fastmail.com Mon Mar 13 07:34:32 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 17:34:32 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170312200436.947D318C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170312200436.947D318C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1489354472.1850950.908878144.19D9B027@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017, at 16:04, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Doug McIlroy > > > Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. But > > allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was dubious at > > best. > > Sorry, I'm not sure I'm completely clear what you mean there? Do you mean > 'non-ASCII-text objects were processed by the mail system without being > told > to do so explicitly, by the user'? That, combined with the below, is > indeed a > problem. I think he means the fact that MIME specifies the type of the main message body (not just attachments), so you can have a message with *no* text parts. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 13 08:12:55 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 18:12:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode Message-ID: <20170312221255.BFE3F18C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Random832 > I think he means the fact that MIME specifies the type of the main > message body (not just attachments), so you can have a message with *no* > text parts. Right, that I could discern; what I couldn't get with an definitiveness was _why_ that was particularly a problem. (Another possibility, other than the one I previously gave, is perhaps that there simply is no text part, which one can peruse, ignoring the rest?) Noel From mah at mhorton.net Mon Mar 13 09:35:24 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:35:24 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <34f2acb2-d104-ffde-c36e-4cc14905fe21@mhorton.net> That's interesting, Clem. It would be useful to date the real date of the first email attachment sent. Right now the only firm date we have is 6/1/80. Do you have any old email or copy of uuencode that could establish an earlier date? Thanks, Mary Ann On 03/12/2017 10:42 AM, Clem Cole wrote: > I think it might actually predates 6/1/80 by 6-9 months because I was > at Tek a year earlier and you and I started corresponding that first > summer I was at Tek. I remember that you had sent me a copy of it > shortly after you wrote it. So I think there is a chance that that > might be a slightly later version. > > Clem > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Mary Ann Horton > wrote: > > I just heard from a historian named Piotr Klaban with an > interesting historical sidelight. > > Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th > anniversary of the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's > MIME. Piotr points out that uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. > > I checked and, while I don't have any email archives from that > time frame at Berkeley, I was able to find the 4BSD archive on > minnie that dates the uuencode.1c man page at 6/1/80. We didn't > call them attachments back then, just sending binary files by > email. (Prior to then it was common to just include the text of > the file raw in the email, which only worked for ASCII files.) It > was a few years later when cc:Mail and Microsoft Mail started > calling uuencoded files embedded in email "attachments". > > When MIME came out in 1992 I became a champion of SMTP/MIME as a > standard - it was a big improvement. But uuencod predated MIME by > 12 years. > > Mary Ann > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 09:41:32 2017 From: gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com (Gregg Levine) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:41:32 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <47519b01-0ef1-412e-8048-4494cd5d13f9@SG2APC01FT011.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <47519b01-0ef1-412e-8048-4494cd5d13f9@SG2APC01FT011.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Message-ID: Hello! Jason, that is amazing. Can you e-mail me steps you took? But please do so off of list. ----- Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com "This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again." On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 1:28 AM, wrote: > As much as I despise the whole ‘email server is my file server’, the thing > is that email clients are cross platform, and an easy way to get data in and > out of a server, and out to other people. SMTP+UUENCODE/MIME is basically > the best peer to peer network that is still going strong, since RFC 821 in > 1982! Naturally other email systems existed prior to this, but SMTP let you > easily send across the internet, in a method that basically still works to > this day, although servers have become more selective on who they talk to, > thanks to the rise of SPAM.. > > > > I just fired up 4.3 BSD Uwsic, and setup an external DNS, and right away I’m > able to send an email, and I’m able to receive it on gmail: > > > > From: The Not Ready for Prime Time Super User root at csl3.wisc.edu > > > > Compared to what a disaster FTP turned out with it’s active/passive port > games, SMTP with it’s relay based nature is still the easiest way to send & > receive data. Add in something like Microsoft Exhcange, which has > persistent and shared data stores, it’s quite easily to setup ‘public > folders’ and keep binaries in there. Of course you’d be crazy to put > ancient email servers directly onto the internet, but you can easily setup > forwarding/spooling gateways like postfix, to process inbound mail, and > deliver it to your ancient UNIX/VMS/MacOS/Windows server of choice. I route > mine through MS Office 365, but backend on Exchange 5.5 as I can use the > Outlook client on MS-DOS, MacOS, and OS/2 to easily get files around if > needed. Add in stunnel, and you can even use ‘modern’ IMAP clients against > Exchange 5.5... Not that I’d recommend you doing something like this... lol > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > From: Dan Cross > Sent: Sunday, 12 March 2017 9:16 AM > To: Mary Ann Horton > Cc: TUHS main list > Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > Possible? Yes. Convenient? No. > > You could cat several uuencode files together and send them in one email. > You'd have to edit them on the receiving end into separate files and > uudecode them separately. In practice, you'd uuencode a tarball. > > MIME was a major advance, and what's telling is that 25 years later, > SMTP/MIME is still the standard. > > > > This is so interesting. Not to be argumentative about it but I felt it was > actually something of a regression. Something like making a file available > via an FTP server (possible in an executable but unreadable directory with > an obscure name) or just in some directory in an organization where a > filesystem was shared and sending a pointer to the file via email seemed > much more efficient, particularly if one was sending to multiple recipients. > Attaching files to email as MIME components felt like trying to turn email > into a filesystem, and SMTP into a file transfer protocol. The way I saw it, > email was email and we already had file transfer protocols.... > > > > It seemed like MIME really took off when Microsoft embraced it; before that, > plain ol' text seemed much more common. My sense at the time was that > networked filesystems and services like FTP (or the then-nascent HTTP) were > far less commonplace on the MS platform, so email as a content distribution > mechanism was more natural in that world. I was somewhat dismayed at the > inability to make Windows users see the light; in retrospect, of course, > this just means that I myself was missing something critical. > > > > Mary Ann, why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really curious > about the reasoning from folks involved with such things at the time. > > > > - Dan C. > > > > From mah at mhorton.net Mon Mar 13 09:43:32 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:43:32 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> Message-ID: Uuencode was very basic. It could be used for what later was called "attachments", but it couldn't handle rich text message bodies, multiple attachments, and it had security issues and UNIX-specific content. The coolness factor of Borenstein's original "let me sing you email" was all it took to get us hooked. Mary Ann On 03/11/2017 05:14 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Mary Ann Horton > wrote: > > Possible? Yes. Convenient? No. > > You could cat several uuencode files together and send them in one > email. You'd have to edit them on the receiving end into separate > files and uudecode them separately. In practice, you'd uuencode a > tarball. > > MIME was a major advance, and what's telling is that 25 years > later, SMTP/MIME is still the standard. > > > This is so interesting. Not to be argumentative about it but I felt it > was actually something of a regression. Something like making a file > available via an FTP server (possible in an executable but unreadable > directory with an obscure name) or just in some directory in an > organization where a filesystem was shared and sending a pointer to > the file via email seemed much more efficient, particularly if one was > sending to multiple recipients. Attaching files to email as MIME > components felt like trying to turn email into a filesystem, and SMTP > into a file transfer protocol. The way I saw it, email was email and > we already had file transfer protocols.... > > It seemed like MIME really took off when Microsoft embraced it; before > that, plain ol' text seemed much more common. My sense at the time was > that networked filesystems and services like FTP (or the then-nascent > HTTP) were far less commonplace on the MS platform, so email as a > content distribution mechanism was more natural in that world. I was > somewhat dismayed at the inability to make Windows users see the > light; in retrospect, of course, this just means that I myself was > missing something critical. > > Mary Ann, why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really > curious about the reasoning from folks involved with such things at > the time. > > - Dan C. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 13 10:00:14 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 17:00:14 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <47519b01-0ef1-412e-8048-4494cd5d13f9@SG2APC01FT011.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Message-ID: <20170313000013.GF13938@mcvoy.com> I used to have an undocumented mail service on my workstation at Sun. I could send mail with a subject line specifying what I wanted and it sent it to me. Mainly used it when I was teaching at Stanford and I wanted to grab stuff but couldn't get into Sun's network from the outside. In fact, just found the script, it only worked if I was coming from lm at CS.Stanford.EDU or lm at Sunburn.Stanford.EDU so I must have been worried about security. I had a different one that I made available publicly that served up all the papers in /u/lm/Doc/postscript/. On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 07:41:32PM -0400, Gregg Levine wrote: > Hello! > Jason, that is amazing. Can you e-mail me steps you took? But please > do so off of list. > ----- > Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com > "This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again." > > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 1:28 AM, wrote: > > As much as I despise the whole ???email server is my file server???, the thing > > is that email clients are cross platform, and an easy way to get data in and > > out of a server, and out to other people. SMTP+UUENCODE/MIME is basically > > the best peer to peer network that is still going strong, since RFC 821 in > > 1982! Naturally other email systems existed prior to this, but SMTP let you > > easily send across the internet, in a method that basically still works to > > this day, although servers have become more selective on who they talk to, > > thanks to the rise of SPAM.. > > > > > > > > I just fired up 4.3 BSD Uwsic, and setup an external DNS, and right away I???m > > able to send an email, and I???m able to receive it on gmail: > > > > > > > > From: The Not Ready for Prime Time Super User root at csl3.wisc.edu > > > > > > > > Compared to what a disaster FTP turned out with it???s active/passive port > > games, SMTP with it???s relay based nature is still the easiest way to send & > > receive data. Add in something like Microsoft Exhcange, which has > > persistent and shared data stores, it???s quite easily to setup ???public > > folders??? and keep binaries in there. Of course you???d be crazy to put > > ancient email servers directly onto the internet, but you can easily setup > > forwarding/spooling gateways like postfix, to process inbound mail, and > > deliver it to your ancient UNIX/VMS/MacOS/Windows server of choice. I route > > mine through MS Office 365, but backend on Exchange 5.5 as I can use the > > Outlook client on MS-DOS, MacOS, and OS/2 to easily get files around if > > needed. Add in stunnel, and you can even use ???modern??? IMAP clients against > > Exchange 5.5... Not that I???d recommend you doing something like this... lol > > > > > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > > > > > > > From: Dan Cross > > Sent: Sunday, 12 March 2017 9:16 AM > > To: Mary Ann Horton > > Cc: TUHS main list > > Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode > > > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > > > Possible? Yes. Convenient? No. > > > > You could cat several uuencode files together and send them in one email. > > You'd have to edit them on the receiving end into separate files and > > uudecode them separately. In practice, you'd uuencode a tarball. > > > > MIME was a major advance, and what's telling is that 25 years later, > > SMTP/MIME is still the standard. > > > > > > > > This is so interesting. Not to be argumentative about it but I felt it was > > actually something of a regression. Something like making a file available > > via an FTP server (possible in an executable but unreadable directory with > > an obscure name) or just in some directory in an organization where a > > filesystem was shared and sending a pointer to the file via email seemed > > much more efficient, particularly if one was sending to multiple recipients. > > Attaching files to email as MIME components felt like trying to turn email > > into a filesystem, and SMTP into a file transfer protocol. The way I saw it, > > email was email and we already had file transfer protocols.... > > > > > > > > It seemed like MIME really took off when Microsoft embraced it; before that, > > plain ol' text seemed much more common. My sense at the time was that > > networked filesystems and services like FTP (or the then-nascent HTTP) were > > far less commonplace on the MS platform, so email as a content distribution > > mechanism was more natural in that world. I was somewhat dismayed at the > > inability to make Windows users see the light; in retrospect, of course, > > this just means that I myself was missing something critical. > > > > > > > > Mary Ann, why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really curious > > about the reasoning from folks involved with such things at the time. > > > > > > > > - Dan C. > > > > > > > > -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 13 10:07:45 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 20:07:45 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <34f2acb2-d104-ffde-c36e-4cc14905fe21@mhorton.net> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <34f2acb2-d104-ffde-c36e-4cc14905fe21@mhorton.net> Message-ID: Maybe - I'm not sure how much of my Tek old stuff is recoverable. I did just find something for Noel recently. Who knows ;-) There is one tape I have from that time that a) I'm not sure what is on it and b) if its readable. It's on my to do list. I will add it to the pile, Clem On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > That's interesting, Clem. It would be useful to date the real date of the > first email attachment sent. Right now the only firm date we have is > 6/1/80. Do you have any old email or copy of uuencode that could establish > an earlier date? > > Thanks, > > Mary Ann > > On 03/12/2017 10:42 AM, Clem Cole wrote: > > I think it might actually predates 6/1/80 by 6-9 months because I was at > Tek a year earlier and you and I started corresponding that first summer I > was at Tek. I remember that you had sent me a copy of it shortly after you > wrote it. So I think there is a chance that that might be a slightly later > version. > > Clem > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > >> I just heard from a historian named Piotr Klaban with an interesting >> historical sidelight. >> >> Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th anniversary of >> the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's MIME. Piotr points out that >> uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. >> >> I checked and, while I don't have any email archives from that time frame >> at Berkeley, I was able to find the 4BSD archive on minnie that dates the >> uuencode.1c man page at 6/1/80. We didn't call them attachments back then, >> just sending binary files by email. (Prior to then it was common to just >> include the text of the file raw in the email, which only worked for ASCII >> files.) It was a few years later when cc:Mail and Microsoft Mail started >> calling uuencoded files embedded in email "attachments". >> >> When MIME came out in 1992 I became a champion of SMTP/MIME as a standard >> - it was a big improvement. But uuencod predated MIME by 12 years. >> >> Mary Ann >> >> >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Mar 13 10:09:10 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:09:10 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <34f2acb2-d104-ffde-c36e-4cc14905fe21@mhorton.net> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <34f2acb2-d104-ffde-c36e-4cc14905fe21@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <20170313000910.GA22985@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:35:24PM -0700, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > That's interesting, Clem. It would be useful to date the real date of > the first email attachment sent. Right now the only firm date we have > is 6/1/80. Do you have any old email or copy of uuencode that could > establish an earlier date? Surely someone here has an archive of e-mail that they can grep through. I just did: $ grep ^begin 198*/*/* [ yyyy/mm/dd ] and hit an e-mail in 1989. My archive only goes back to 1985 though. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 13 10:11:41 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 20:11:41 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313000910.GA22985@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <34f2acb2-d104-ffde-c36e-4cc14905fe21@mhorton.net> <20170313000910.GA22985@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: I changed systems to many times and in the old days storage was so expensive, email got archived to tape thinking if I needed its I would read it later - then either did pull want a wanted or let if go fallow and the the bits decay. On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 8:09 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:35:24PM -0700, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > That's interesting, Clem. It would be useful to date the real date of > > the first email attachment sent. Right now the only firm date we have > > is 6/1/80. Do you have any old email or copy of uuencode that could > > establish an earlier date? > > Surely someone here has an archive of e-mail that they can grep through. > I just did: > > $ grep ^begin 198*/*/* [ yyyy/mm/dd ] > > and hit an e-mail in 1989. My archive only goes back to 1985 though. > > Cheers, Warren > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Mon Mar 13 10:34:27 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 20:34:27 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Doug McIlroy > wrote: > >> And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want >> to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. >> > > ​Or when your HR and Legal dept sends legal documents (like tax info and > patent disclosures ) using XPS instead of PS or PDF and wonder why much of > the company can not or will not read it when "legal can read it just fine." > Or when the project management consultants ask to see your requirements document and you send it to them in troff and they write back, "I can't open this in Word." Sigh. One of my pet peeves when I got my first job outside of a university environment was that I was expected to drop all of the tools I'd been accustomed to using and start using "the standard", which basically meant something Microsoft based. Even though I was running FreeBSD on my workstation, and not Windows NT. It was somewhat maddening; whenever I tried to use Windows I felt like I was typing in jello because it was so unfamiliar. I finally gave up MH for email (and acme Mail under Plan 9) when I realized this whole "web" thing was here to stay and that GMail had acquired a somewhat reasonable user interface, that email attachments were now the norm even within a single organization, and that I wasn't going to get away from any of it. The world moves, even if not always forward. But I still somewhat resent the idea that the "cloud" is forcing me into a specific model of working that requires I learn a mandated toolset that I don't really care for: I'd rather be able to pick and choose the tools that best suit the problem at hand and my style of working and combine them in ways that are useful to me, but that weren't anticipated by the original authors. I think that's sort of the essence of the Unix tool philosophy, but something that's fallen by the wayside, even under Unix, and I think that's a real shame. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 13 11:28:13 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 18:28:13 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170313012813.GN2685@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 08:34:27PM -0400, Dan Cross wrote: > Or when the project management consultants ask to see your requirements > document and you send it to them in troff and they write back, "I can't > open this in Word." Sigh. > > One of my pet peeves when I got my first job outside of a university > environment was that I was expected to drop all of the tools I'd been > accustomed to using and start using "the standard", which basically meant > something Microsoft based. Even though I was running FreeBSD on my > workstation, and not Windows NT. It was somewhat maddening; whenever I > tried to use Windows I felt like I was typing in jello because it was so > unfamiliar. Yep, agreed. I fought the good fight in my company, our commercial contract is a troff document (complete with troff's version of #ifdef so I sourced a generic MLA, an Intel specific one, a Cisco specific one, an HP specific one, an educational one, and something else I'd have to go look). Invariably the customers would suck the roff output into word and wack it and send it back. I built up tools to deal with that, I'd export back to text and then run it through something I call pfmt which reformats stuff such that each sentence starts on a new line. That made it very easy to diff and see changes. This actually caught some really bad behaviour on HP's part (this is all ancient history so I doubt anyone cares). They sucked it into Word, turned on track changes, made some minor changes, then turned off track changes and made some major changes. If I had been trusting Word's history we would not have noticed the major changes. But I didn't, I caught them, when they were presented to HP they did the classic "however did that happen, we have no idea, blah, blah, blah". Pretty darn sleazy. --lm P.S. For those of you who are business guys, yeah, every single customer we have ever had has been on our paper. Including Intel. We may be the only small company that can make that claim. From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 13 11:59:11 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:59:11 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313000013.GF13938@mcvoy.com> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <47519b01-0ef1-412e-8048-4494cd5d13f9@SG2APC01FT011.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <20170313000013.GF13938@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: > I used to have an undocumented mail service on my workstation at Sun. I > could send mail with a subject line specifying what I wanted and it sent > it to me. Mainly used it when I was teaching at Stanford and I wanted > to grab stuff but couldn't get into Sun's network from the outside. In > fact, just found the script, it only worked if I was coming from > lm at CS.Stanford.EDU or lm at Sunburn.Stanford.EDU so I must have been > worried about security. Giggle... Back when I was working for GEAC, I happened to find an outside line that they had forgotten was there, and me being a Unixoid and wanting to avoid their poxy M$ firewall, I used it for email etc. The IT bod understood, and it wasn't closed until after I left. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 13 15:39:29 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:39:29 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313012813.GN2685@mcvoy.com> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <20170313012813.GN2685@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: [...] > This actually caught some really bad behaviour on HP's part (this is all > ancient history so I doubt anyone cares). They sucked it into Word, > turned on track changes, made some minor changes, then turned off track > changes and made some major changes. If I had been trusting Word's > history we would not have noticed the major changes. But I didn't, I > caught them, when they were presented to HP they did the classic > "however did that happen, we have no idea, blah, blah, blah". Pretty > darn sleazy. A former boss of mine used to get quotes in Word all the time (we were a Unix house); he used to run "strings" against the document, and challenge the supplier with the fact that they were giving a competitor a better deal. To this day, "strings" is still my best Word decoder... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 13 15:58:30 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:58:30 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Paul Winalski wrote: > Back in the day plain ASCII wasn't really secure, either. There were > bugs in the firmware of the VT100 and other smartish terminals that > would cause strange behavior if certain malformed control sequences were > received. For example, causing the bell (actually a loud beep) to sound > continuously until the terminal was power-cycled. There was one > sequence that stored bad data into the user preferences area of the > EPROM. That bricked the terminal by causing it to go into a reset/crash > loop. DEC ended up modifying VMS Mail to filter out ASCII control > characters by default when it displayed email messages. You could still > display the unfiltered text, but you had to explicitly ask for that to > be done. Giggle... Back when "packet radio" was popular in the Amateur ("ham") radio world, we used to send each other ASCII bombs. Just program say F1 (the "help" key under Messy-Dog) to do a "FORMAT /Y C:" and wait... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From steffen at sdaoden.eu Mon Mar 13 21:37:45 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:37:45 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170313113745.lSbbS%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Clem Cole wrote: |On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Doug McIlroy <[1]doug at cs.dartmouth.edu[/1]\ |> wrote: | | [1] mailto:doug at cs.dartmouth.edu | |And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want |to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. | |Or when your HR and Legal dept sends legal documents (like tax info \ |and patent disclosures )  using XPS instead of PS or PDF and wonder \ |why much of the |company can not or will not read it when "legal can read it just fine." And market power is actively misused by major players, but which is possibly the only natural aspect of them: Google simply uses Cascading-Style-Sheets to create quotes, which is fine per se, but it does this by using a "class gmail_quote" without giving the actual definition of it, forcing everbody all around the world to special treat "gmail_quote", otherwise it will look like above. There is not even an external reference to the CSS. Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Doug McIlroy < I think this was supposed to go public... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:39:45 +0000 From: Steve Simon To: dave at horsfall.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode I still actively fight office. I wrote docx2troff and xlsx2txt. The former can extract txt or troff source from modern (DOCX / OPC) document as can the latter though, by their nature excel tables don't map well to tbl(1). These are written for plan9 and so the libraries are a bit different, but they could be ported to unix without too much pain. Shout if anyone is interested. -Steve -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: no subject Date: no date Size: 38 URL: From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 13 15:39:29 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:39:29 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313012813.GN2685@mcvoy.com> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <20170313012813.GN2685@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: [...] > This actually caught some really bad behaviour on HP's part (this is all > ancient history so I doubt anyone cares). They sucked it into Word, > turned on track changes, made some minor changes, then turned off track > changes and made some major changes. If I had been trusting Word's > history we would not have noticed the major changes. But I didn't, I > caught them, when they were presented to HP they did the classic > "however did that happen, we have no idea, blah, blah, blah". Pretty > darn sleazy. A former boss of mine used to get quotes in Word all the time (we were a Unix house); he used to run "strings" against the document, and challenge the supplier with the fact that they were giving a competitor a better deal. To this day, "strings" is still my best Word decoder... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." --upas-zyzrnnzjbiabzengbhksmefiye-- From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Mar 13 22:47:06 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:47:06 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Quick question: earliest Unix system with mail, uucp and bangpaths? Message-ID: <20170313124706.GA29402@minnie.tuhs.org> As I go to bed, I wonder. Which was the earliest system that used uucp to send mail through multiple systems to a remote user? I see V7 has uucp/sdmail.c, but the comment says: This is only implemented for local system mail at this time. Ditto 32V and 3BSD. 4BSD has delivermail. Its uucp has a README which says: The ``mail'' command has been modified, so that it may only be used to send mail, when it is invoked under a name beginning with 'r'. 3BSD has the same uucp. http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=3BSD/usr/src/cmd/uucp/README Ah, but 32V's mail.c checks for 'r': http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=32V/usr/src/cmd/mail.c and so does V7: http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/src/cmd/mail.c So I guess I've just answered my question. It also looks like delivermail from 4.1BSD could compile on V7, so it might be fun to try and bring a V7 system up on uucp+mail. But will it (delivermail?) do bang paths?! Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 13 23:33:36 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 09:33:36 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Quick question: earliest Unix system with mail, uucp and bangpaths? In-Reply-To: <20170313124706.GA29402@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170313124706.GA29402@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: UNIX/TS - which would become V7 could do uucp mail without Berkeley delivermail. And I believe there were versions of the delivery system around the Bell System system before TS -- maybe PWB 2.0 but I've forgotten. Anyone from Columbus or Indian Hill? delivermail - could handle the BerkNet, ArpaNet (on Ing70) and eventually UUCP. Then when Eric had to start dealing with the what he referred to as the header format of the day problem, he added a database production language -- and sendmail was born. I will just never forgive him for embedding the smtpd into it - I wish he had left it as a separate program like it was in the BBN tcp. Back to your question, I believe that local mail was around fairly early 3rd, 4th or 5th edition maybe. And uucp was spliced into it fairly soon their after, but I believe it was not the "default" mail code. Again, I think it was a few generations before the architecture of separation of the "Mail User Interface" , "Mail User Agent" , "Mail Delivery Interface" and "Mail Deliver Agent" into different components would emerge. And until such time, things are little blurry. Clem On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: > As I go to bed, I wonder. Which was the earliest system that used uucp to > send mail through multiple systems to a remote user? > > I see V7 has uucp/sdmail.c, but the comment says: This is only implemented > for local system mail at this time. Ditto 32V and 3BSD. > > 4BSD has delivermail. Its uucp has a README which says: The ``mail'' > command > has been modified, so that it may only be used to send mail, when it is > invoked under a name beginning with 'r'. 3BSD has the same uucp. > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=3BSD/usr/src/cmd/uucp/README > > Ah, but 32V's mail.c checks for 'r': > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=32V/usr/src/cmd/mail.c > and so does V7: > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/src/cmd/mail.c > > So I guess I've just answered my question. It also looks like delivermail > from 4.1BSD could compile on V7, so it might be fun to try and bring a > V7 system up on uucp+mail. But will it (delivermail?) do bang paths?! > > Cheers, Warren > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael at kjorling.se Tue Mar 14 00:58:04 2017 From: michael at kjorling.se (Michael =?utf-8?B?S2rDtnJsaW5n?=) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 14:58:04 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170312221255.BFE3F18C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <1489354472.1850950.908878144.19D9B027@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170312221255.BFE3F18C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170313145804.GH21831@yeono.kjorling.se> On 12 Mar 2017 18:12 -0400, from jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa): > (Another possibility, other than the one I previously gave, is perhaps that > there simply is no text part, which one can peruse, ignoring the rest?) Well, one could argue that if whoever is sending you something doesn't even bother with telling you why they are sending it and what it is, then is it really worth your time? I can live with multipart/alternative { text/plain, text/html } messages where the plain text part is actually _meaningful_ (my MUA is set up to do nothing with text/html unless I ask it, at which point they are fed through 'lynx -dump' plus a few other parameters), but have been known to shoot back HTML-_only_ messages to the originator. Usually with a comment to the effect of "this looks like it came through garbled". I'm still waiting for the first such recipient to obviously take the hint, but I haven't yet given up hope. The worst part is that apparently lots of "modern" MUAs don't handle multipart messages well. As in they'll get a perfectly fine MIME multi-message e-mail (for example a forwarded message plus some commentary), and it apparently shows up as _blank_. Yes, yes, MIME is a complex standard with lots of potential pitfalls, but really, _blank_? As in nothing showing up at all? Even _Outlook_ does better than that. -- Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael at kjorling.se “People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don’t.” (Bjarne Stroustrup) From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Mar 14 01:35:33 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:35:33 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode (fwd) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170313153533.GB24086@mcvoy.com> Hey Steve, I'll take a crack at porting these if you don't mind. I hate word and if your docx2troff can tease apart a word doc into roff, that would be *awesome*. On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:41:51PM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: > I think this was supposed to go public... > > -- > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:39:45 +0000 > From: Steve Simon > To: dave at horsfall.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode > > I still actively fight office. I wrote docx2troff and xlsx2txt. > > The former can extract txt or troff source from modern (DOCX / OPC) document > as can the latter though, by their nature excel tables don't map well to tbl(1). > > These are written for plan9 and so the libraries are a bit different, > but they could be ported to unix without too much pain. > > Shout if anyone is interested. > > -Steve > Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:39:29 +1100 (EST) > From: Dave Horsfall > To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society > Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode > > On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: > > [...] > > > This actually caught some really bad behaviour on HP's part (this is all > > ancient history so I doubt anyone cares). They sucked it into Word, > > turned on track changes, made some minor changes, then turned off track > > changes and made some major changes. If I had been trusting Word's > > history we would not have noticed the major changes. But I didn't, I > > caught them, when they were presented to HP they did the classic > > "however did that happen, we have no idea, blah, blah, blah". Pretty > > darn sleazy. > > A former boss of mine used to get quotes in Word all the time (we were a > Unix house); he used to run "strings" against the document, and challenge > the supplier with the fact that they were giving a competitor a better deal. > > To this day, "strings" is still my best Word decoder... > > -- > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From steffen at sdaoden.eu Tue Mar 14 06:21:54 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 21:21:54 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313113745.lSbbS%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <20170313113745.lSbbS%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <20170313202154.BNV4w%steffen@sdaoden.eu> i wrote: Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: |Clem Cole wrote: ||And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want ||to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. .. |And market power is actively misused by major players, but which .. |Turning off the HTML text part takes a button click (or took once |i looked last) ... and it turns out to be too much work. Even |that. I actually realized that this sounded snappish and overly offensive, and i want to apologize for that. It was definitely and absolutely meant as a general statement, like, why walking to the TV and turning it off, if standby is so easy. Something more like this.. --steffen From mj at mjturner.net Tue Mar 14 07:06:50 2017 From: mj at mjturner.net (Michael-John Turner) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 21:06:50 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:04:12PM +0100, Josh Good wrote: >And I quote: "EulerOS 2.0 for the x86-64 architecture were certified as >UNIX 03 compliant. The UNIX 03 conformance statement shows that the >standard C compiler is from the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), and that >the system is a Linux distribution of the Red Hat family." Inspur K-UX is similar - a Chinese repackaging of RHEL. Interestingly, it seems that Red Hat have not gone down the certification route themselves - perhaps they don't see any value in it? Cheers, MJ -- Michael-John Turner * mj at mjturner.net * http://mjturner.net/ From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 14 07:35:31 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:35:31 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Michael-John Turner wrote: > Interestingly, it seems that Red Hat have not gone down the certification > route themselves - perhaps they don't see any value in it? ​Or in there case, negative value. RH likes to have the world believe they are Linux. They don't want anything lessening their brand. Certification would make RH < UNIX I suspect which is not what they want. Certification has always been about the ISV's, and if they can convince the ISV to test on their implementation directly (and they have) they don't need it. It's the old he who has the gold. It's a crappy attitude and its just what pisses people off about MS, Apple or in the old days DEC or IBM. Sad. Clem​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Tue Mar 14 07:51:57 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:51:57 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> Message-ID: <20170313215157.GK27536@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 13, 21:06, Michael-John Turner wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:04:12PM +0100, Josh Good wrote: > >And I quote: "EulerOS 2.0 for the x86-64 architecture were certified as > >UNIX 03 compliant. The UNIX 03 conformance statement shows that the > >standard C compiler is from the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), and that > >the system is a Linux distribution of the Red Hat family." > > Inspur K-UX is similar - a Chinese repackaging of RHEL. > > Interestingly, it seems that Red Hat have not gone down the certification > route themselves - perhaps they don't see any value in it? I've wondered about that too. The cost of doing the certification tests themselves --not including the engineering time to prepare the tests-- probably is about US$ 100,000 so Red Hat should be able to afford it. My theory is that Red Hat sees more value in *not* passing the UNIX certification tests. As if thus Red Hat was stating: "Linux is the new standard, and Red Hat makes it happen. Anything else out there, is just legacy." And truth be told, probably most (all?) of the "certified UNIX" systems on the list have some "Linux compatibility" layer of some kind built into them. So compatibility with whom is the compatibility that matters? -- Josh Good From dave at horsfall.org Tue Mar 14 07:56:46 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:56:46 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313145804.GH21831@yeono.kjorling.se> References: <1489354472.1850950.908878144.19D9B027@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170312221255.BFE3F18C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20170313145804.GH21831@yeono.kjorling.se> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Mar 2017, Michael Kjörling wrote: > I can live with multipart/alternative { text/plain, text/html } messages > where the plain text part is actually _meaningful_ (my MUA is set up to > do nothing with text/html unless I ask it, at which point they are fed > through 'lynx -dump' plus a few other parameters), but have been known > to shoot back HTML-_only_ messages to the originator. Usually with a > comment to the effect of "this looks like it came through garbled". I'm > still waiting for the first such recipient to obviously take the hint, > but I haven't yet given up hope. Procmail? I'd like to have that script :-) -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Tue Mar 14 08:14:22 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:14:22 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <20170313202154.BNV4w%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <20170313113745.lSbbS%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <20170313202154.BNV4w%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <201703132214.v2DMEM8d032173@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > |Turning off the HTML text part takes a button click (or took once |i looked last) No offense taken, but there's no way to turn off the HTML part when that's the only part--and that is often the case. Doug From krewat at kilonet.net Tue Mar 14 08:30:31 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 18:30:31 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> Message-ID: <8f208e0c-7398-50bc-9e0e-0e640b3a0b99@kilonet.net> For the true Linux fan-person, it might be seen as a detriment. :) On 3/13/2017 5:06 PM, Michael-John Turner wrote: > Inspur K-UX is similar - a Chinese repackaging of RHEL. > > Interestingly, it seems that Red Hat have not gone down the > certification route themselves - perhaps they don't see any value in it? From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Tue Mar 14 10:11:04 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 13:11:04 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170313215157.GK27536@naleco.com> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> <20170313215157.GK27536@naleco.com> Message-ID: <1489450264.58c73518735ca@www.paradise.net.nz> That was the thing that tipped me off late in the nineties that Linux was succeeding - only the big vendors - and Microsoft - were ignoring Linux, everybody else had Linux-compatibility tick boxes. Particularly when FreeBSD incorporated one such item ... Then when IBM took Linux to the mainframe, it was pretty obvious that it wasn't solely a hobby OS any longer. Wesley Parish Quoting Josh Good : > My theory is that Red Hat sees more value in *not* passing the UNIX > certification tests. As if thus Red Hat was stating: "Linux is the > new standard, and Red Hat makes it happen. Anything else out there, > is just legacy." > > And truth be told, probably most (all?) of the "certified UNIX" systems > on the list have some "Linux compatibility" layer of some kind built > into them. So compatibility with whom is the compatibility that > matters? > > -- > Josh Good > > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From schily at schily.net Mon Mar 13 20:15:43 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:15:43 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> Message-ID: <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> Josh Good wrote: > Hello all. > > I was perusing the list of officially branded UNIX systems, according to > the "UNIX 03" specification and tests done by the Open Group, and I > found there listed something called "Huawei EulerOS 2.0". > > https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/xy.htm > > Intriguing, ain't it? > > So I went to Wikipedia, to see what it has to say about such a beast. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#EulerOS > > And I quote: "EulerOS 2.0 for the x86-64 architecture were certified as > UNIX 03 compliant. The UNIX 03 conformance statement shows that the > standard C compiler is from the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), and that > the system is a Linux distribution of the Red Hat family." They would need to mention how they passed the test. Given that there have been many problems last time, there was a collaboration between the Linux people and the OpenGroup: http://www.opengroup.org/personal/ajosey/tr20-08-2005.txt I would guess that this company dod modify software inorder to become compliant. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From steffen at sdaoden.eu Tue Mar 14 20:33:18 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:33:18 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <1489354472.1850950.908878144.19D9B027@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170312221255.BFE3F18C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20170313145804.GH21831@yeono.kjorling.se> Message-ID: <20170314103318.4nIZ0%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Dave Horsfall wrote: |On Mon, 13 Mar 2017, Michael Kjörling wrote: |> I can live with multipart/alternative { text/plain, text/html } messages |> where the plain text part is actually _meaningful_ (my MUA is set up to |> do nothing with text/html unless I ask it, at which point they are fed |> through 'lynx -dump' plus a few other parameters), but have been known |> to shoot back HTML-_only_ messages to the originator. Usually with a |> comment to the effect of "this looks like it came through garbled". I'm |> still waiting for the first such recipient to obviously take the hint, |> but I haven't yet given up hope. | |Procmail? I'd like to have that script :-) This really is a kind script of yours, using MIME multipart/mixed and only providing the text part. What spread in the wild (initiated by a member of the RedHat security team as far as i know) was using multipart/alternative but then not providing the alternative. |Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will \ |suffer." I don't really care as long as plain text mail is possible, and used, except that, here Michael Kjörling is unfortunately right, that major players like Google Groups sent out digests where the text partial was mutilated to being useless, for example not even giving a complete subject line, whereas the alternative HTML part gave at least some text (the details i have forgotten). This was in 2015. By sheer distress i added an option to favour the HTML part of multipart mails, and then got bitten from this new alternative-less trend. (My MUA is too stupid yet to handle this with a bit of intelligence.) The good news is that in the meanwhile even the HTML part has become practically useless if you don't have a (i think, fully blown) browser at hand. --steffen From steffen at sdaoden.eu Tue Mar 14 20:49:43 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:49:43 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <201703132214.v2DMEM8d032173@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703121813.v2CIDtRH099094@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <20170313113745.lSbbS%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <20170313202154.BNV4w%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <201703132214.v2DMEM8d032173@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170314104943.Zn7LG%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Doug McIlroy wrote: |>|Turning off the HTML text part takes a button click (or took once ||i looked last) | |No offense taken, but there's no way to turn off the HTML part |when that's the only part--and that is often the case. It is the decision of the sending party what type of message is produced, this i hope is still possible even for purely web-based mail clients. This sender-side decision i was referring to in the post quoted above. Unfortunately your observation is correct, but luckily on this list, and also on most lists that i read! But it seems many administrator tools only ever generate HTML or other rich text log files and statistics, and so on request generating mails to send these as the main body my MUA will support in the future (even though very primitive yet, disallowing additional signature injection, for example). The world turns, and integration progresses, and if you don't move you will be left behind: this is not necessarily something bad. E.g., on FreeBSD many tools in the base system now use a XO (i think) library for generating output, so that the output can be plain text, as normal, but also JSON or XML, and maybe even binary CBOR at some future time, and if there is a correct MIME type then why should Mail not be a valid transport for this, that then can be correctly decoded on the receiver side according to the MIME content type. I for one very much prefer plain text in human interaction. --steffen From tfb at tfeb.org Tue Mar 14 21:35:35 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:35:35 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> Message-ID: <42280A7B-067C-4BE7-A028-685D89BEC0A1@tfeb.org> On 13 Mar 2017, at 21:35, Clem Cole wrote: > > Or in there case, negative value. RH likes to have the world believe they are Linux. They don't want anything lessening their brand. Certification would make RH < UNIX I suspect which is not what they want. Certification has always been about the ISV's, and if they can convince the ISV to test on their implementation directly (and they have) they don't need it. > Well, in particular a lot of the kind of organisations RH sell to (banks) had experiences with Unix which were not that good: places I worked spent an enormous amount of money on very expensive machines with hardware-redundancy features which were at best marginally functional, and certainly not functional enough to rely on. These features compared very badly with the things that IBM Z-series machines could do (it might be that the IBM/AIX machines were better in this regard: I didn't deal with them very much). Of course we'd argue that this is not the fault of Unix, and that's a different discussion. But the people who have spent 9-figure sums on all this marginally-functional tin that the Unix vendors foisted on them don't look at it that way: they just want something which is not Unix, and which runs on cheap tin. Linux is not Unix, and runs on cheap tin. --tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cym224 at gmail.com Tue Mar 14 23:58:43 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:58:43 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On 13 March 2017 at 06:15, Joerg Schilling wrote (in part): > Given that there have been many problems last time, there was a collaboration > between the Linux people and the OpenGroup: > > http://www.opengroup.org/personal/ajosey/tr20-08-2005.txt > > I would guess that this company dod modify software inorder to become compliant. As they note (http://developer.huawei.com/ict/en/site-euleros ): Derived from the source-code for the CentOS distribution. In due course, I may try it. If this actually works back to most distributions, it *may* one day become possible to actually have Linux-distro-derived code compile on Unix systems. N. From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 00:43:51 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:43:51 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > But the people who have spent 9-figure sums on all this > marginally-functional tin that the Unix vendors foisted on them don't > look at it that way: they just want something which is not Unix, and > which runs on cheap tin. > ​Fair enough -- but I think that this is really another way of describing Prof. Christiansen's disruption theory​. The "lessor" technology wins over "better" technology because it's good enough. I'm curious for the Banks, in your experience - which were the UNIX vendors that were pushing 9-figure UNIX boxes. I'll guess, IBM was one of them. Maybe NCR. What HP, Sun, DEC in that bundle? > Linux is not Unix, and runs on cheap tin. > I ​believe that the point you are making is that "white box" PC's running a UNIX-like system - aka Linux could comes pretty close to doing what the highly touted AIX, NCR et al were doing and were "good enough" to get the job done. ​And that's not a statement about UNIX as much as a statement about, the WINTEL ecosystem, that Linux sat on top of and did an extremely impressive job of utilizing. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 15 01:38:15 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:38:15 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:43:51AM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > > Linux is not Unix, and runs on cheap tin. > > > I ???believe that > the point you are making is that "white box" PC's running a UNIX-like > system - aka Linux could comes pretty close to doing what the highly touted > AIX, NCR et al were doing and were "good enough" to get the job done. As someone who dedicated a bunch of his life to Unix, it pains me to say it but Linux is better than a lot of the Unix systems from back in the day. I loved SunOS but I wouldn't trade today's Linux for SunOS and I don't think there are very many people who would disagree. It got better than "good enough". From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 15 01:51:47 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:51:47 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> But how far along are we on the Linux timeline, and how far along was Sun on the SunOS timeline before they stopped developing it? It's been 23 or so years since my first exposure to Linux. SunOS started at 1.0 in 1983, and last release was just before 1995. 12 years in total. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SunOS Now, of course, I understand SunOS is based on BSD so there is a lot more work invested in SunOS before Sun even started on it which adds another 10 years (maybe less) to the SunOS development timeline. But in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? Just a thought experiment, nothing more. On 3/14/2017 11:38 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > As someone who dedicated a bunch of his life to Unix, it pains me to say > it but Linux is better than a lot of the Unix systems from back in the > day. I loved SunOS but I wouldn't trade today's Linux for SunOS and I > don't think there are very many people who would disagree. > > It got better than "good enough". > From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 15 01:56:31 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 08:56:31 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170314155631.GD32726@mcvoy.com> SunOS wasn't multi threaded. Linux seems to have done that pretty well without getting all bloated (unlike early Solaris releases, I can't speak to the later ones). Linux is just more mature, has had more people working on it (which is both a good and a bad thing). And didn't have Sun's stick in the mud approach to compat that made things like /proc in Solaris way way way less useful than Linux' /proc. So it's really hard to say. On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:51:47AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > But how far along are we on the Linux timeline, and how far along was Sun on > the SunOS timeline before they stopped developing it? > > It's been 23 or so years since my first exposure to Linux. > > SunOS started at 1.0 in 1983, and last release was just before 1995. 12 > years in total. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SunOS > > Now, of course, I understand SunOS is based on BSD so there is a lot more > work invested in SunOS before Sun even started on it which adds another 10 > years (maybe less) to the SunOS development timeline. But in reality, how > much of Linux was based on previous works? > > Just a thought experiment, nothing more. > > > On 3/14/2017 11:38 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > >As someone who dedicated a bunch of his life to Unix, it pains me to say > >it but Linux is better than a lot of the Unix systems from back in the > >day. I loved SunOS but I wouldn't trade today's Linux for SunOS and I > >don't think there are very many people who would disagree. > > > >It got better than "good enough". > > -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From michael at kjorling.se Wed Mar 15 01:57:18 2017 From: michael at kjorling.se (Michael =?utf-8?B?S2rDtnJsaW5n?=) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:57:18 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): > in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which would include at least the essential userspace parts)? -- Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael at kjorling.se “People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don’t.” (Bjarne Stroustrup) From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 15 02:20:06 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 12:20:06 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> Message-ID: <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Everything. I'm trying to grok how long Linux as a whole was in active development. That includes all the GNU utilities, GCC, everything. Just like a "regular" corporate development environment would have devoted to the cause :) On 3/14/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote: > On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): >> in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? > Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which would > include at least the essential userspace parts)? > From tfb at tfeb.org Wed Mar 15 02:20:39 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (tfb at tfeb.org) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:20:39 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 14 Mar 2017, at 14:43, Clem Cole wrote: > > I'm curious for the Banks, in your experience - which were the UNIX vendors that were pushing 9-figure UNIX boxes. I'll guess, IBM was one of them. Maybe NCR. What HP, Sun, DEC in that bundle? I didn't mean 9-figure sums on single machines: I meant that much for an estate. Typically companies would have machines from more than one vendor: where I was we had IBM, HP, Sun in the Unix estate at least. Then based on a fully-stuffed high-end machine costing ~$1M (which is about right), you need 100 to be 9 figures. Where I was we had 25 top-end machines from the vendor I knew best I think, and probably as many again from each the two others, as well as a bunch (low thousands I think) of lesser machines. > I ​believe that the point you are making is that "white box" PC's running a UNIX-like system - aka Linux could comes pretty close to doing what the highly touted AIX, NCR et al were doing and were "good enough" to get the job done. No, not really: what I'm saying is that the deployments of big expensive Unix systems were *not* blazingly successful (for reasons which may or may not have had to do with Unix, and which I believe mostly but not entirely did not in fact), and the people who sign off that kind of purchase then have the 'Unix bad' bit set, and so anything which is being pushed as *not* Unix smells like good to them. There is no particular reason to think that what they are doing now will work any better, other than that I think it's obvious by now that the huge-gold-plated-machine idea doesn't work very well (with the possible exception of z series, which is not Unix of course), and much smaller silver-plated systems are just better and also offer stupidly more bang per buck. Also they have probably learned some lessons from the first iteration so less dumb mistakes will be made. --tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Wed Mar 15 04:06:29 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 02:06:29 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: GCC started in 1986 with the 0.9 release in 1988, along with gas, and binutils. It originally targeted the 68020 and the VAX. Naturally more platforms were added. GCC 0.9 can be found, but many of the early versions until 1.21 seem to have been lost. I've been on and off trying to catalog some of this stuff, as you pointed out there was a lot of ground work getting Minix on the 8086, then the Bruce Evans 80386 port of Minix which then could be used to cross compile Linux using GCC 1.40... Although using the DJGPP MS-DOS port of GCC as a template I am able to build early Linux kernels on Windows using the old FSF GCC and binutils. So theoretically it could be cross compiled from MS-DOS. And there is of course, the original Libc, and bash which was the original environment, then later the GNU filesystem utils. oldinux.org has many of these old software artifacts to check out, along with vim.org http://ftp.vim.org/languages/gcc/old-releases/gcc-1/ And here for some binutils going back to 1988 https://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/sourceware.org/pub/binutils/old-releases/ On March 15, 2017 12:20:06 AM GMT+08:00, Arthur Krewat wrote: >Everything. I'm trying to grok how long Linux as a whole was in active >development. That includes all the GNU utilities, GCC, everything. > >Just like a "regular" corporate development environment would have >devoted to the cause :) > > > >On 3/14/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote: >> On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): >>> in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? >> Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which would >> include at least the essential userspace parts)? >> -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 04:18:02 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:18:02 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: Below... I agree!!! On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > As someone who dedicated a bunch of his life to Unix, it pains me to say > it but Linux is better than a lot of the Unix systems from back in the > day. I loved SunOS but I wouldn't trade today's Linux for SunOS and I > don't think there are very many people who would disagree. > > It got better than "good enough". ​It doesn't pain me at all. It is exactly what Prof. Christiansen says will happen... the "good enough" (but disruptive) technology is on faster growth than the "better" (but sustaining) one. At some point that curves will cross and what was once "good enough" now starts to control the market. That is what happened here. Linux is the "better" technology for some value of "better." ​ The term "disruptive technology" gets tossed around a lot, but very few people have actually read his book. It really is an wonderful read. He nails our business. The point is when the tech is birthed >>new group of people<< don't care that the new technology is not as good - they value it for some other reason. One reason is that it is always less expensive. Plus because it is a "lessor" technology, the "market leaders" have been taught by the Harvard Business School and to ignore the lessor as a distraction (no margins, they can not compete, they don't do the same things as us... you have heard it all). But that group of "few people" grows and the value of the lessor tech to them, out weights, the limitations and they provide the cash/incentive to make it better and it does get better. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 04:20:27 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:20:27 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: That's not really fair. The compiler and the utilities was developed for UNIX long before the Linux kernel existed. This is why so many of consider "Linux" just the current version of UNIX. On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Everything. I'm trying to grok how long Linux as a whole was in active > development. That includes all the GNU utilities, GCC, everything. > > Just like a "regular" corporate development environment would have devoted > to the cause :) > > > > > On 3/14/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote: > >> On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): >> >>> in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? >>> >> Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which would >> include at least the essential userspace parts)? >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 04:31:32 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:31:32 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Jason Stevens < jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com> wrote: > ​i​ > t originally targeted the 68020 ​It ran on the 68000 before the *20. rms had access to Masscomp box we gave him fairly early on.​ I remember pitching to our exec's trying to get him more HW and trying explain who he was to them at the time. That would have been late 85. He may have had access to that system before he got a Sun but I don't remember. That said, I'm sure the MC-500 was not the first 68000 he had access. I think he was using HW in Steve Ward's lab that the Trix guys were developing with TI and he might have had access to an Apollo system. If we can find Jack test he might remember, Noel do you remember how that went down? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From imp at bsdimp.com Wed Mar 15 04:41:33 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 12:41:33 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: Let's not forget X11 which has a long history as well starting in 1984. The 11th version of the protocol (X11) dates from 1987. All the X11 versions are online still due to the X consortium. However, X10 and earlier can be hard to find. https://www.x.org/releases/ has X10R3 and X10R4, but nothing earlier. That's also a huge part of Linux since it represents its windowing system. I used X10 on a sun 3/50 back in the day before they upgraded it to X11. It was slower and buggier than SunTools, but more cutting edge. suntools is dead and X11 is still alive. suntools went directly to the frame buffer, while X always did the protocol thing (though with many attempts over the years to make the protocol layer optional, maybe wayland will finally succeed)... Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and rebranded with the GPL. Most of that original code is now gone, but in the early days it was the source of much friction between the BSD and GPL communities, even if a lot (all) of the code was eventually replaced... It wasn't so much the use of the code that bothered people, but the filing off of the original attributions... All that's water under the bridge, but the fact that this happened, as well as many other incidents in the early days, goes a long way to explain many of the hard feelings and out-sized reactions you used to see back in the day.... This is also an important motivating factor for the foundation that Linux was built on: This friction, the causes of which were partially real or and partially imagined, drive much innovation in both camps... Warner On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Everything. I'm trying to grok how long Linux as a whole was in active > development. That includes all the GNU utilities, GCC, everything. > > Just like a "regular" corporate development environment would have devoted > to the cause :) > > > > > On 3/14/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote: >> >> On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): >>> >>> in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? >> >> Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which would >> include at least the essential userspace parts)? >> > From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 15 04:49:00 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:49:00 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like Message-ID: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> Nice thing about X was that it would talk to remote displays. I still remember sitting in the Pentagon demonstrating that the Suntools screen lock wasn't particularly secure. Then there was NeWS. This was Gosling's first attempt at a deployable language. However PostScript (even with Owen Densmore's class extensions), while a reasonable intermediary language is really sucky to actually develop. Java was a bit more refined. Of course, lots of things either implement X under the native window system or backdoor X with local extensions. We got around doing high frame rate image work on X via the SharedMemoryExtension and the ability to flip buffers on the retrace interval (both extensions, but commonly implemented by many servers). From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Wed Mar 15 04:59:00 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 02:59:00 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <2CC5CDAC-4E5B-4628-BE5D-D31532275F66@superglobalmegacorp.com> It would certainly explain the -m68000 flags, in the announcement it only mentioned the sun and Vax https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/mod.compilers/ynAVuwR7dPw As always the more info from prior to the 0.9 announcement is interesting! On March 15, 2017 2:31:32 AM GMT+08:00, Clem Cole wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Jason Stevens < >jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com >> >wrote: > > >​i​ >t originally targeted the 68020 > > >​It ran on the 68000 before the *20. rms had access to Masscomp box >we >gave him fairly early on.​ I remember pitching to our exec's trying to >get him more HW and trying explain who he was to them at the time. >That >would have been late 85. He may have had access to that system >before he got a Sun but I don't remember. That said, I'm sure the >MC-500 was not the first 68000 he had access. I think he was using HW >in Steve Ward's lab that the Trix guys were developing with TI and he >might have had access to an Apollo system. If we can find Jack test he >might remember, Noel do you remember how that went down? -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Mar 15 05:01:24 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:01:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") Message-ID: <20170314190124.1224418C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Clem Cole > rms had access to Masscomp b= ox we gave him fairly early on. > ... > I'm sure the MC-500 was not the first 68000 he had access. I think he > was using HW in Steve Ward's lab that the Trix guys were developing > with TI and he might have had access to an Apollo system. > ... > Noel do you remember how that went down? Sorry, no. From the end of '82 to early '84 I was out of the US, waiting for my permanent residency to come through, so I missed a chunk of events in that time period. Maybe one of the DSSR/RTS (Steve Ward, or someone) could clarify what access RMS had to their 68K machines? Noel From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 15 05:48:35 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:48:35 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: So what I'm hearing is Linux's timeline, which includes things that were not developed just for Linux, extends further out than SunOS does. Again, I'm including everything ... You could make a case for certain Unixes that do not include a pre-existing C compiler being bounded by their own development (or any other operating system that needs a precursor). For example, say there was an operating system that used a C compiler to build itself that was developed 10 years before. That example operating system's timeline would have to include said C compiler IMHO. On the other hand, an operating system who's sole method of creation was engineered in year 0, and was "developed" for 10 years and ended, we could say that OS's timeline was a solid 10 years. All I'm saying is comparing Linux's timeline to something like SunOS has to include everything that went into both because they both relied on precursors. Side note: I'm a bit of a bitch when it comes to Linux - which doesn't mean I don't think Linux is "UNIX" - it just means I think it's the Coherent of today's UNIX ;) On 3/14/2017 2:20 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > That's not really fair. The compiler and the utilities was developed > for UNIX long before the Linux kernel existed. This is why so many of > consider "Linux" just the current version of UNIX. > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Arthur Krewat > wrote: > > Everything. I'm trying to grok how long Linux as a whole was in > active development. That includes all the GNU utilities, GCC, > everything. > > Just like a "regular" corporate development environment would have > devoted to the cause :) > > > > > On 3/14/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote: > > On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net > (Arthur Krewat): > > in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works? > > Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which > would > include at least the essential userspace parts)? > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 06:05:38 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:05:38 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > So what I'm hearing is Linux's timeline, which includes things that were > not developed just for Linux, extends further out than SunOS does. > ​Mumble... the problem of course is the under those rules, SunOS goes back to research which goes back to V0.... ​ > > > ​...​ > All I'm saying is comparing Linux's timeline to something like SunOS has > to include everything that went into both because they both relied on > precursors. > Except for any possible legal reasons....​why differentiate ? Looks like a Duck, Quacks Like Duck or from a Turing Test.... I'm mostly can not tell the difference. > > Side note: I'm a bit of a bitch when it comes to Linux - which doesn't > mean I don't think Linux is "UNIX" - it just means I think it's the > Coherent of today's UNIX ;) > ​I guess it doesn't matter to me that much. Some of the changes are gratuitous and annoying, which brings out my inner curmudgeon as its make its tough to type to sometimes. But the fact is, UNIX, Linux, Macos are pretty much the same thing - much more so than winders. They are way more similar than different and I can be productive with all three. To me its like ethnicity in people. It says a little about some of how you might look at something, what some of you shared positions/starting points are, but we are way more alike than different and I would rather learn from the differences than fight them or try to inflict my wishes. We are better with diversity. Clem​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 15 06:16:43 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:16:43 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1fc6c1e2-c0b9-ac8c-4c48-80d7d5a46f62@kilonet.net> On 3/14/2017 4:05 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > We are better with diversity. Agreed :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 06:54:32 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:54:32 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > >> So what I'm hearing is Linux's timeline, which includes things that were >> not developed just for Linux, extends further out than SunOS does. >> > > ​Mumble... the problem of course is the under those rules, SunOS goes > back to research which goes back to V0.... > ...and Multics, whatever assembler DEC provided for the PDP-7 and so on back to the discovery of the integers and zero. Pretty soon you find yourself in the court of the Chola empire.... ​...​ >> All I'm saying is comparing Linux's timeline to something like SunOS has >> to include everything that went into both because they both relied on >> precursors. >> > Except for any possible legal reasons....​why differentiate ? Looks like > a Duck, Quacks Like Duck or from a Turing Test.... I'm mostly can not tell > the difference. > Being too like a duck carries its own risks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU Somehow, I feel that clip is an apt metaphor for the computing world in general and Linux in particular, but I'm having a hard time articulating exactly how. Side note: I'm a bit of a bitch when it comes to Linux - which doesn't mean >> I don't think Linux is "UNIX" - it just means I think it's the Coherent of >> today's UNIX ;) >> > ​I guess it doesn't matter to me that much. Some of the changes are > gratuitous and annoying, which brings out my inner curmudgeon as its make > its tough to type to sometimes. But the fact is, UNIX, Linux, Macos are > pretty much the same thing - much more so than winders. They are way more > similar than different and I can be productive with all three. To me its > like ethnicity in people. It says a little about some of how you might > look at something, what some of you shared positions/starting points are, > but we are way more alike than different and I would rather learn from the > differences than fight them or try to inflict my wishes. We are better > with diversity. > Well said! - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 07:19:50 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:19:50 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > ...and Multics, whatever assembler DEC provided for the PDP-7 and so on > back to the discovery of the integers and zero. Pretty soon you find > yourself in the court of the Chola empire.... > ​I think Ken wrote his own assembler on the GE system​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsqmobile at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 07:52:09 2017 From: jsqmobile at gmail.com (John S Quarterman) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 17:52:09 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Howdy Folks, and Internet Hall of Fame Message-ID: How are y'all? And greetings from the piney woods of south Georgia. If anybody wants to help get an Internet innovator into the Internet Hall of Fame, please drop me a note at jsqmobile at gmail.com. No rush; deadline is tomorrow. He's not a Unix person, but you'll recognize him. Hint: early ISP. -jsq -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Wed Mar 15 08:45:47 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:45:47 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 14, 10:43, Clem Cole wrote: > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > > > Linux is not Unix, and runs on cheap tin. > > > I believe that > the point you are making is that "white box" PC's running a UNIX-like > system - aka Linux could comes pretty close to doing what the highly touted > AIX, NCR et al were doing and were "good enough" to get the job done. Well, an HP Proliant (or Dell or Lenovo, etc.) machine, with its hardware-RAID battery-backed hard disk controller, redundant power supplies, lights-out remote access to firmware/BIOS, and 512 GB or more of RAM, is not exactly a "white box" PC - although it is undoubtely PC-based. Those things are mass-produced for the Windows market, but run Linux just the same. If that system can be had, with Linux and full or source code, for 20% of the cost of a similar "highly touted" AIX or HP/UX or SPARC machine... well, that's pretty much a game over situation for several formerly incumbent UNIX-branded vendors. > And that's not a statement about UNIX as much as a statement about, the > WINTEL ecosystem, that Linux sat on top of and did an extremely impressive > job of utilizing. Totally agree. But it's also a statement about how when UNIX (the by hackers, for the hackers, operating system) closed its source code, it signed its future, unappealable, certain demise. In "internet lingo": UNIX closed its source, that was felt as breakage, and it was "routed around". Therefore, Linux. Fellow list member Larry McVoy shaw it comming from the very beginning, he has a paper about it: http://www.landley.net/history/mirror/unix/srcos.html -- Josh Good From schily at schily.net Tue Mar 14 20:20:47 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 11:20:47 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net> Message-ID: <58c7c3ff.58sDuibEjTWHXZvE%schily@schily.net> Clem Cole wrote: > ???Or in there case, negative value. RH likes to have the world believe > they are Linux. They don't want anything lessening their brand. > Certification would make RH < UNIX I suspect which is not what they want. > Certification has always been about the ISV's, and if they can convince the > ISV to test on their implementation directly (and they have) they don't > need it. RH did make several strange things that did make me wonder whether they are really an OSS company, but they have a person working in the OpenGroup core team. This person (Eric Blake) usually helps to connect to developers from glibc, but he of course knows about the problems GNU software has with the POSIX standard. He is one of the active people in the teleconferences and he does not try to bend POSIX to follow what is in use on RH-Linux. I remember several cases where he helped to convince GNU people to make their programs POSIX compliant. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From schily at schily.net Wed Mar 15 00:14:40 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 15:14:40 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> Nemo wrote: > On 13 March 2017 at 06:15, Joerg Schilling wrote (in part): > > Given that there have been many problems last time, there was a collaboration > > between the Linux people and the OpenGroup: > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/personal/ajosey/tr20-08-2005.txt > > > > I would guess that this company dod modify software inorder to become compliant. > > As they note (http://developer.huawei.com/ict/en/site-euleros ): > Derived from the source-code for the CentOS distribution. In due > course, I may try it. If this actually works back to most > distributions, it *may* one day become possible to actually have > Linux-distro-derived code compile on Unix systems. In case people write POSIX compliant code... BTW: passing the POSIX certification does not verify that the system is POSIX compliant. The Linux kernel does e.g. not correctly implement the waitid() syscall and the POSIX validation test suite does not yet check for the deviation. On a real POSIX system, the following test program passes, but this currently only applies to Solaris, SCO UnixWare, recent FreeBSD and recent NetBSD: /*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ #include #include #include #include /* * Non-standard compliant platforms may need * #include or something similar * in addition to the include files above. */ extern void handler(int sig, siginfo_t *sip, void *context); extern void dosig(void); pid_t cpid; int main() { siginfo_t si; pid_t pid; int ret; dosig(); if ((pid = fork()) < 0) exit(1); cpid = pid; if (pid == 0) { _exit(1234567890); } ret = waitid(P_PID, pid, &si, WEXITED); printf(" ret: %d si_pid: %ld si_status: %d si_code: %d\n", ret, (long) si.si_pid, si.si_status, si.si_code); if (pid != si.si_pid) printf("si_pid in struct siginfo should be %ld but is %ld\n", (long) pid, (long) si.si_pid); if (si.si_status != 1234567890) printf("si_status in struct siginfo should be %d (0x%x) but is %d (0x%x)\n", 1234567890, 1234567890, si.si_status, si.si_status); if (si.si_code != CLD_EXITED) printf("si_code in struct siginfo should be %d (0x%x) but is %d (0x%x)\n", CLD_EXITED, CLD_EXITED, si.si_code, si.si_code); if (CLD_EXITED != 1) printf("CLD_EXITED is %d on this platform\n", CLD_EXITED); return (0); } /* * Include it here to allow to verify that #include * makes siginfo_t available */ #include void handler(int sig, siginfo_t *sip, void *context) { printf("received SIGCHLD (%d), si_pid: %ld si_status: %d si_code: %d\n", sig, (long) sip->si_pid, sip->si_status, sip->si_code); if (sip->si_pid != cpid) printf("SIGCHLD: si_pid in struct siginfo should be %ld but is %ld\n", (long) cpid, (long) sip->si_pid); if (sip->si_status != 1234567890) printf("SIGCHLD: si_status in struct siginfo should be %d (0x%x) but is %d (0x%x)\n", 1234567890, 1234567890, sip->si_status, sip->si_status); if (sip->si_code != CLD_EXITED) printf("SIGCHLD: si_code in struct siginfo should be %d (0x%x) but is %d (0x%x)\n", CLD_EXITED, CLD_EXITED, sip->si_code, sip->si_code); } void dosig() { struct sigaction sa; sa.sa_sigaction = handler; sigemptyset(&sa.sa_mask); sa.sa_flags = SA_RESTART|SA_SIGINFO; sigaction(SIGCHLD, &sa, NULL); } /*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ On Solaris, this prints something like: received SIGCHLD (18), si_pid: 11860 si_status: 1234567890 si_code: 1 ret: 0 si_pid: 11860 si_status: 1234567890 si_code: 1 On Linux, it prints something like: received SIGCHLD (17), si_pid: 5434 si_status: 210 si_code: 1 SIGCHLD: si_status in struct siginfo should be 1234567890 (0x499602d2) but is 210 (0xd2) ret: 0 si_pid: 5434 si_status: 210 si_code: 1 si_status in struct siginfo should be 1234567890 (0x499602d2) but is 210 (0xd2) Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From pepe at naleco.com Wed Mar 15 09:27:25 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:27:25 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <20170314232725.GC14659@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 14, 15:14, Joerg Schilling wrote: > On a real POSIX system, the following test program passes, but this currently > only applies to Solaris, SCO UnixWare, recent FreeBSD and recent NetBSD: So IBM AIX, HP/UX and Mac OS X are wrongfully-branded UNIX systems? Nice to know. -- Josh Good From clemc at ccc.com Wed Mar 15 11:11:59 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 21:11:59 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Josh Good wrote: > In "internet lingo": UNIX closed its source, that was felt as breakage, and > it was "routed around". Therefore, Linux. > ​Arghhh ​.. sorry you pushed a "Clem Hot Button" -- Traditional AT&T UNIX was always "Open Source" but it was licensed for $s however and you could see it unless you paid to get a ticket from AT&T. But if you did, it was very open and if fact that is why Unix flourished. I admit, I have found it fascinating to hear from many of you that you did not believe it was so easy to get access to the sources in those days, but the truth is - it was open and because it was open, an industry was born around UNIX. Not the real "closed" systems of the day. That said... the original code was never "Free and Open Source" - although some believe it was made so (such as the UCB lawyers described here and I'll not re-debate). Others on this list, such as Larry, strongly believe that IP was ripped off and have argued that. The argument about BSDi/386BSD/ et al is based is the "Free" part, not the "Open" part. As I have pointed out, I switched from 386BSD to Linux because I was worried we were going to lose access to "free" UNIX. This is very much the same as what happened by many other hackers in the day. And as Larry points out, when people like Larry, me et al started hacking, Linux improved. But the improvement happened *because of the economics of the system*. The other issue is that economics of UNIX changed. When UNIX was originally developed, for a University, the cost the systems was say 50-100K and the cost of Unix was at most $100. For a firm it was $20K for the first system and 5K for each system there after. Expensive, but manageable. As for the cost of entry in a Unix system dropped to a $5-$10K for the HW and SW together, the AT&T went up to $100K for the first system and $20K for the second, although if got a redistribution license it could drop to about $1K per system (BTW - that was the big fight with MSFT during the time of the negotiation for what would become the System III license - Gates wanted to pay $25 per CPU for Xenix and we laughed at by AT&T, DEC, HP, IBM et al - I was in the room during that discussion in fact). My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I ask you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it and share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". But as people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX club if you were commercial, although any University type could be apart for free. Note the university restrictions were imposed by them (for probably good reasons), but none the less - the code was open and >>was<< made available at many places. But it was not "free." Linus chose to make make Linux free, bless him. This single act, changed the economic potential of his "product" and in the end, is what allowed it to expand. But as I said, earlier today, this is right out Prof. Clay Christensen's disruptive technology theory . Rant over.... Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From downing.nick at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 11:13:04 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:13:04 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: Hmm yes although perhaps controversially I see this as a bad feature and one area where Microsoft actually gets it right. Despite the old issues of "DLL Hell" which have largely been resolved by standardizing all DLLs and in newer code by using assemblies... you have to admit that they provide a direct, local API (indeed ABI) to every subsystem you would want to use, here I am thinking of GDI, but also lots of things that would require ioctls (CD burning, say) or domain specific languages (such as Postscript) on Linux. This makes it really easy for Windows developers to use the feature and the interface is fast and reliable. And where a domain specific language is actually NEEDED (printing to a Postscript printer on Windows, or RDP-type desktop remoting etc) it is easy to insert a proxy DLL or object or device driver that does the necessary scrambling and unscrambling. It is not so easy to go the other way as it requires extensive emulation (think of ghostscript driving my Canon non-PS printer). I wrote about this issue earlier using some examples like an "ESC [" capable terminal as opposed to a memory mapped local console, or an "AT" capable external modem as opposed to an internal "WinModem" that just exposes its D/A and A/D converters with minimal signal processing and needs the host to do the heavy lifting. Same thing applies to a graphics terminal. Of course it should be programmed at a high level by specifying shapes, etc to be drawn, regions to be blitted, clipping regions and pens etc, a font manager, and it should be possible to load bitmaps, etc, into its offscreen memory and/or create offscreen drawing buffers, if these features are used correctly by applications then it is of course trivial to add a remoting proxy driver similar to Microsoft's RDP, or indeed X Windows. But the difficulty with X Windows is that the remoting layer is always there, even though it is almost completely redundant today. This hurts performance but more importantly it requires extensive workarounds as you described, which add enormous extra complexity and in my view sharply increase the learning curve and setup costs. Having said that, Xlib does offer a decent API/ABI so if we just code to that it's not TOO bad, I would like to see the rest of it deprecated though, and vendors encouraged to implement Xlib with whatever backend seems appropriate. The ridiculous thing here is that X setup is so damn convoluted and incestuously tied in with the window, session and display managers, THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO RUN X REMOTELY ANYMORE AND HAVE A FULL FEATURED DESKTOP, I have tried many times and have had various tries at thin clients and terminal serving in my home network and it basically fell over because environments like Gnome do not support multiple sessions of the same home directory, not to mention numerous other problems that mean if you login remotely you basically just get a blank screen with a default X cursor and maybe a context menu that can run an Xterm. Bleh! In my experience you have to use a remoter like VNC and guess what that does, tricks X into thinking it's running locally and then intervenes further up in the display stack to do the actual remoting. It's a complete dog's breakfast and frankly could never compete with Windows in any realistic way. I use it because it is the least bad of the available options (no way am I having advertising in my start menu and my computer loaded with bloatware and spyware before I even open the box, and no way am I putting up with vague messages like "Something went wrong" or "Windows is making some checks to optimize your experience" or whatnot), and because my computer is so fast despite being 6yrs old that X only feels borderline sluggish, i.e. is tolerable. But so much better would be possible with a redesign. CUPS is also a dogs breakfast and hugely unreliable, Windows GDI printing just wins hands down for all the same reasons. End rant. Nick On Mar 15, 2017 5:49 AM, "Ron Natalie" wrote: Nice thing about X was that it would talk to remote displays. I still remember sitting in the Pentagon demonstrating that the Suntools screen lock wasn't particularly secure. Then there was NeWS. This was Gosling's first attempt at a deployable language. However PostScript (even with Owen Densmore's class extensions), while a reasonable intermediary language is really sucky to actually develop. Java was a bit more refined. Of course, lots of things either implement X under the native window system or backdoor X with local extensions. We got around doing high frame rate image work on X via the SharedMemoryExtension and the ability to flip buffers on the retrace interval (both extensions, but commonly implemented by many servers). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Wed Mar 15 17:55:13 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 01:55:13 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> Message-ID: <201703150755.v2F7tDh8027337@freefriends.org> Clem Cole wrote: > But the improvement happened *because of the economics of the system*. I guess that's true. My experience is that GNU Awk (gawk) was used on the side a lot, alongside Unix awk on Unix systems. When gawk became *the* awk on Linux systems, that's when it really started getting pounded on, and that's when many of the significant bugs and/or performance issues got shaken out. I suspect that this is true of the other major GNU tools, such as Bash, coreutils, etc. Arnold From tfb at tfeb.org Wed Mar 15 20:15:06 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:15:06 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> On 15 Mar 2017, at 01:13, Nick Downing wrote: > > But the difficulty with X Windows is that the remoting layer is always there, even though it is almost completely redundant today. It's redundant if you don't ever use machines which you aren't physically sitting next to and want to run any kind of graphical tool run on them. I do that all the time. --tim From downing.nick at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 21:03:32 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 22:03:32 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> Message-ID: I realized after writing that I was being slightly unfair since one valid use case that DOES work correctly is something like: ssh -X This is occasionally handy, although the best use case I can think of is running a browser on some internet-facing machine so as to temporarily change your IP address, and this use case isn't exactly bulletproof since at least google chrome will look for a running instance and hand over to it (despite that instance having a different DISPLAY= setting). Nevertheless my point stands which is that IMO a programmatic API (either through .so or .dll linkage, or through ioctls or dedicated syscalls) should be the first resort and anything else fancy such as remoting, domain specific languages, /proc or fuse type interfaces, whatever, should be done through extra layers as appropriate. You shouldn't HAVE to use them. cheers, Nick On Mar 15, 2017 9:15 PM, "Tim Bradshaw" wrote: On 15 Mar 2017, at 01:13, Nick Downing wrote: > > But the difficulty with X Windows is that the remoting layer is always there, even though it is almost completely redundant today. It's redundant if you don't ever use machines which you aren't physically sitting next to and want to run any kind of graphical tool run on them. I do that all the time. --tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From schily at schily.net Wed Mar 15 21:11:28 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:11:28 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <20170314232725.GC14659@naleco.com> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> <20170314232725.GC14659@naleco.com> Message-ID: <58c92160.ZlvHdWOkL83pBDeR%schily@schily.net> Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 14, 15:14, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > On a real POSIX system, the following test program passes, but this currently > > only applies to Solaris, SCO UnixWare, recent FreeBSD and recent NetBSD: > > So IBM AIX, HP/UX and Mac OS X are wrongfully-branded UNIX systems? Well, this is your wording... The background is just that around 1995, The OpenGroup added the waitid() interface that has been introduced in 1989 by SVr4. At that time, the OpenGroup standard text was correct and interested companies could have implemented the interface correctly. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From tfb at tfeb.org Wed Mar 15 22:03:32 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (tfb at tfeb.org) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:03:32 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> On 15 Mar 2017, at 11:03, Nick Downing wrote: > > I realized after writing that I was being slightly unfair since one valid use case that DOES work correctly is something like: > ssh -X > This is occasionally handy, although the best use case I can think of is running a browser on some internet-facing machine so as to temporarily change your IP address I think you live in a strange alternative world, or (more likely) I do. My world is better however. In my world I have a machine on my desk which runs an X server (which currently is talking to the physical screen, but will I hope soon be some kind of VNC so I can push this display to wherever I need it). I also use a large number of machines which don't have any kind of screen and on which I may want to run graphical tools. In my experience this is what researchy type places with large-scale computing requirements have looked like essentially for ever, and it's the environment X was designed for (well, probably it was actually designed for student access at MIT but it very quickly moved into these environments). And it works *really* well, and anything which replaces it needs to work at least as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From downing.nick at gmail.com Wed Mar 15 23:12:12 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 00:12:12 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> Message-ID: Hmm well that DOES sound a bit patronizing, no offence taken though, I think it's more that I almost never use graphical tools, well at least not for any sysadmin or development type work. In the last day I ran chromium browser, xviewer (AKA eye of gnome), xreader (AKA evince), the gimp, libreoffice writer, and (currently) mplayer... these are all exclusively because I HAD to work with an inherently graphical resource, so there was no reasonable alternative but to run those programs. For anything else I would use the command line (occasionally I do DSP type stuff with matplotlib or gamey type stuff with pygame I guess). I can't honestly see a use case where I would ever want to run any of those programs on a server, since I associate all those activities with personal type stuff that only happens on my laptop, occasionally on my home server in its role as media centre connected to TV but not much. So that's why I say that X remoting is irrelevant to me. At one stage I had a separate office with thin clients (and experimental setups at home etc) but frankly it was not that useable, not with gnome at least due to single session limitation. I also had in the last 6 years a separate office and server at uni, I briefly ran VNC on it and I had to do the ssh -X thing on it once or twice for whatever reason (get an important bookmark URL, check a large Google Drive upload, that sort of thing) but I never considered actually running a graphical app on it since I could just git pull and run locally. So it's not that I haven't been exposed to servers or haven't tried those commands or whatnot, it's actually that I've attempted to use that functionality where appropriate (got excited about it, and then disillusioned later), and really thought about it carefully in order to optimize my setup and development costs, and concluded that that technology is irrelevant to my workflow and not worth the setup cost. If X were to be de-bloatified and large chunks of it deprecated and deleted in order to make configuration simple, logical and flexible, then that may change. Hmm. Nick On Mar 15, 2017 11:03 PM, wrote: > On 15 Mar 2017, at 11:03, Nick Downing wrote: > > > I realized after writing that I was being slightly unfair since one valid > use case that DOES work correctly is something like: > ssh -X > This is occasionally handy, although the best use case I can think of is > running a browser on some internet-facing machine so as to temporarily > change your IP address > > > I think you live in a strange alternative world, or (more likely) I do. > My world is better however. In my world I have a machine on my desk which > runs an X server (which currently is talking to the physical screen, but > will I hope soon be some kind of VNC so I can push this display to wherever > I need it). I also use a large number of machines which don't have any > kind of screen and on which I may want to run graphical tools. > > In my experience this is what researchy type places with large-scale > computing requirements have looked like essentially for ever, and it's the > environment X was designed for (well, probably it was actually designed for > student access at MIT but it very quickly moved into these environments). > And it works *really* well, and anything which replaces it needs to work at > least as well. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Wed Mar 15 23:42:45 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:42:45 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <58c92160.ZlvHdWOkL83pBDeR%schily@schily.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> <20170314232725.GC14659@naleco.com> <58c92160.ZlvHdWOkL83pBDeR%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <1489585365.3442859.912122976.442EDB92@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017, at 07:11, Joerg Schilling wrote: > The background is just that around 1995, The OpenGroup added the waitid() > interface that has been introduced in 1989 by SVr4. At that time, the > OpenGroup > standard text was correct and interested companies could have implemented > the > interface correctly. What was the rationale for including the requirement we are discussing? Even granting that it *did* (there doesn't seem to be any version of the standard online early enough not to have the supposed mistake in the text, present in SUSv2 and Issue 6, of allowing waitid to give an 8-bit value, so we have only your word) Is it really desirable that the standard *should* include novel SVR4 features not present in earlier versions of Unix that do not add any particular value? From michael at kjorling.se Thu Mar 16 00:32:28 2017 From: michael at kjorling.se (Michael =?utf-8?B?S2rDtnJsaW5n?=) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:32:28 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> On 14 Mar 2017 15:48 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): > Again, I'm including everything ... You could make a case for > certain Unixes that do not include a pre-existing C compiler being > bounded by their own development (or any other operating system that > needs a precursor). For example, say there was an operating system > that used a C compiler to build itself that was developed 10 years > before. That example operating system's timeline would have to > include said C compiler IMHO. > > On the other hand, an operating system who's sole method of creation > was engineered in year 0, and was "developed" for 10 years and > ended, we could say that OS's timeline was a solid 10 years. Then why limit yourself to the C compiler? The operating system probably relies on an early bootstrapper layer to start (on the IBM PC and similar systems this is the BIOS or more recently UEFI; other architectures are similar or different). The code was probably written using keyboards, which may or may not rely on firmware for the physical key to key code to operating system input mapping, let alone the editor and file system code used to store those first few chunks of code. And what about the timelines of _those_? At some point the system becomes self-hosting in the software sense, but it took work to get to that point. And so on. I think you see where I am heading with this; if we're going to include things that were not done specifically for the operating system in question, then unless we draw a clear line somewhere, we end up with some guy working on vacuum tube theory a century ago and _still_ aren't anywhere near an answer to "how long is the timeline of this piece of software?". Hence, absent some kind of demarcation, that discussion becomes meaningless. -- Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael at kjorling.se “People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don’t.” (Bjarne Stroustrup) From tfb at tfeb.org Thu Mar 16 00:37:08 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (tfb at tfeb.org) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:37:08 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <76BC14F6-AAA1-48EC-B803-878779F1A0CD@tfeb.org> On 15 Mar 2017, at 13:12, Nick Downing wrote: > > Hmm well that DOES sound a bit patronizing Sorry, it was not meant to be. All I was trying to say was that X in fact works extremely well for the environments it is designed for (in which I now work), and for people who need to use graphical tools in those environments, and ripping out the network transparency (which seems to be what a bunch of people want to do) would be this geological step backwards in those environments: a GUI which is local to one machine is just a hugely limiting thing. The whole reason I originally started using X was not that it was faster than Suntools (because it was catastrophically slower) but the network transparency. I think the bloat argument is also one of those things which has been overtaken by events: X is bloated in the sense that Common Lisp is bloated: they were both a serious pain in the 1990s, but compared to anything with the word 'enterprise' in its name they now look like these svelte lightweight things which start in a tiny fraction of a second. But I don't want to get into a fight about this and it's probably off-topic anyway (and again, sorry if I seemed patronising that was not my intention at all: probably should not send email with a cold). --tim From random832 at fastmail.com Thu Mar 16 01:16:23 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:16:23 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <58c94c4e.ywmehec4cxSvdppy%schily@schily.net> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> <20170314232725.GC14659@naleco.com> <58c92160.ZlvHdWOkL83pBDeR%schily@schily.net> <1489585365.3442859.912122976.442EDB92@webmail.messagingengine.com> <58c94c4e.ywmehec4cxSvdppy%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <1489590983.3467430.912238176.0034B198@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017, at 10:14, Joerg Schilling wrote: > It seems that you do not understand POSIX the right way. > > POSIX does not invent new features but rather standardizes existing > features > present in existing UNIX implementations. Yes but what I was suggesting was that this may have been a case of too eagerly standardizing a new feature that one implementation had added without considering whether there was a good reason to impose that feature on other implementations. I mean, surely not *everything* that SVr4 does is in POSIX. There must therefore be some rationale for selecting which features, particularly features that are not already universal, to standardize. So what was the rationale for including this one? From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 16 01:36:21 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:36:21 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> Message-ID: You make a valid point, and re-reading what I wrote, I find that I pushed the example too far :) The subject was originally that SunOS at it's end-of-life did not have the features that Linux now does, and comparing their development lengths brings up an interesting question. What would SunOS have become if it had been actively developed for as long as Linux has? I was trying to make the point that SunOS didn't have the same amount of elapsed time invested in it's development, and yet in fairness it was based on BSD which adds to that elapsed time significantly. Off-topic: Anyone ever run SunOS on a Sparc-10 or similar platform (670?) with two processors? Was it my imagination or did it actually use both processors? Side note: I was one of those people who was pulled kicking-and-screaming into the Solaris (SVR4) world after having administered SunOS for years. On 3/15/2017 10:32 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote: > On 14 Mar 2017 15:48 -0400, from krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat): >> Again, I'm including everything ... You could make a case for >> certain Unixes that do not include a pre-existing C compiler being >> bounded by their own development (or any other operating system that >> needs a precursor). For example, say there was an operating system >> that used a C compiler to build itself that was developed 10 years >> before. That example operating system's timeline would have to >> include said C compiler IMHO. >> >> On the other hand, an operating system who's sole method of creation >> was engineered in year 0, and was "developed" for 10 years and >> ended, we could say that OS's timeline was a solid 10 years. > Then why limit yourself to the C compiler? The operating system > probably relies on an early bootstrapper layer to start (on the IBM PC > and similar systems this is the BIOS or more recently UEFI; other > architectures are similar or different). The code was probably written > using keyboards, which may or may not rely on firmware for the > physical key to key code to operating system input mapping, let alone > the editor and file system code used to store those first few chunks > of code. And what about the timelines of _those_? At some point the > system becomes self-hosting in the software sense, but it took work to > get to that point. And so on. > > I think you see where I am heading with this; if we're going to > include things that were not done specifically for the operating > system in question, then unless we draw a clear line somewhere, we end > up with some guy working on vacuum tube theory a century ago and > _still_ aren't anywhere near an answer to "how long is the timeline of > this piece of software?". Hence, absent some kind of demarcation, that > discussion becomes meaningless. > From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 16 01:54:15 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:54:15 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <58c9623b.law1Aw2ufj3DFNA1%schily@schily.net> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> <58c9623b.law1Aw2ufj3DFNA1%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <8949cc1a-b5c9-6640-6f82-e18e1ab678a0@kilonet.net> Sorry, in this context, SunOS means 4.1.4 - not Solaris SVR4 I run Solaris myself, and love it. On 3/15/2017 11:48 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Arthur Krewat wrote: > >> You make a valid point, and re-reading what I wrote, I find that I >> pushed the example too far :) >> >> The subject was originally that SunOS at it's end-of-life did not have >> the features that Linux now does, and comparing their development >> lengths brings up an interesting question. What would SunOS have become > So you believe that SunOS-5.11 is no longer alive? > > There is an Oracle based version and a OpenSolarisd based version developed by > the community. > > Jörg > From lm at mcvoy.com Thu Mar 16 01:59:05 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 08:59:05 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> Message-ID: <20170315155905.GF2995@mcvoy.com> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:36:21AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Off-topic: Anyone ever run SunOS on a Sparc-10 or similar platform (670?) > with two processors? Was it my imagination or did it actually use both > processors? Yeah, SunOS 4.1.4 had some MP work done to it. Pretty sure I posted about it here and dragged Greg Limes into it. He was involved in that work. I think it sort of worked up to 4 CPUs but as with all early kernel threading stuff it worked better when it was a 4 cpus of userland work, less so when it was 4 cpus of I/O. > Side note: I was one of those people who was pulled kicking-and-screaming > into the Solaris (SVR4) world You and me both. From khm at sciops.net Thu Mar 16 02:40:06 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:40:06 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:12:12AM +1100, Nick Downing wrote: > Hmm well that DOES sound a bit patronizing, no offence taken though, I > think it's more that I almost never use graphical tools, well at least not > for any sysadmin or development type work. In the last day I ran chromium > browser, xviewer (AKA eye of gnome), xreader (AKA evince), the gimp, > libreoffice writer, and (currently) mplayer... these are all exclusively > because I HAD to work with an inherently graphical resource, so there was > no reasonable alternative but to run those programs. For anything else I > would use the command line (occasionally I do DSP type stuff with > matplotlib or gamey type stuff with pygame I guess). I can't honestly see a > use case where I would ever want to run any of those programs on a server, Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different programs. It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the functionality should be deleted. khm From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 16 02:52:52 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:52:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> Message-ID: <84c8f429-fe4a-691c-f585-bad495f41aec@kilonet.net> I just installed the latest version of Oracle's Forms/Reports 12c for a customer and it uses an X-windows installer. Guess how I remote displayed it back to my VNC session that is running on a "jump server"? On 3/15/2017 12:40 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote: > Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator > too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different > programs. > > It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. > That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the > functionality should be deleted. > > khm > From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Mar 16 03:43:34 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:43:34 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315155905.GF2995@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> <20170315155905.GF2995@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:36:21AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> Off-topic: Anyone ever run SunOS on a Sparc-10 or similar platform (670?) >> with two processors? Was it my imagination or did it actually use both >> processors? > > Yeah, SunOS 4.1.4 had some MP work done to it. Pretty sure I posted > about it here and dragged Greg Limes into it. He was involved in that > work. I think it sort of worked up to 4 CPUs but as with all early > kernel threading stuff it worked better when it was a 4 cpus of > userland work, less so when it was 4 cpus of I/O. Solbourne computer produced OS/MP, which was a SMPized version of SunOS 4.1. It scaled to at least 16 CPUs. Userland was 100% compatible with SunOS at the given revision level. My team (the OI group) was part of Solbourne for a while, so we got much of that gear when we were spun out to ParcPlace. Our main build server had 12 CPUs, and it was nice being able to do make -j 16. cfront was, for its time, quite the pig. Now it's lightyears faster than clang, though produces lousy code... OS/MP ran on hardware that was 50MHz SuperSparc CPUs and could be configured up to 14 CPUs and a whopping 256MB of RAM... Warner From lm at mcvoy.com Thu Mar 16 05:02:58 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:02:58 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> <20170315155905.GF2995@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170315190258.GA20490@mcvoy.com> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:43:34AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > Solbourne computer produced OS/MP, which was a SMPized version of > SunOS 4.1. It scaled to at least 16 CPUs. I don't suppose that code is around anywhere? I'd love to see what they did. Even as a set of diffs from 4.1 would be cool. From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Mar 16 05:14:25 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 13:14:25 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315190258.GA20490@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <20170315143228.GG25424@yeono.kjorling.se> <20170315155905.GF2995@mcvoy.com> <20170315190258.GA20490@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:43:34AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >> Solbourne computer produced OS/MP, which was a SMPized version of >> SunOS 4.1. It scaled to at least 16 CPUs. > > I don't suppose that code is around anywhere? I'd love to see what > they did. Even as a set of diffs from 4.1 would be cool. It was never released publicly. I know a guy who might still have a copy, but I don't know if he'd be willing to let me copy it... There's a small chance I still have a copy on a backup dump somewhere, but I kinda doubt it... Warner From pepe at naleco.com Thu Mar 16 05:28:17 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 20:28:17 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 14, 21:11, Clem Cole wrote: > > My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I ask > you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it and > share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". But as > people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX club if > you were commercial, although any University type could be apart for free. What UNIX for PC in the '90s had the option to buy a source code license for that specific version, so that PC hackers could write drivers for their hardware and tune the kernel internals to their liking, or be able to fix themselves a bug in the serial port driver, etc.? Certainly not OpenServer, not UnixWare nor SCO Xenix. Did DELL Unix offered a payware source code license for their product? I'm not aware of such. >From System V onwards, UNIX became closed source in what matters, that is, the version running on your hardware and the version with the drivers you are using (unless you were an employee at IBM, DEC, HP or SUN running propietary hardware and happened to be in the right group). It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At least, it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source code he could readily compile and run on his i386. -- Josh Good From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 16 05:35:27 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:35:27 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: SVR4 On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 14, 21:11, Clem Cole wrote: > > > > My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I ask > > you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it and > > share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". But > as > > people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX club if > > you were commercial, although any University type could be apart for > free. > > What UNIX for PC in the '90s had the option to buy a source code license > for that specific version, so that PC hackers could write drivers for > their hardware and tune the kernel internals to their liking, or be able > to fix themselves a bug in the serial port driver, etc.? > > Certainly not OpenServer, not UnixWare nor SCO Xenix. Did DELL Unix > offered a payware source code license for their product? I'm not aware > of such. > > From System V onwards, UNIX became closed source in what matters, that > is, the version running on your hardware and the version with the drivers > you are using (unless you were an employee at IBM, DEC, HP or SUN running > propietary hardware and happened to be in the right group). > > It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At least, > it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source code > he could readily compile and run on his i386. > > -- > Josh Good > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 16 05:45:24 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:45:24 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: Sorry -- finger fumble... SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many people did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was available it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote drivers for it etc. There were books published about it. It was hardly secret. That said, BSDi was $1K until the law suite and the pretty reasonable at the time, and NET2 would eventually become free in the same way as Linux - purely a copying fee. Linus has gone on record if he had know about the 386BSD download, he would have used it. It was a case of not knowing. But as Larry points out, some people still are not happy with the results. It's also not clear that people like me would still not gotten scared when the court case came -- which clouded things... I'm not sating Linux was (and is not) important. Just saying please don't say UNIX was not Open. It was. Unix was not Free. On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 14, 21:11, Clem Cole wrote: > > > > My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I ask > > you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it and > > share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". But > as > > people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX club if > > you were commercial, although any University type could be apart for > free. > > What UNIX for PC in the '90s had the option to buy a source code license > for that specific version, so that PC hackers could write drivers for > their hardware and tune the kernel internals to their liking, or be able > to fix themselves a bug in the serial port driver, etc.? > > Certainly not OpenServer, not UnixWare nor SCO Xenix. Did DELL Unix > offered a payware source code license for their product? I'm not aware > of such. > > From System V onwards, UNIX became closed source in what matters, that > is, the version running on your hardware and the version with the drivers > you are using (unless you were an employee at IBM, DEC, HP or SUN running > propietary hardware and happened to be in the right group). > > It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At least, > it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source code > he could readily compile and run on his i386. > > -- > Josh Good > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From schily at schily.net Thu Mar 16 00:14:38 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:14:38 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"? In-Reply-To: <1489585365.3442859.912122976.442EDB92@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com> <58c6714f.IBfM/wqgeKrLugki%schily@schily.net> <58c7fad0.H3V/v3UHdCpwwB0E%schily@schily.net> <20170314232725.GC14659@naleco.com> <58c92160.ZlvHdWOkL83pBDeR%schily@schily.net> <1489585365.3442859.912122976.442EDB92@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <58c94c4e.ywmehec4cxSvdppy%schily@schily.net> Random832 wrote: > What was the rationale for including the requirement we are discussing? > Even granting that it *did* (there doesn't seem to be any version of the > standard online early enough not to have the supposed mistake in the > text, present in SUSv2 and Issue 6, of allowing waitid to give an 8-bit > value, so we have only your word) Is it really desirable that the > standard *should* include novel SVR4 features not present in earlier > versions of Unix that do not add any particular value? It seems that you do not understand POSIX the right way. POSIX does not invent new features but rather standardizes existing features present in existing UNIX implementations. The fact that SUS introduced waitid(), obviously intended and correctly worded an interface as defined by SVr4 in 1989. The fact that later versions introduced a different wording has been identified as a bug from the standardization process and this bug has been corrected in the technical corrigendum 2 of the current standard. You may read this at: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/toc.htm If you like to understand the real problem, it may be better to give more information about the deviations: - AIX only returns 8 bits from the exit() code but is otherwise correct. - HP-UX behaves similar to AIX - Mac OS X returns the lower 24 bits from the exit() code and sign extends the result. Mac OS X however returns a zeroed out si_pid and si_code and thus it's waitid() is completely unusable. I have no idea how Apple could ever pass the POSIX compliance tests. - Previous *BSD implementations did and Linux does clobber important information early in the kernel and thus would need to change their kernel data flow to make waitid() behave correctly. - FreeBSD did this in July 2015 within 20 hours after reporting - NetBSD did this change last year in April within a few days. - The Linux kernel people have been informed and replied that there is no interest in becomming compliant. - The Cygwin people have been informed and replied that they have been Solaris compatible in the past but now are bug by bug Linux compatible. It seems that AIX did introduce it's bug as a result from lately adopting and being hit by the bug in the standard. AIX in addition release the currently latest release one week before the bug in the standard was fixed. I cannot speak for the other OS. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 16 06:08:04 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:08:04 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: BTW Josh, I am trying to be respectful here. I suspect you are tad younger I am and your early introduction into UNIX was on the WINTEL platform, not on the DEC systems like mine. So, if I'm going to make a guess you were not in a position when you were introduced to be able to get access to the sources. So in your experience the UNIX source were closed to you personally (and many others). I get that. But it does not change the fact it, there were available and there open and were not a secret. Which was very different from many of "closed" systems (says Cisco, or much of the other infrastructure) of the day. They always have been. Even System V. It was quite easy to get source if you were willing (and could pay). I'm not suggesting that it was easy for you could and I understand that frustration. I personally would not have been able to pay for the licenses, but I was being employed by firms that could and valued my abilities, so they did. This was also true for many educational institutions. Sun and DEC actually were quite liberal with their source licenses, because AT&T had been. They had to be also - because their customer required it. The point is there is a difference between "open" and "free." There are a lot of things that are open and we can look at but not touch or have the wearwithall to modify. But that does not change their openness - we can still (and do) learn from them. Linus and many of us learned because UNIX (the ideas) and the basic implementations were open. We talked about them, they were well specified. We wrote application that relied on those ideas, APIs etc. And Linus, Andy Tannenbaum and Plaguer before them reimplemented those ideas and created clones. *Unix was and is "open" and the implementations were and are available.* The problem for many is the price to look at the implementations - that I grant. And for many, for some of those implementations, can be high. But it does not make them "closed." The effect may seem that way to you, but it was not and is not the same. All, I'm asking you to say, is that traditional UNIX implementations such as System V were not "Free and Open," unlike Linux some of the other Unix clones. And that make all the difference. They were and still are open. On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 14, 21:11, Clem Cole wrote: > > > > My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I ask > > you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it and > > share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". But > as > > people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX club if > > you were commercial, although any University type could be apart for > free. > > What UNIX for PC in the '90s had the option to buy a source code license > for that specific version, so that PC hackers could write drivers for > their hardware and tune the kernel internals to their liking, or be able > to fix themselves a bug in the serial port driver, etc.? > > Certainly not OpenServer, not UnixWare nor SCO Xenix. Did DELL Unix > offered a payware source code license for their product? I'm not aware > of such. > > From System V onwards, UNIX became closed source in what matters, that > is, the version running on your hardware and the version with the drivers > you are using (unless you were an employee at IBM, DEC, HP or SUN running > propietary hardware and happened to be in the right group). > > It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At least, > it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source code > he could readily compile and run on his i386. > > -- > Josh Good > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 16 06:26:20 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:26:20 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: <01fe01d29dca$6924cde0$3b6e69a0$@ronnatalie.com> We had the source code from Interactive Systems for their 386 implementations of IS/1 (pretty bare bones SysV) Back around 1988. I had it running on the PC and also was porting it to an Multibus II system (message passing coprocessor). Anyhow you didn’t need the source to rebuild the kernels and write device drivers. The necessary header file were there along with the .o files needed to link your new stuff to the kernel. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Thu Mar 16 06:27:23 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 13:27:23 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:45:24PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: > SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many people > did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was available > it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote > drivers for it etc. That's a pretty peculiar definition of open. Which is fine, I guess, but you need to realize that that's open much like a high end country club is open. It's open to the rich people, to the connected people, everyone else is left out in the cold. In terms of source access, you're in the country club. You are looking around and you see all these other people in the club and that turns into "many, many people" but it's not. Millions of people, with the ability to do something with the source, did not have access to the source. $100K to someone with an ivy league education and a career that matched may have seemed fine. What about some talented hacker in, say, Finland? What the so-called open people didn't get is that there was all this talent that could be harnessed, in many cases for free, if you gave them source. It's too easy to look at your walled garden and see all your friends there and go "everything was fine". It wasn't, and as Josh said, the world "routed around" the problem. Which sort of proves it was a problem. From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 16 06:48:09 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:48:09 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <011901d29cf3$a5e41560$f1ac4020$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <021f01d29dcd$74e97880$5ebc6980$@ronnatalie.com> Well, I’m not even going to get into the deficiencies of Microsoft, I spent the last twenty years of my life beating head against those. DLL hell did not go away with the common runtime environment, the solution was a giant kludge. The one thing I have to say about the common runtime framework is it makes so much sense it’s amazing that Microsoft came up with it…want to link programs together…just put them in the same directory. Very UNIX like in philosophy. Don’t get me started about GDI+…makes a lot of sense but it is inordinately slower than the legacy system and the font processing is a joke, nowhere near as complete as the original. Anyhow MS Windows sucks as badly as you blame X. You have to reach deep into it’s guts to get performance out of it as well. Also, while you think all the world’s a workstation, a lot of industry is going the other way and you find out had bad Windows sucks at remote application running when any performance is required. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 16 06:48:34 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 16:48:34 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: My point is that is was on the *price list, *the sources were never hidden away. And that a lot of people did have access to it. Your point - the prices to get a ticket was too high and thus, when the price was even less, even more had access. Which I did not (and do not) disagree. But Unix was open, people did discussed it, people did look at it, learned from it etc.... that was not true of "closed systems" like say Cisco's. Our even VMS, although VM, TSS, OS/360 and the like were "Open." That's why we have a UNIX "industry" -- it spread beyond the "ivy league" as you said it. The ideas leaked out, because AT&T made it open - because they had by the 1956 consent decree et al.... That is a clear distinction. And please its not about a wall garden ... because it really was not that hard. I'm not disagreeing that it did not happen and your point is that people were excluded ... I get that. But don't call Unix closed because there was a price (aka a ticket). It just was not "free" -- that's all I'm saying and as you have pointed out that difference was in practice to many, many people large (which I'm not disagreeing). You and I really need to have the beer together ;-) On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:45:24PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: > > SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many > people > > did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was > available > > it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote > > drivers for it etc. > > That's a pretty peculiar definition of open. Which is fine, I guess, > but you need to realize that that's open much like a high end country > club is open. It's open to the rich people, to the connected people, > everyone else is left out in the cold. > > In terms of source access, you're in the country club. You are looking > around and you see all these other people in the club and that turns into > "many, many people" but it's not. Millions of people, with the ability > to do something with the source, did not have access to the source. > $100K to someone with an ivy league education and a career that matched > may have seemed fine. What about some talented hacker in, say, Finland? > > What the so-called open people didn't get is that there was all this > talent that could be harnessed, in many cases for free, if you gave > them source. It's too easy to look at your walled garden and see all > your friends there and go "everything was fine". It wasn't, and as Josh > said, the world "routed around" the problem. Which sort of proves it > was a problem. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Thu Mar 16 09:22:54 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com ('Josh Good') Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 00:22:54 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <01fe01d29dca$6924cde0$3b6e69a0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <01fe01d29dca$6924cde0$3b6e69a0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <20170315232252.GB15120@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 15, 16:26, Ron Natalie wrote: > We had the source code from Interactive Systems for their 386 > implementations of IS/1 (pretty bare bones SysV) You had it. But was it available as a purchasing option "through the distribution channel" to the public at large, or was it only available to companies which entered a "joint venture" with Interactive Systems? > Anyhow you didn???t need the source to rebuild the kernels and write > device drivers. The necessary header file were there along with the > .o files needed to link your new stuff to the kernel. If you wanted to fix the serial driver to work with a faster UART chip, you could not do it (other than hacking hex in the object files). Rebuilding the kernel pretty much only existed because the kernel used hard coded config settings which needed relinking to be changed. The object files themselves were set in stone by the vendor and the final user had to option to change them. If relinking the kernel to load different kernel modules, and the ability to write device drivers for certain subsystems equals an open system, then Windows NT is also an open system. -- Josh Good From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 16 09:46:45 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 19:46:45 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Another common thread in this discussion has been universities had access to the source code, so just go ask the right people at your school. Which is all well and good, except for those that never went - for various reasons. I never even graduated High School ... I had "access" to the 4.2/4.3BSD sources, but only because a friend of mine worked at a university. It was when I was forewarned that said university threw away piles of VAXes and tapes that I then had my grubby hands on the source code to BSD and a few other things. This is where the NFS 2.0 source code came from that I gave to Warren :) When I got my grubby hands on FreeBSD, I nearly cried. This was before I went dumpster diving. On 3/15/2017 4:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > SNIP > In terms of source access, you're in the country club. > > SNIP From pepe at naleco.com Thu Mar 16 09:55:25 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 00:55:25 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170315235525.GC15120@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 15, 15:45, Clem Cole wrote: > > SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many people > did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was available > it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote > drivers for it etc. There were books published about it. It was hardly > secret. Nobody says UNIX source code was "secret". It just was not open after UNIX began to be directly sold by AT&T post Bell-breakage. If UNIX source code was "open" at $100K, then Windows NT source code can also be seen as open if you have enough money to buy Microsoft. > Just saying please don't say UNIX was not Open. It was. Unix was not > Free. I beg to differ. UNIX stopped being open when the Lion's book could not be legally sold anymore at bookstores. That happened even earlier than System V, it happened when AT&T released V7. The reason that AT&T stated was that they wanted to keep "UNIX source code" as a "trade secret". So this begs the question: how can something, anything, be at the same time "open" and a "trade secret"? No doubt some argumentation can be concocted to marry both concepts, but I have that feeling it's going to be a hard one to swallow. To me, open means libre access, because if there is no libre access, then it is what is known as closed. Please note that libre access --when applied to source code-- does not necessarily mean "up for grabs and redistribution" - it just means libre access to random eyeballs in meatspace. -- Josh Good From pechter at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 10:05:38 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 20:05:38 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315235525.GC15120@naleco.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315235525.GC15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 15, 15:45, Clem Cole wrote: >> SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many people >> did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was available >> it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote >> drivers for it etc. There were books published about it. It was hardly >> secret. > Nobody says UNIX source code was "secret". It just was not open after > UNIX began to be directly sold by AT&T post Bell-breakage. > > If UNIX source codeHa was "open" at $100K, then Windows NT source code can > also be seen as open if you have enough money to buy Microsoft. Having worked at a minicomputer company (Concurrent Computer Corporation) back in the 87 days... I can say that there was no way I could access the SysV sources without being an approved developer or support engineer. I was the IT Systems Administrator with the company managing their Xelos SysVR2 systems in the MIS department and I had no access. When I found a serious bug they looked at it. Reproduced it. Reported it to AT&T who checked the will not fix box on their ticket and closed the bug. The problem was that cron would malloc memory until it couldn't get any more and core dump. This stopped automatic backups and jobs from being scheduled reliably and was critical to my operations. The fix was I had to write a script to kill -0 cron with a sleep... and if the job was no longer there -- restart cron. AT&T support basically said "Get a machine that implements demand paged virtual memory and it won't happen." Pretty sad. I had worked for DEC and other places that would've fixed the code for a customer. Especially an OEM. Concurrent had pretty much put Unix on the back burner until they bought Masscomp. Their only OS they were pushing at the time was OS/32. Xelos was a pretty decent SVR5.2 port -- the next version even had ksh in it. I wanted to get a 3280 and see how Xelos on it compared with something equivalent on a VAX 8650. Bill Pechter at gmail.com From pepe at naleco.com Thu Mar 16 10:35:22 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 01:35:22 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] "Xenix 2.2.3c Restoration" articles by Michael Casadevall Message-ID: <20170316003521.GE15120@naleco.com> Hello. Perhaps you haven't been made aware yet of these series of --IMHO-- very interesting articles about Xenix 386, entitled "Xenix 2.2.3c Restoration", by Michael Casadevall, a.k.a. NCommander at the geek site https://soylentnews.org (of which he is one of the founders): Part 1: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/03/1620222 Part 2: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/07/1632251 Part 3: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/11/2014253 I wish Bela Lubkin, ex- kernel engineer at "classic" SCO, would have joined the list to comment on those articles and pour some light into the more obscure points. I sent an email to Bela some time ago telling him about the TUHS mailing list, but I didn't hear back from him. -- Josh Good From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 16 10:45:38 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 20:45:38 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: Arthur's behavior, I think really proves my point.... you were able to do that because UNIX was (is) open and was being studies and used by a lot of people had folks did have access to the source. You did not see VMS, NT or the like having academic books written about them, and used as models in OS classes. You would not have been able to do that with NT or VMS. And whole point is that when AT&T did try to pull it back as a trade secret, they failed. The courts said -- no. This is open.... this has been published - this story has been told. These ideas out "out there." That is why if AT&T had >>won<< the BSDi/UCB case, technical Linux and all the clone were in violation also. It it was found to be a "secret" - but the court made it clear. It was not. And by the way, the Lions book could never be legally bought - it was the most copied text around. The whole term "Open Systems" was used to define Unix to being with. The idea is that Unix was the first of OS that people really knew what was happening under the covers. There were no secrets - you got / could get the sources (even with Sys V) but it might cost $s. I also understand the disappointment that many of you had because you did not have access to the sources. I get it. I see that would have been frustrating. Particularly when it was so close and yet so far. And it does seem like it was club that you couldn't belong, which I find sad because many of never looked at that way. I also see that if you were not in that club, you might be seen by some "in the club" as not having done anything "worthwhile" and need to "prove" something. If that is what how you feel, I truly want to make sure you understand I do not believe either of those things and never have. Josh -- all I am asking is you to be respectful of the term and the folks that created it, industry and frankly the market and opportunity that Linux and today's tech has so wonderful exploited. So I ask you to please call it Free and Open and I'm fine either way, although it will grate me when I see you and other make that misunderstanding. I believe that Linux was and >>is<< important and it does matter!!! The Cool Kids did something, I am many others are thankful and proud of them for doing ... it Linux is an great piece of technology and its paying a lot of bills for a lot of people today (including me). I do not want to be seen and knocking Linux in anyway. But I do see a lot of people "knocking" Unix because it was not "free" and frankly it was a different world. That's why I'm trying help explain the difference. Maybe it is too subtle for you to see and you had to live it to fully understand it. I fear you think because I did have access to sources, I think I was some how special. My point has always been, we really were not. Other than the specialness of the time was based on economics, because the cost of the systems that ran UNIX was so high, that was what limited. Which comes back to my main thesis... this is an argument about economics and cost -- WINTEL economics changed things -- so the question is asked -- did having access to the sources play into the openness or not? My point is that it was open >>before<< WINTEL existed, so you can change it being open or not. What "Free UNIX" did was make the "wisdom" spread even faster - it was an accelerant but it did not change the basic piece. UNIX was different .. it was open... it open up minds and created and industry, which now Linux (a "free" UNIX implementation) is undisputed leader - created by some cool folks that I personally very much respect and admire. I do fear a problem is that you seem to be equating "open" with "having access to the source" - where as the term was coined to mean "the ideas are available for all to see and share in" - as in a mathematical, and academic style of openness. Open University, Open Book, Open Ideas etc... I suspect your definition has narrowed that definition to include that unless the sources are in front of you, *the ideas are not really available; *which is why I cringe and it is a hot button for me and I find it wrong. In the end, definition does not change the status of what Unix was. It was the definition of Open Systems -- it was published and I do stand behind that. And in the end, it could not be claimed as trade secret because it was ->> by definition<<- open and known. But traditional Unix from AT&T was never >>free<< and that fact is not going to change either. It may some how in the future, but that past is true and as a result, Linus and other did an end-around and created and awesome >>free<< solution. Clem On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Another common thread in this discussion has been universities had access > to the source code, so just go ask the right people at your school. > > Which is all well and good, except for those that never went - for various > reasons. I never even graduated High School ... > > I had "access" to the 4.2/4.3BSD sources, but only because a friend of > mine worked at a university. > > It was when I was forewarned that said university threw away piles of > VAXes and tapes that I then had my grubby hands on the source code to BSD > and a few other things. > > This is where the NFS 2.0 source code came from that I gave to Warren :) > > When I got my grubby hands on FreeBSD, I nearly cried. This was before I > went dumpster diving. > > > On 3/15/2017 4:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > >> SNIP >> In terms of source access, you're in the country club. >> >> SNIP >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Thu Mar 16 10:46:40 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:46:40 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: <1489625200.58c9e07028fee@www.paradise.net.nz> One of the problems was the hardware system price ratio to software system price. When you could get a 486 PC for $5-10k and the SysV source license (for 4.3BSD!) was $100k, it seemed rather monstrously disproportionate. :) This mismatch didn't exist in the Minicomputer world, where a VAX cost rather more than $5-10k and the price for a source license was thus not disproportionate. FWVLIW Wesley Parish Quoting Clem Cole : > BTW Josh, I am trying to be respectful here. I suspect you are tad > younger > I am and your early introduction into UNIX was on the WINTEL platform, > not > on the DEC systems like mine. So, if I'm going to make a guess you were > not in a position when you were introduced to be able to get access to > the > sources. > > So in your experience the UNIX source were closed to you personally > (and > many others). I get that. But it does not change the fact it, there > were > available and there open and were not a secret. Which was very > different > from many of "closed" systems (says Cisco, or much of the other > infrastructure) of the day. They always have been. Even System V. > > It was quite easy to get source if you were willing (and could pay). > I'm > not suggesting that it was easy for you could and I understand that > frustration. I personally would not have been able to pay for the > licenses, but I was being employed by firms that could and valued my > abilities, so they did. This was also true for many educational > institutions. > > Sun and DEC actually were quite liberal with their source licenses, > because > AT&T had been. They had to be also - because their customer required > it. > > The point is there is a difference between "open" and "free." There are > a > lot of things that are open and we can look at but not touch or have > the > wearwithall to modify. But that does not change their openness - we can > still (and do) learn from them. > > Linus and many of us learned because UNIX (the ideas) and the basic > implementations were open. We talked about them, they were well > specified. > We wrote application that relied on those ideas, APIs etc. And Linus, > Andy Tannenbaum and Plaguer before them reimplemented those ideas and > created clones. *Unix was and is "open" and the implementations were > and > are available.* The problem for many is the price to look at the > implementations - that I grant. And for many, for some of those > implementations, can be high. But it does not make them "closed." > > The effect may seem that way to you, but it was not and is not the > same. > All, I'm asking you to say, is that traditional UNIX implementations > such > as System V were not "Free and Open," unlike Linux some of the other > Unix > clones. And that make all the difference. > > They were and still are open. > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Josh Good wrote: > > > On 2017 Mar 14, 21:11, Clem Cole wrote: > > > > > > My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I > ask > > > you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it > and > > > share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". > But > > as > > > people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX > club if > > > you were commercial, although any University type could be apart > for > > free. > > > > What UNIX for PC in the '90s had the option to buy a source code > license > > for that specific version, so that PC hackers could write drivers for > > their hardware and tune the kernel internals to their liking, or be > able > > to fix themselves a bug in the serial port driver, etc.? > > > > Certainly not OpenServer, not UnixWare nor SCO Xenix. Did DELL Unix > > offered a payware source code license for their product? I'm not > aware > > of such. > > > > From System V onwards, UNIX became closed source in what matters, > that > > is, the version running on your hardware and the version with the > drivers > > you are using (unless you were an employee at IBM, DEC, HP or SUN > running > > propietary hardware and happened to be in the right group). > > > > It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > > very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > > talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At > least, > > it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > > write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source > code > > he could readily compile and run on his i386. > > > > -- > > Josh Good > > > > > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From clemc at ccc.com Thu Mar 16 10:52:44 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 20:52:44 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <1489625200.58c9e07028fee@www.paradise.net.nz> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <1489625200.58c9e07028fee@www.paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: Right and as Larry points out that led to a club mentality, which can see would (in practice) make people interpret something in a different way than really was the case or the intended case. On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Wesley Parish wrote: > One of the problems was the hardware system price ratio to software system > price. When you could get > a 486 PC for $5-10k and the SysV source license (for 4.3BSD!) was $100k, > it seemed rather monstrously > disproportionate. :) > > This mismatch didn't exist in the Minicomputer world, where a VAX cost > rather more than $5-10k and > the price for a source license was thus not disproportionate. > > FWVLIW > > Wesley Parish > > Quoting Clem Cole : > > > BTW Josh, I am trying to be respectful here. I suspect you are tad > > younger > > I am and your early introduction into UNIX was on the WINTEL platform, > > not > > on the DEC systems like mine. So, if I'm going to make a guess you were > > not in a position when you were introduced to be able to get access to > > the > > sources. > > > > So in your experience the UNIX source were closed to you personally > > (and > > many others). I get that. But it does not change the fact it, there > > were > > available and there open and were not a secret. Which was very > > different > > from many of "closed" systems (says Cisco, or much of the other > > infrastructure) of the day. They always have been. Even System V. > > > > It was quite easy to get source if you were willing (and could pay). > > I'm > > not suggesting that it was easy for you could and I understand that > > frustration. I personally would not have been able to pay for the > > licenses, but I was being employed by firms that could and valued my > > abilities, so they did. This was also true for many educational > > institutions. > > > > Sun and DEC actually were quite liberal with their source licenses, > > because > > AT&T had been. They had to be also - because their customer required > > it. > > > > The point is there is a difference between "open" and "free." There are > > a > > lot of things that are open and we can look at but not touch or have > > the > > wearwithall to modify. But that does not change their openness - we can > > still (and do) learn from them. > > > > Linus and many of us learned because UNIX (the ideas) and the basic > > implementations were open. We talked about them, they were well > > specified. > > We wrote application that relied on those ideas, APIs etc. And Linus, > > Andy Tannenbaum and Plaguer before them reimplemented those ideas and > > created clones. *Unix was and is "open" and the implementations were > > and > > are available.* The problem for many is the price to look at the > > implementations - that I grant. And for many, for some of those > > implementations, can be high. But it does not make them "closed." > > > > The effect may seem that way to you, but it was not and is not the > > same. > > All, I'm asking you to say, is that traditional UNIX implementations > > such > > as System V were not "Free and Open," unlike Linux some of the other > > Unix > > clones. And that make all the difference. > > > > They were and still are open. > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Josh Good wrote: > > > > > On 2017 Mar 14, 21:11, Clem Cole wrote: > > > > > > > > My point is that you (and many others) equate "open" and "free" - I > > ask > > > > you to please not make that error. Open means we can talk about it > > and > > > > share it, see it. Which is exactly what we did "back in the day". > > But > > > as > > > > people pointed out you had to pay AT&T to be a member of the UNIX > > club if > > > > you were commercial, although any University type could be apart > > for > > > free. > > > > > > What UNIX for PC in the '90s had the option to buy a source code > > license > > > for that specific version, so that PC hackers could write drivers for > > > their hardware and tune the kernel internals to their liking, or be > > able > > > to fix themselves a bug in the serial port driver, etc.? > > > > > > Certainly not OpenServer, not UnixWare nor SCO Xenix. Did DELL Unix > > > offered a payware source code license for their product? I'm not > > aware > > > of such. > > > > > > From System V onwards, UNIX became closed source in what matters, > > that > > > is, the version running on your hardware and the version with the > > drivers > > > you are using (unless you were an employee at IBM, DEC, HP or SUN > > running > > > propietary hardware and happened to be in the right group). > > > > > > It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > > > very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > > > talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At > > least, > > > it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > > > write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source > > code > > > he could readily compile and run on his i386. > > > > > > -- > > > Josh Good > > > > > > > > > > > > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand > Sor, > Method for Guitar > > "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel > Goldwyn > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From usotsuki at buric.co Thu Mar 16 11:27:13 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 21:27:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: "Free" and "open" are, by themselves, ambiguous words. It is when you combine them that you get the meaning that is often intended by Linux, GNU and OpenBSD people. -uso. From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 16 13:09:12 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:09:12 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <026c01d29e02$b062bdb0$11283910$@ronnatalie.com> I tripped across a project the other day which was a commercial, proprietary, and undocumented system that still used "Open" in their company name. I'm trying to figure out what aspect they are claiming is open. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Steve Nickolas Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 9:27 PM To: Clem Cole Cc: TUHS main list Subject: Re: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") "Free" and "open" are, by themselves, ambiguous words. It is when you combine them that you get the meaning that is often intended by Linux, GNU and OpenBSD people. -uso. From charles.unix.pro at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 13:18:21 2017 From: charles.unix.pro at gmail.com (Charles Anthony) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 20:18:21 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <026c01d29e02$b062bdb0$11283910$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> <026c01d29e02$b062bdb0$11283910$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:09 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > I tripped across a project the other day which was a commercial, > proprietary, and undocumented system that still used "Open" in their > company > name. > I'm trying to figure out what aspect they are claiming is open. > > I once saw a fiber optic connection box labeled something like "Open Systems Interconnect" with a key access lock on it. -- Charles -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 13:36:34 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:36:34 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > [...] > In the end, definition does not change the status of what Unix was. It > was the definition of Open Systems -- it was published and I do stand > behind that. And in the end, it could not be claimed as trade secret > because it was ->> by definition<<- open and known. But traditional Unix > from AT&T was never >>free<< and that fact is not going to change either. > It may some how in the future, but that past is true and as a result, Linus > and other did an end-around and created and awesome >>free<< solution. > [...] Hmm, this is quite interesting, but I had different impression of the definition of "open" at the time: it seemed like what people were saying when they said that Unix was "open" was much less about the source code, but rather about the interfaces and APIs; in particular especially after the standards bodies got together and starting writing down how things were supposed to work. This led to vendor independence (to some extent, anyway) and was a distinction from closed systems which were defined by a single vendor who controlled everything about them (though presumably modulated by customer demand), including the OS (since this was usually written in-house for each platform. This even makes historical sense: Unix was written by a third party who didn't design the hardware). Consider DEC: In 1981, they had at least three hardware platforms intended for the timesharing market, each running multiple operating systems: PDP-11 running RSX-11*, RT-11, RSTS/E and Ultrix-11 (Unix); PDP-10 running TOPS-10 and TOPS-20; VAX running VMS and Ultrix-32 (Unix). And this isn't to mention any of the other stuff they were selling/supporting (PDP-8's, etc). Of those software systems it's easy to see what Ultrix-11 and Ultrix-32 have in common; one has a reasonable shot at getting software written for one running on the other. Contrast with RT-11 and VMS, or even RT-11 and RSX. Similarly with IBM, CDC, HP, GE, etc. In other words, the "openness" in "open systems" wasn't about code *for the system itself*; it was about freedom from software lock-in to a particular hardware vendor. Or, perhaps, openness to multiple system vendors supporting the same customer-written code. "Open" in a sense closer to what we now call "open source" (meaning the source was available for inspection) came much later. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Thu Mar 16 14:08:24 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 22:08:24 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <201703160408.v2G48OOn025801@freefriends.org> Dan Cross wrote: > Hmm, this is quite interesting, but I had different impression of the > definition of "open" at the time: it seemed like what people were saying > when they said that Unix was "open" was much less about the source code, > but rather about the interfaces and APIs; Yes!!!! Portability of application code was a big issue, and the option to avoid vendor lock-iin. > In other words, the "openness" in "open systems" wasn't about code *for the > system itself*; it was about freedom from software lock-in to a particular > hardware vendor. Or, perhaps, openness to multiple system vendors > supporting the same customer-written code. You've hit the nail very much on the head. This did come as a result of the "openness" that Clem is describing: since people knew how "UNIX" (as a concept) worked, it was possible to transfer both your source code, and your peoples' how-to-use-it knowledge from one vendor to another. This caused vendors to start competing more on price / performance. Arnold From dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org Thu Mar 16 16:52:53 2017 From: dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org (Derek Fawcus) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 07:52:53 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] "Xenix 2.2.3c Restoration" articles by Michael Casadevall In-Reply-To: <20170316003521.GE15120@naleco.com> References: <20170316003521.GE15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170316065253.GA87888@cowbell.employees.org> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 01:35:22AM +0100, Josh Good wrote: > Part 1: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/03/1620222 > Part 2: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/07/1632251 > Part 3: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/11/2014253 Part 4 was published yesterday: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/13/086250 DF From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 16 22:51:42 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:51:42 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <692ffeeb-b279-cfd2-307b-aa8a51c32641@kilonet.net> On 3/15/2017 8:45 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > Arthur's behavior, I think really proves my point.... you were able > to do that because UNIX was (is) open and was being studies and used > by a lot of people had folks did have access to the source. You did > not see VMS, NT or the like having academic books written about them, > and used as models in OS classes. You would not have been able to do > that with NT or VMS. > Believe it or not, somewhere I believe I have microfiche of VMS 4.0 source code somewhere. Which reminds me, I need to do something with that. It came from the same place as the other source code I have. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pechter at gmail.com Thu Mar 16 23:18:19 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:18:19 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <692ffeeb-b279-cfd2-307b-aa8a51c32641@kilonet.net> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> <692ffeeb-b279-cfd2-307b-aa8a51c32641@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <4faa957e-30ee-4c1a-b679-ea475c79f8e5.maildroid@localhost> VMS source fiche was very common of sites owned by large corporations. Their IT staff used it to research bugs... and as sample code for writing their own drivers etc... -----Original Message----- From: Arthur Krewat To: Clem Cole Cc: TUHS main list Sent: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 8:53 Subject: Re: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") On 3/15/2017 8:45 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > Arthur's behavior, I think really proves my point.... you were able > to do that because UNIX was (is) open and was being studies and used > by a lot of people had folks did have access to the source. You did > not see VMS, NT or the like having academic books written about them, > and used as models in OS classes. You would not have been able to do > that with NT or VMS. > Believe it or not, somewhere I believe I have microfiche of VMS 4.0 source code somewhere. Which reminds me, I need to do something with that. It came from the same place as the other source code I have. From norman at oclsc.org Fri Mar 17 01:40:12 2017 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:40:12 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") Message-ID: <1489678815.19703.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> William Pechter: VMS source fiche was very common of sites owned by large corporations. Their IT staff used it to research bugs... and as sample code for writing their own drivers etc... ===== Indeed, I used the VMS source microfiche to learn how to handle various sorts of errors (machine checks, memory errors) better in UNIX. Stock VAX systems at the time just crashed on any error, but it turned out that many of them admitted recovery: some errors were transient, others could be ridden over by disabling some piece of the hardware. This led to an amusing event on the VAX-11/750 that at the time handled e-mail as uucp node research!. (Its internal name on our datakit node was grigg.) People noticed that the system was running slowly. I checked and discovered that the CPU itself seemed to be a bit slower. Then I checked logs and discovered that a week earlier, there had been a cache error; my new recovery code had turned off the failing half of the cache, logged the error, and forged ahead. At the next convenient time, we took the system down and ran DEC's standalone diagnostics. (Contrary to the rude stories one hears, those diags were in fact pretty thorough.) The problem didn't show up, so we booted grigg back up again, secure in the knowledge that if the problem was persistent, my code would let us know without crashing. (I don't think it ever showed up again.) We also learned to pay more attention to console messages! Norman Wilson Toronto ON From chet.ramey at case.edu Fri Mar 17 01:42:39 2017 From: chet.ramey at case.edu (Chet Ramey) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:42:39 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <6899fbbf-3f03-77de-be38-66a25b082c71@case.edu> On 3/15/17 4:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:45:24PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: >> SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many people >> did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was available >> it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote >> drivers for it etc. > > That's a pretty peculiar definition of open. Which is fine, I guess, > but you need to realize that that's open much like a high end country > club is open. It's open to the rich people, to the connected people, > everyone else is left out in the cold. This is the same access vs. affordability argument we're seeing played out in other segments of US society. I have access to a Porsche, as do thousands of others (some of whom choose not to buy one), but I can't afford one. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet at case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/ From pechter at gmail.com Fri Mar 17 03:26:52 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:26:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <1489678815.19703.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1489678815.19703.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: <921e4da6-6e93-f9b6-8568-1634b139167e@gmail.com> Norman Wilson wrote: > William Pechter: > > VMS source fiche was very common of sites owned by large corporations. > Their IT staff used it to research bugs... and as sample code for > writing their own drivers etc... > > ===== > > Indeed, I used the VMS source microfiche to learn how to > handle various sorts of errors (machine checks, memory > errors) better in UNIX. Stock VAX systems at the time > just crashed on any error, but it turned out that many of > them admitted recovery: some errors were transient, > others could be ridden over by disabling some piece of the > hardware. > > This led to an amusing event on the VAX-11/750 that at the > time handled e-mail as uucp node research!. (Its internal > name on our datakit node was grigg.) People noticed that > the system was running slowly. I checked and discovered > that the CPU itself seemed to be a bit slower. Then I > checked logs and discovered that a week earlier, there had > been a cache error; my new recovery code had turned off > the failing half of the cache, logged the error, and forged > ahead. > o > At the next convenient time, we took the system down and ran > DEC's standalone diagnostics. (Contrary to the rude stories > one hears, those diags were in fact pretty thorough.) The > problem didn't show up, so we booted grigg back up again, > secure in the knowledge that if the problem was persistent, > my code would let us know without crashing. (I don't think > it ever showed up again.) > > We also learned to pay more attention to console messages! > > Norman Wilson > Toronto ON DEC's later diagnostics were excellent. They were copied by a ton of folks including Masscomp and Alliant who wrote frighteneningly similar diagnostic supervisors. The thing about that is it had a big impact on servicability for those companies. 1. They had a large number of Field Engineers in the world with DEC experience who could come up to speed quickly. 2. The diagnostics were easy to learn. Of course the reason they looked like the DEC ones was that ex-DEC software engineers and programmers wrote them. Concurrent Computer's diags looked very similar to the load and run stuff of XXDP which required a lot of knowledge of each diag and it's options. They were often called the "No problem found tape" by Field Service -- because the diags would not find any issues and the OS running with full interrupt driven OS's would roll over on load. On the PDP11 there was XXDP's DEC/X 11 system exerciser... On VMS there was UETP and just looking at the errorlog output. The only Unix that came close to the VMS errorlog in my experience was the errorlogging on AIX was excellent. Bill -- Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now! pechter-at-gmail.com http://xkcd.com/705/ From pechter at gmail.com Fri Mar 17 03:29:46 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:29:46 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <6899fbbf-3f03-77de-be38-66a25b082c71@case.edu> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <6899fbbf-3f03-77de-be38-66a25b082c71@case.edu> Message-ID: Chet Ramey wrote: > On 3/15/17 4:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:45:24PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: >>> SVR4 (aka UnixWare) was available for source - the problem is many people >>> did like the price to see it. It was $100K. But the source was available >>> it was open and many, many of people with PC and had access to it, wrote >>> drivers for it etc. >> That's a pretty peculiar definition of open. Which is fine, I guess, >> but you need to realize that that's open much like a high end country >> club is open. It's open to the rich people, to the connected people, >> everyone else is left out in the cold. > This is the same access vs. affordability argument we're seeing played out > in other segments of US society. > > I have access to a Porsche, as do thousands of others (some of whom choose > not to buy one), but I can't afford one. > I have copies of the old 8086/8088 PC Xenix. I don't know if SCO or Microsoft even sold the sources. My old boss ran very early Microsoft SCO on a PDP11. Don't know if he had sources. Even working as a sysadmin for an AT&T oem of System V wouldn't get me access to the source through normal corporate means. Perhaps I could've bribed an engineer with a Pizza to let me get to his machine without a screen lock... but he'd have been risking his job. Bill -- Digital had it then. Don't you wish you could buy it now! pechter-at-gmail.com http://xkcd.com/705/ From clemc at ccc.com Fri Mar 17 04:45:59 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:45:59 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <921e4da6-6e93-f9b6-8568-1634b139167e@gmail.com> References: <1489678815.19703.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> <921e4da6-6e93-f9b6-8568-1634b139167e@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 1:26 PM, William Pechter wrote: > DEC's later diagnostics were excellent. They were copied by a ton of folks > including Masscomp and Alliant who wrote frighteneningly similar > diagnostic supervisors. > ​Can't speak for Alliant but Masscomp and DEC had shared authorship in he diagnostics group. The former in C and later in BLISS of course; but the authors were pretty much the same. If it works, don't mess with it. Also the Tech's were all originally ex-DEC so it made sense - although the manufacturing guys were ex-DG.​ Actually there was a story I tell. Both Masscomp and DEC were using the same HW CAD system at one point. DEC has a microcode assembler that had originally been written in PDP-11 assembler and was running compatibility mode on the Vax. Masscomp wrote a new microcode assembler that was "frighteningly similar" in C that tjt the UNIX guys put together with lex/yacc and the like one weekend for the HW team. Knowledge of this made its way to the mill. It was also know that DEC has a number of CAD libraries that the HW guys had been using to make their board layouts easier -- discussions occurred over beers at the Mau Kaui... tapes some how fell out of cars one night... and DEC had a microcode assembler running on Ultrix in C and somehow our HW guys stopped complain about some missing libraries they wanted. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael at kjorling.se Fri Mar 17 04:52:52 2017 From: michael at kjorling.se (Michael =?utf-8?B?S2rDtnJsaW5n?=) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:52:52 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: References: <1489354472.1850950.908878144.19D9B027@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170312221255.BFE3F18C099@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20170313145804.GH21831@yeono.kjorling.se> Message-ID: <20170316185252.GF21831@yeono.kjorling.se> On 14 Mar 2017 08:56 +1100, from dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall): >> I can live with multipart/alternative { text/plain, text/html } messages >> where the plain text part is actually _meaningful_ (my MUA is set up to >> do nothing with text/html unless I ask it, at which point they are fed >> through 'lynx -dump' plus a few other parameters), but have been known >> to shoot back HTML-_only_ messages to the originator. Usually with a >> comment to the effect of "this looks like it came through garbled". I'm >> still waiting for the first such recipient to obviously take the hint, >> but I haven't yet given up hope. > > Procmail? I'd like to have that script :-) Sorry, no automation, but it'd probably be possible to cobble something together using procmail and formail. Just "unauto_view *" and "alternative_order text/plain text/html text" plus hitting "reply" in Mutt and coming up with something bearing a not too close resemblance to insults. The exact wording tends to vary with how annoyed I am at the particular sender at the moment. -- Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael at kjorling.se “People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don’t.” (Bjarne Stroustrup) From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 17 05:47:55 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 06:47:55 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At least, > it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source code > he could readily compile and run on his i386. Perhaps I'm confused (not uncommon) but I have distinct memories of having a source licence for my BSD/OS system on a 386... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Fri Mar 17 05:33:10 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:33:10 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics Message-ID: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> "Open" was certainly not a work heard in the Unix lab, where our lawyers made sure we knew it was a "trade secret". John Lions was brought into the lab both because we admired his work and because the lawyers wanted to reel that work back in-house. Out in the field, the trade secret was treated in many different ways. Perhaps the most extreme was MIT, whose lawyers believed it could not be adequately protected in academia and forbade its use there. I don't know what eventually broke the logjam. Doug From clemc at ccc.com Fri Mar 17 06:05:07 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:05:07 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics In-Reply-To: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote: > Perhaps the most extreme was MIT, whose > lawyers believed it could not be adequately protected in > academia and forbade its use there. > ​Doug - that is interesting. Do you know the time frame of the banishment? Noel any memories of what allowed it be used? Clearly, once the restriction was removed, it spread. At CMU, for the OS course, we had a sign a document with the university stating something that we understood it was AT&Ts IP and we were using it as a teaching tool. I remember thinking that whole thing was weird, the students could not get accounts on the OS development machines for the course to get get source access -- but I already had one because I was working for the EE dept before I took the official OS course and had been kernel hacking and already helped write fsck with Ted that summer before. So it felt like the CMU lawyers were trying close the barn doors after they were already open with a couple of us (their were probably 5 or so that were in that same spot). Maybe if we can find Bill Wulf, whom I think was the one that shepherded that document through the CMU lawyers. His wife, Anita was teaching the course at the time; IIRC. He might remember. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 17 06:21:27 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:21:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics Message-ID: <20170316202127.5D4AF18C0A5@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Clem Cole > Do you know the time frame of the banishment? Noel any memories of what > allowed it be used? Sorry, this is something I know nothing of; it must have happened while I was still an early undergrad. The first Unix I knew of at MIT was the one in the DSSR/RTS group in LCS, which arrived (I think) roughly around the start of my sophmore year (so early '76 or so) - I have a memory of one of my friends (who was an undergrad working in that group) telling me about it, and showing it to me. (I remember being totally blown away with the way you could write a command 'foo', compile it, and jut say 'foo' to run it...) Actually, it may have shown up well before that - perhaps they had it well before I first saw it. Certainly by the time I showed up at LCS (fall of '77) it had already spread to CSR; they had an 11/40 with Unix on it, cloned from the DSSR system. Again, I don't know if there was any paperwork that had to happen, or if that system was already covered under whatever license the DSSR machine was under. Of course, this was all DARPA-funded work, and there may have been something there that allowed it. We certainly passed Unix source around with other DARPA projects (e.g. at BBN) without, AFAICR, worrying much about paperwork. > we had a sign a document with the university stating something that we > understood it was AT&Ts IP I don't recall anything like that at MIT; maybe in the very early days, there was something, but certainly not by '77. If it's important to know what happened, I can ask (e.g. Prof. Ward, head of DSSR). Noel From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 17 06:54:28 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 07:54:28 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] [Uucp] News readers In-Reply-To: <20170315005610.GA6645@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170315002422.GB1905@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170315005610.GA6645@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:24:22AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > Then, perhaps a better news reader. Any preferences :-) > > So far I've though of (and found) [...] After going through several readers, I ended up with "trn". Also, Alpine has a passable reader. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From paul.winalski at gmail.com Fri Mar 17 07:28:08 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:28:08 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics In-Reply-To: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On 3/16/17, Doug McIlroy wrote: > "Open" was certainly not a work heard in the Unix lab, > where our lawyers made sure we knew it was a "trade secret". > John Lions was brought into the lab both because we admired > his work and because the lawyers wanted to reel that work > back in-house. That matches my recollection: AT&T treated the UNIX sources as a trade secret. When I worked on DEC's port of the VAX/VMS linker to Ultrix, our team was very careful to work from the a.out specification only, and to avoid any contact with the sources to ld. We wanted to avoid any chance of AT&T claiming that our VMS linker port in any way used their proprietary technology. AT&T made the sources available pretty widely in academia, for use as a teaching tool, and some of the universities involved seemed to play pretty fast and loose with the NDA. A lot of CS students I talked to were under the impression that the UNIX sources were freely open and hackable at their college. Because of this I always wondered whether, if push came to shove, AT&T would be able to legally enforce its trade secret claims. I don't think the issue was ever actually litigated. -Paul W. From pechter at gmail.com Fri Mar 17 07:31:38 2017 From: pechter at gmail.com (William Pechter) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:31:38 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] [Uucp] News readers In-Reply-To: References: <20170315002422.GB1905@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170315005610.GA6645@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Wed, 15 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:24:22AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >>> Then, perhaps a better news reader. Any preferences :-) >> So far I've though of (and found) > [...] > > After going through several readers, I ended up with "trn". Also, Alpine > has a passable reader. > Trn and tin should both be reasonable. I think trn4 and tin may be a bit past the mid 80's. I seem to remember tin was in the early 1990s (wikipedia says 1991) and trn was probably just a little earlier. Rn was pretty much the standard newsreader in the old days when we still did news via serial port. Trn will build on newer machines and does run in rn mode. Bill From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 17 08:17:34 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:17:34 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: <1489678815.19703.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1489678815.19703.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, Norman Wilson wrote: > (Contrary to the rude stories one hears, those diags were in fact pretty > thorough.) They sure were... We had a problem with our RK-11 when running Unix, and because it never showed up with RSX it must've been the fault of Unix, right? Wrong... The DEC gingerbeer turned up with something called "DECEX" (for DEC exerciser); it was menu-driven, and you could exercise as much of the system as you wanted (simultaneously). Well, it found that overlapped seeks were not implemented properly on the RK-11 (which Unix used but RSX didn't, and neither did their standard diags). One quick FCO later, and it was fixed; red faces on the part of DEC... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From pepe at naleco.com Fri Mar 17 09:04:57 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:04:57 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> Message-ID: <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 15, 09:40, Kurt H Maier wrote: > > Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator > too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different > programs. > > It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. > That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the > functionality should be deleted. I don't use X11 forwarding because it works bad/slow over WAN links, but RDP/ICA works just fine over the same. Also, in X11 forwarding any network hiccup means the X11 app you are remoting just crashes, that does not happen in the RDP/ICA world. The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, self-contained, GUI desktop". In my opinion, X11 is not appropriate for desktops --it is designed more for a scientific workstation kind of thing--, but currently there is just no mature alternative in the Unix/Linux world (except for Mac OS X, of course). -- Josh Good From rmswierczek at gmail.com Fri Mar 17 09:29:23 2017 From: rmswierczek at gmail.com (Robert Swierczek) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:29:23 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: Here is my 2 cents to add: I think both approaches have their pro's and con's. This is what I would like to see in an ideal remote GUI environment (I'll use the X11 convention for display server and application client): Mostly stateless as in VNC, little or no round-tripping of messages. Client application contains a very small library (not a whole GUI rendering library as needed by remote desk-topping). Lighter than Xlib. Maybe on the order of curses. Suitable for embedded devices. Client should be tolerant of server going down and reconnecting (as in VNC) because of a crash or migration. User should see their application rendered in the servers widget scheme. Server can be implemented natively or in a browser. Some form of remote OpenGL supported (as in JS/WebGL) On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 15, 09:40, Kurt H Maier wrote: >> >> Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator >> too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different >> programs. >> >> It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. >> That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the >> functionality should be deleted. > > I don't use X11 forwarding because it works bad/slow over WAN links, > but RDP/ICA works just fine over the same. Also, in X11 forwarding any > network hiccup means the X11 app you are remoting just crashes, that > does not happen in the RDP/ICA world. > > The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 > forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) > which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only > bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, > self-contained, GUI desktop". > > In my opinion, X11 is not appropriate for desktops --it is designed more > for a scientific workstation kind of thing--, but currently there is > just no mature alternative in the Unix/Linux world (except for Mac OS X, > of course). > > -- > Josh Good > From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 17 09:29:50 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:29:50 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 16, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Josh Good wrote: > > The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". The Mac proclaimed the bitmap screen interface to the world, but X11 (and Sunview) pretty much invented the GUI desktop metaphor. Into the mid-late 1990s I was managing shops that were using NCD X11 network terminals to run all sorts of GUI-based office applications (WYSIWIG word processing, spreadsheets, what have you) off UNIX hosts, well before the web was anything more than a curiosity. And that pedigree dates back to the mid-1980s, where SunOS 3 helped define the concept of diskless clients. Which isn't quite the same thing, but all of this was happening long before, say, Windows came along. And *well* before Windows had the concept of remote GUI access. And that was *well* *well* before those Windows machines grokked the concept of multiple-users-on-independent-graphical-desktops remote access. Circa 1994, a batch of 20 colour NCD X terminals talking to something like an SGI Onyx would kick the living daylights out of an equivalent set of 20 80486 Windows 3.11 desktops, on compute performance, for the GUI desktop environment they provided, and overall functionality and productivity. --lyndon From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Fri Mar 17 09:46:49 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:46:49 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics In-Reply-To: References: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <1489708009.58cb23e901ea8@www.paradise.net.nz> In relation to which, a google search on "site:groklaw.net unix methods" yields some interesting observations on this very topic of "trade secrets" wrt Unix. Wesley Parish Quoting Paul Winalski : > On 3/16/17, Doug McIlroy wrote: > > "Open" was certainly not a work heard in the Unix lab, > > where our lawyers made sure we knew it was a "trade secret". > > John Lions was brought into the lab both because we admired > > his work and because the lawyers wanted to reel that work > > back in-house. > > That matches my recollection: AT&T treated the UNIX sources as a > trade secret. When I worked on DEC's port of the VAX/VMS linker to > Ultrix, our team was very careful to work from the a.out specification > only, and to avoid any contact with the sources to ld. We wanted to > avoid any chance of AT&T claiming that our VMS linker port in any way > used their proprietary technology. > > AT&T made the sources available pretty widely in academia, for use as > a teaching tool, and some of the universities involved seemed to play > pretty fast and loose with the NDA. A lot of CS students I talked to > were under the impression that the UNIX sources were freely open and > hackable at their college. Because of this I always wondered whether, > if push came to shove, AT&T would be able to legally enforce its trade > secret claims. I don't think the issue was ever actually litigated. > > -Paul W. > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From lyndon at orthanc.ca Fri Mar 17 10:05:18 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:05:18 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: > On Mar 16, 2017, at 4:29 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > for the GUI desktop environment they provided I forgot to clarify: the Irix [56].X desktop environment. Which was light years ahead of everyone else at the time. From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Mar 17 10:13:31 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:13:31 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:04:57AM +0100, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 15, 09:40, Kurt H Maier wrote: > > > > Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator > > too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different > > programs. > > > > It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. > > That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the > > functionality should be deleted. > > I don't use X11 forwarding because it works bad/slow over WAN links, > but RDP/ICA works just fine over the same. Also, in X11 forwarding any > network hiccup means the X11 app you are remoting just crashes, that > does not happen in the RDP/ICA world. I'm a huge X11 fan, use remote display all the time (I'm reading this mail on slovax.mcvoy.com but I'm on a laptop so when mutt needs to display a photo or a word doc or whatever, that's all remote X over wifi, it "works" well enough that I use it a lot). That said, whatever they did in RDP (which I'm guessing is Microsoft's remote desktop protocol?) is awesome. Way, way, way better than remote display. As Josh said, works quite well over a WAN. I've used it to get desktop access to windows machines in our build cluster and it works great (I'm in the Santa Cruz mountains and my net connection is point to point wifi to a tower, not the greatest). > The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 > forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) > which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only > bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, > self-contained, GUI desktop". Huh. So is RDP better because it does bitmap to bitmap compression? > In my opinion, X11 is not appropriate for desktops --it is designed more > for a scientific workstation kind of thing--, but currently there is > just no mature alternative in the Unix/Linux world (except for Mac OS X, > of course). I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if that makes sense but RDP is the shit. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From scj at yaccman.com Fri Mar 17 11:04:45 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:04:45 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics In-Reply-To: <201703161933.v2GJXAdo144602@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <2f004b6cd59d100c4853aa1c15c06cf0c0db93ec@webmail.yaccman.com> Yes, Doug is spot on.  Being told by the govt. that we had to patent everything we could and license it fairly got rather strange when software was involved -- there was a lot of question whether software could be patented at all, and the Labs had to patent software if it could be patented (e.g., the setuid bit). The biggest issue, which still hasn't gone away, is that software moves so much faster than the law.  The lawyers seemed to take the standpoint that if something was questionable, just wait for five years until there are better legal precedents. At one point I made a major push to get the PCC grammar for C released in the public domain.  I still think this would have brought standardization about much sooner, and my managers were in favor of it.  But the lawyers delayed and delayed.  The next thing you know, we had "far pointers" and all sorts of other gook in the language that took the standards committee additional years to wring out.  Sigh... Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug McIlroy" To: Cc: Sent:Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:33:10 -0400 Subject:Re: [TUHS] System Economics "Open" was certainly not a work heard in the Unix lab, where our lawyers made sure we knew it was a "trade secret". John Lions was brought into the lab both because we admired his work and because the lawyers wanted to reel that work back in-house. Out in the field, the trade secret was treated in many different ways. Perhaps the most extreme was MIT, whose lawyers believed it could not be adequately protected in academia and forbade its use there. I don't know what eventually broke the logjam. Doug -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From downing.nick at gmail.com Fri Mar 17 11:15:19 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:15:19 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: I think the main difference being discussed here is 3 approaches to remote logins: (1) the user has a single login session, effectively a console, and can connect to it/view it/interact with it from anywhere (2) the user creates a new login session whenever they connect to the server from a new station (or separately from the same station) (3) the user has a local GUI console and login session, but windows can be created in it that connect to remotely running apps I would say that VNC, RDP are cases of type (1) whereas standard X remoting (where a display manager runs on a diskless client, say) is type (2) and "ssh -X" type X remoting is type (3). Ignoring type (3) for the moment, I would say these approaches have the following advantages/disadvantages: - (1) is failsafe to dropped connections, etc, where (2) is not - (1) is helpful for remote assistance since multiple parties can view or interact with the desktop, where (2) is not - (2) should be IMO more efficient since all context is maintained in the terminal and the running applications can store stuff in offscreen memory, invoke complex drawing primitives, etc, where (1) lends itself more naturally to doing the drawing operations locally and then sending bitmap "patches" to the changed areas of the screen (this is what gives it the failsafe nature and also why apparently some people see it running faster, because of bitmap compression) - (2) is more powerful and scriptable IMO since a new session doesn't hurt or depend on any other session, it seems more unix-like considering how we use ssh and subshells and so on, basically multiuser facilities being used single-user, whereas the type (1) IMO seems limited in scalability and might also run into performance problems with super high resolution displays, or lesser hardware that can't compress bitmaps quickly. Types 1 and 2 have a direct analogue to console terminal sessions: (1) is where the user runs "screen" (or something like "nohup") whereas (2) is where the user does an "ssh" to the server causing the sshd to fork a new session. Personally, I think the type (2) should be extended to handle the use cases of type (1) since I believe it is more efficient for context to be stored in the terminal and drawing operations carried out there. So the ideal way I believe to handle these cases in a "new generation, de-bloatified X" would be to provide an optional utility like "screen" which caches any state which has been sent to the terminal, keeping dirty flags etc to indicate whether such state has also been forwarded onto the real terminal, and re-generate the protocol and all drawing commands having sent any dependencies such as offscreen bitmaps first. That way, you could have a type (2) system, but log into shared sessions and/or re-log into dropped sessions, migrate sessions and so on. But since the "screen" like program would be a separately installed, optional package, it wouldn't impact on the simplified base system unless you wanted this function. cheers, Nick On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Robert Swierczek wrote: > Here is my 2 cents to add: I think both approaches have their pro's > and con's. This is what I would like to see in an ideal remote GUI > environment (I'll use the X11 convention for display server and > application client): > > Mostly stateless as in VNC, little or no round-tripping of messages. > > Client application contains a very small library (not a whole GUI > rendering library as needed by remote desk-topping). Lighter than > Xlib. Maybe on the order of curses. Suitable for embedded devices. > > Client should be tolerant of server going down and reconnecting (as in > VNC) because of a crash or migration. > > User should see their application rendered in the servers widget scheme. > > Server can be implemented natively or in a browser. > > Some form of remote OpenGL supported (as in JS/WebGL) > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Josh Good wrote: >> On 2017 Mar 15, 09:40, Kurt H Maier wrote: >>> >>> Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator >>> too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different >>> programs. >>> >>> It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. >>> That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the >>> functionality should be deleted. >> >> I don't use X11 forwarding because it works bad/slow over WAN links, >> but RDP/ICA works just fine over the same. Also, in X11 forwarding any >> network hiccup means the X11 app you are remoting just crashes, that >> does not happen in the RDP/ICA world. >> >> The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 >> forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) >> which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only >> bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, >> self-contained, GUI desktop". >> >> In my opinion, X11 is not appropriate for desktops --it is designed more >> for a scientific workstation kind of thing--, but currently there is >> just no mature alternative in the Unix/Linux world (except for Mac OS X, >> of course). >> >> -- >> Josh Good >> From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 17 12:16:00 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:16:00 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: Well $999 would get you source.. https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/32/93939063_729b710163_z.jpg?zz=1 With more and more magazines of the era being scanned and put online, I should try to find the 1800itsunix... On March 17, 2017 3:47:55 AM GMT+08:00, Dave Horsfall wrote: >On Wed, 15 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > >> It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > >> very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > >> talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At >least, >> it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > >> write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source >code >> he could readily compile and run on his i386. > >Perhaps I'm confused (not uncommon) but I have distinct memories of >having >a source licence for my BSD/OS system on a 386... > >-- >Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will >suffer." -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 17 12:16:00 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:16:00 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: Well $999 would get you source.. https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/32/93939063_729b710163_z.jpg?zz=1 With more and more magazines of the era being scanned and put online, I should try to find the 1800itsunix... On March 17, 2017 3:47:55 AM GMT+08:00, Dave Horsfall wrote: >On Wed, 15 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > >> It is obvious to me that RMS's GNU movement was aimed at solving that > >> very problem. And if that was a problem, then the "UNIX openness" you > >> talk about does not seem to have been very practical at all. At >least, >> it was totally useless to PC hackers, like Linus Torvalds - he had to > >> write his own UNIX, because he was not able to get any UNIX source >code >> he could readily compile and run on his i386. > >Perhaps I'm confused (not uncommon) but I have distinct memories of >having >a source licence for my BSD/OS system on a 386... > >-- >Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will >suffer." -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Mar 17 13:16:25 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 11:16:25 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1595e98a-045b-4332-ae4b-4c3b9009e513@SG2APC01FT013.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Well there is xrdp http://www.xrdp.org/ I’ve used this to ‘terminal server-ize’ our Oracle on Linux installs, as our DBA’s were used to Oracle on Windows (I know, I know, they also used to run it on Netware....) So the upshot is that on Windows you just fire up the rdp client, and connect into the Linux machine, and it’ll greet you with a login screen, login, and you have your desktop. On the backend it’s the virtual X framebuffer, and xrdp does some vnc/mstsc type translation in the middle. It’s great for sharing out desktops, or if you have those old ‘windows terminals’ that can at least talk to a MS Terminal server. It’s incompatible with the citrix stuff, but it’s pretty cool. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Larry McVoy Sent: Friday, 17 March 2017 8:14 AM To: Josh Good Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:04:57AM +0100, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 15, 09:40, Kurt H Maier wrote: > > > > Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator > > too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different > > programs. > > > > It's all very well for X11's networking tools to be useless for you. > > That doesn't make them useless in general, and it doesn't mean the > > functionality should be deleted. > > I don't use X11 forwarding because it works bad/slow over WAN links, > but RDP/ICA works just fine over the same. Also, in X11 forwarding any > network hiccup means the X11 app you are remoting just crashes, that > does not happen in the RDP/ICA world. I'm a huge X11 fan, use remote display all the time (I'm reading this mail on slovax.mcvoy.com but I'm on a laptop so when mutt needs to display a photo or a word doc or whatever, that's all remote X over wifi, it "works" well enough that I use it a lot). That said, whatever they did in RDP (which I'm guessing is Microsoft's remote desktop protocol?) is awesome. Way, way, way better than remote display. As Josh said, works quite well over a WAN. I've used it to get desktop access to windows machines in our build cluster and it works great (I'm in the Santa Cruz mountains and my net connection is point to point wifi to a tower, not the greatest). > The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 > forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) > which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only > bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, > self-contained, GUI desktop". Huh. So is RDP better because it does bitmap to bitmap compression? > In my opinion, X11 is not appropriate for desktops --it is designed more > for a scientific workstation kind of thing--, but currently there is > just no mature alternative in the Unix/Linux world (except for Mac OS X, > of course). I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if that makes sense but RDP is the shit. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Fri Mar 17 15:55:32 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 23:55:32 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <201703170555.v2H5tWs7017414@freefriends.org> Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". > > The Mac proclaimed the bitmap screen interface to the world, but X11 > (and Sunview) pretty much invented the GUI desktop metaphor. I thought all this really went back to the work at Xerox PARC. The Alto and so on; we had a few at Georgia Tech in the mid '80s, before Suns. Arnold From steffen at sdaoden.eu Fri Mar 17 22:39:35 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:39:35 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170317123935.Zj3Be%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Larry McVoy wrote: |On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:04:57AM +0100, Josh Good wrote: |> On 2017 Mar 15, 09:40, Kurt H Maier wrote: |>> Your usage habits are not natural laws. I'm a systems administrator |>> too, and I use X11 forwarding every single day, on dozens of different |>> programs. ... |> I don't use X11 forwarding because it works bad/slow over WAN links, ... |I'm a huge X11 fan, use remote display all the time (I'm reading this |mail on slovax.mcvoy.com but I'm on a laptop so when mutt needs to |display a photo or a word doc or whatever, that's all remote X over |wifi, it "works" well enough that I use it a lot). And it makes it possible to run browsers in a separate KVM into which you log in with X11 forwarding enabled, for very insecure things, and if your machine is strong enough. Matthew Dillon of DragonflyBSD posted[1] a nice recipe of separating privileges via several different user accounts on the same machine (as in "ssh dfw1 at localhost -n \"setenv DISPLAY :0.0; firefox\""), onto which i added the additional KVM separation; a pain on my small box with todays internet, however. But possible. And i am hoping for improved virtual graphics, they are working on that! --steffen From steffen at sdaoden.eu Fri Mar 17 22:45:13 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:45:13 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317123935.Zj3Be%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <20170317123935.Zj3Be%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <20170317124513.uQykc%steffen@sdaoden.eu> ... |things, and if your machine is strong enough. Matthew Dillon of |DragonflyBSD posted[1] a nice recipe of separating privileges via |several different user accounts on the same machine (as in "ssh |dfw1 at localhost -n \"setenv DISPLAY :0.0; firefox\""), onto ... Sorry, i had forgotten the link, it is [1] http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/2015-August/291195.html --steffen From ron at ronnatalie.com Fri Mar 17 22:56:13 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 08:56:13 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <032601d29f1d$dc5e6f10$951b4d30$@ronnatalie.com> >> The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". > The Mac proclaimed the bitmap screen interface to the world, but X11 (and Sunview) pretty much invented the GUI desktop metaphor. I think most people will attribute the desktop metaphor to Xerox. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 17 23:05:34 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:05:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like Message-ID: <20170317130534.8DC5018C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: "Ron Natalie" > I think most people will attribute the desktop metaphor to Xerox. Strictly speaking, to Smalltalk (from PARC); things like Bravo, and the basic user command interface on the Alto (I forget what its name was), didn't have any concept of windows/desktop (although Bravo did use the bitmap screen). Noel From krewat at kilonet.net Sat Mar 18 00:39:21 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:39:21 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <30254e4d-df07-e060-11ed-f0e6a5a78dc8@kilonet.net> On 3/16/2017 8:13 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if > that makes sense but RDP is the shit. Check out VNC - you run a "server" on the remote side, and the VNC client on the client side. The advantage is that everything you run stays running on the remote side. I use this setup all the time for a security-conscious Fortune 100 company I consult for, as well as personally. Now, of course, it can be argued that VNC has it's security problems, some of which stem from X11 itself. For example, I can't tell you how many people do an "xhost +" either manually or (to my horror) in .vnc/xstartup - But that's X11's problem not VNC. Add "ssh -X" to all of this. From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 18 01:06:20 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 11:06:20 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317130534.8DC5018C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170317130534.8DC5018C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <036f01d29f30$09e9a780$1dbcf680$@ronnatalie.com> I beg to differ. The Star not only pioneered the WISIWYG application presentation also the concept of the desktop. The whole conscept of dropping documents as icons on the desktop appears to have orginated there. Of course, as with a lot of nifty stuff PARC and the other Xerox research guys came up with, it never really saw wholesale product development. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Noel Chiappa Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 9:06 AM To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Re: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like > From: "Ron Natalie" > I think most people will attribute the desktop metaphor to Xerox. Strictly speaking, to Smalltalk (from PARC); things like Bravo, and the basic user command interface on the Alto (I forget what its name was), didn't have any concept of windows/desktop (although Bravo did use the bitmap screen). Noel From tfb at tfeb.org Sat Mar 18 01:19:31 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:19:31 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> On 16 Mar 2017, at 23:29, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > The Mac proclaimed the bitmap screen interface to the world, but X11 (and Sunview) pretty much invented the GUI desktop metaphor. As someone who used Xerox machines: no, they didn't. From dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org Sat Mar 18 01:24:26 2017 From: dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org (Derek Fawcus) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:24:26 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] [Uucp] News readers In-Reply-To: References: <20170315002422.GB1905@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170315005610.GA6645@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170317152426.GA64706@cowbell.employees.org> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:31:38PM -0400, William Pechter wrote: > Trn and tin should both be reasonable. I think trn4 and tin may be a > bit past the mid 80's. > I seem to remember tin was in the early 1990s (wikipedia says 1991) and > trn was probably just a little earlier. I was certainly using trn from around '92 til '98 (when I basically stopped reading netnews). DF From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sat Mar 18 01:39:02 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 11:39:02 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like Message-ID: <20170317153902.D3CC418C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: "Ron Natalie" >>> I think most people will attribute the desktop metaphor to Xerox. >> Strictly speaking, to Smalltalk (from PARC) ^^^^ > I beg to differ. The Star not only pioneered the WISIWYG application > presentation PARC _was_ Xerox. The Star was a product based on the Alto, but much of the Star stuff was pioneered on the Alto. For instance, WYSIWYG was one of the modes that the Alto's Bravo editor could be run in; it definitely pre-dates the Star. > also the concept of the desktop. Depending on exactly what you mean by 'desktop', that also pre-dated the Star. I heard the multiple overlapping windows of Smalltalk (an Alto application) likened to a collection of sheets of paper on a desktop (which is where the term came from); clicking on one with the mouse brought it to the top, just like pulling a particular sheet of paper out from the ones on a physical desktop. > The whole conscept of dropping documents as icons on the desktop appears > to have orginated there. Yes, as I mentioned: >> things like Bravo, and the basic user command interface on the Alto >> [the Exec, my brain finally coughed up the name - can't find my Alto >> manual at the moment] didn't have any concept of windows/desktop The concept of having a graphical front end as the main user interface was not from the Alto, and the Alto didn't have icons either; both came later (I'll let the Lisa people and Star people argue that one out). Noel From imp at bsdimp.com Sat Mar 18 01:55:21 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:55:21 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Jason Stevens wrote: > Well $999 would get you source.. > > https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/32/93939063_729b710163_z.jpg?zz=1 > > With more and more magazines of the era being scanned and put online, I > should try to find the 1800itsunix... In June 1993, you could already get FreeBSD, NetBSD and 386BSD as well as BSD 4.4-lite. I think Minix was also available and several other 'also ran' Unix clones of the era whose names have slipped from my memory.... Most of the folks in this thread are lamenting the era before the Net2 release when nothing was available without some kind of encumbrance. And they do have a point. Where you went to school mattered a lot for how much access to the sources you could get. But I was at a school that had a liberal source access policy. You asked Mike and he told you where to find the source. :) Mike was the director of the computer center, and he also told you not to release it and it would be an expellable offense if you shared it or copied off the servers. But at the time, I didn't have enough disk space on my PC to do that.... and I always had dialin access to the encumbered 4.2BSD sources as well as the SunOS 3.x sources. But without a machine to run it on, it was hard to hack the kernel, or even know the good kernel code from the bad with certainty.... Wasn't until my senior year that the OS course switched over from writing an OS for a TOPS-20-like machine emulated on a TOPS-20 machine to writing modules to replace bits of SunOS with your own code... It was also part of an evolving notion of "OPEN". The SunOS systems were Open. Totally Open. All the protocols they used were documented and others could write implementations to them. And there was even a sample implementation for things like NFS. For the day, that was super open. Try it with VMS, which had some of the protocols documented and some of those you could implement w/o running afoul of DEC's (claimed) IP of various flavors... Sure, it isn't as Open as today, but it was the first steps down that path... So Unix has always been an open system. It's just that it's help drive the notion of Open, including motivating people to work on Linux while the last bits of it were being freed up and the inevitable legal hassles that caused.... Of course, various commercial flavors complicated this picture significantly.... But various commercial Linux vendors don't really release their sources today, so it can be hard to get all the bits you need, especially in BSP land.... So Linux is open, but only mostly open since compliance isn't universal.... Warner From imp at bsdimp.com Sat Mar 18 01:55:21 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:55:21 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Jason Stevens wrote: > Well $999 would get you source.. > > https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/32/93939063_729b710163_z.jpg?zz=1 > > With more and more magazines of the era being scanned and put online, I > should try to find the 1800itsunix... In June 1993, you could already get FreeBSD, NetBSD and 386BSD as well as BSD 4.4-lite. I think Minix was also available and several other 'also ran' Unix clones of the era whose names have slipped from my memory.... Most of the folks in this thread are lamenting the era before the Net2 release when nothing was available without some kind of encumbrance. And they do have a point. Where you went to school mattered a lot for how much access to the sources you could get. But I was at a school that had a liberal source access policy. You asked Mike and he told you where to find the source. :) Mike was the director of the computer center, and he also told you not to release it and it would be an expellable offense if you shared it or copied off the servers. But at the time, I didn't have enough disk space on my PC to do that.... and I always had dialin access to the encumbered 4.2BSD sources as well as the SunOS 3.x sources. But without a machine to run it on, it was hard to hack the kernel, or even know the good kernel code from the bad with certainty.... Wasn't until my senior year that the OS course switched over from writing an OS for a TOPS-20-like machine emulated on a TOPS-20 machine to writing modules to replace bits of SunOS with your own code... It was also part of an evolving notion of "OPEN". The SunOS systems were Open. Totally Open. All the protocols they used were documented and others could write implementations to them. And there was even a sample implementation for things like NFS. For the day, that was super open. Try it with VMS, which had some of the protocols documented and some of those you could implement w/o running afoul of DEC's (claimed) IP of various flavors... Sure, it isn't as Open as today, but it was the first steps down that path... So Unix has always been an open system. It's just that it's help drive the notion of Open, including motivating people to work on Linux while the last bits of it were being freed up and the inevitable legal hassles that caused.... Of course, various commercial flavors complicated this picture significantly.... But various commercial Linux vendors don't really release their sources today, so it can be hard to get all the bits you need, especially in BSP land.... So Linux is open, but only mostly open since compliance isn't universal.... Warner From lm at mcvoy.com Sat Mar 18 02:21:07 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:21:07 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <30254e4d-df07-e060-11ed-f0e6a5a78dc8@kilonet.net> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <30254e4d-df07-e060-11ed-f0e6a5a78dc8@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:39:21AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > On 3/16/2017 8:13 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > >I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if > >that makes sense but RDP is the shit. > > Check out VNC - you run a "server" on the remote side, and the VNC client on > the client side. The advantage is that everything you run stays running on > the remote side. Unless VNC has evolved it's just nowhere near as snappy as RDP. Can anyone speak to that? From tfb at tfeb.org Sat Mar 18 02:29:25 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:29:25 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <30254e4d-df07-e060-11ed-f0e6a5a78dc8@kilonet.net> <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On 17 Mar 2017, at 16:21, Larry McVoy wrote: > > Unless VNC has evolved it's just nowhere near as snappy as RDP. Can anyone > speak to that? There are variants of the protocol and some of the commercial clients & servers were significantly faster than the original one, but my impression was that RDP was better. VNC doesn't do anything like the same job as X of course: any screen-or-window-image-shipping protocol like that would need an enormous amount of extra baggage on the side of it to do so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dot at dotat.at Sat Mar 18 02:49:35 2017 From: dot at dotat.at (Tony Finch) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:49:35 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317123935.Zj3Be%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <20170317123935.Zj3Be%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > > And it makes it possible to run browsers in a separate KVM into > which you log in with X11 forwarding enabled, for very insecure > things, and if your machine is strong enough. Nice! If you want a less-DIY more-packaged version of this idea, have a look at https://www.qubes-os.org/intro/ Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode Trafalgar: Easterly or northeasterly 5 to 7, occasionally gale 8 in southeast. Moderate or rough, occasionally very rough in southeast. Thundery showers. Good, occasionally poor. From usotsuki at buric.co Sat Mar 18 03:42:46 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:42:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <30254e4d-df07-e060-11ed-f0e6a5a78dc8@kilonet.net> <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:39:21AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: >> >> On 3/16/2017 8:13 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: >>> I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if >>> that makes sense but RDP is the shit. >> >> Check out VNC - you run a "server" on the remote side, and the VNC client on >> the client side. The advantage is that everything you run stays running on >> the remote side. > > Unless VNC has evolved it's just nowhere near as snappy as RDP. Can anyone > speak to that? > I use X redirection to run some apps, but it can get dog slow with anything involving rich bitmaps. I use VNC to remote into my Linux boxen and my neighbor's PC for quick tech assistance. Again, terrible choice for anything involving bitmaps, but it's a bit better for apps that use non-system fonts. I use RDP for accessing my friend's encoding rig (Win10). Still dog-slow for bitmap stuff, but for anything else it's fast as hell even when the latency of the Internet is taken into consideration. For stuff that may require working with graphical previews (such as trimming videos for remote encoding) I use NX. -uso. From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 18 03:56:17 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:56:17 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317153902.D3CC418C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170317153902.D3CC418C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <038d01d29f47$c77e18f0$567a4ad0$@ronnatalie.com> > PARC _was_ Xerox. I know PARC was XEROX, the part of my message you edited out clearly says that. The quote you misattributed to me was Arnold's. > The concept of having a graphical front end as the main user interface was not from the Alto, and the Alto didn't have icons either; both came later (I'll let the Lisa people and Star people argue that one out). Yeah, well they can argue, but it's pretty clear Xerox came first. Of course, neither the Star or Lisa were really full fledged commercial products, but one might argue they are both Alto follow ons. Jobs had seen the Alto at PARC before Lisa was very far along. From dot at dotat.at Sat Mar 18 04:16:35 2017 From: dot at dotat.at (Tony Finch) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:16:35 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: Warner Losh wrote: > Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and > rebranded with the GPL. [context brutally snipped] This brings up questions about how GNU and BSD operated around 1990ish. I'm aware of Bostic's campaign to replace the AT&T code in BSD, which led to the almost-completely-free Net/2. What I wonder is how much of this was duplicating work also done under the GNU umbrella? How much of it was authors donating their rewritten utilities to both projects? What was the state of the GNU project when Bostic started his campaign? Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode Dover, Wight, Portland, Plymouth: Southwest 5 to 7, occasionally gale 8 except in Plymouth. Moderate or rough. Fair then occasional rain. Good, occasionally poor. From reed at reedmedia.net Sat Mar 18 04:52:38 2017 From: reed at reedmedia.net (Jeremy C. Reed) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:52:38 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: > This brings up questions about how GNU and BSD operated around 1990ish. > I'm aware of Bostic's campaign to replace the AT&T code in BSD, which led > to the almost-completely-free Net/2. What I wonder is how much of this was > duplicating work also done under the GNU umbrella? How much of it was > authors donating their rewritten utilities to both projects? What was the > state of the GNU project when Bostic started his campaign? Have a look at the following: GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 6, January, 1989 Contents of Beta Test Tape https://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull6.html#SEC17 GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 7, June, 1989 https://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull7.html "A collection of utilities for file manipulation, including ls, mv, cp, cat, rm, du, head, tail and cmp will be released soon." ... "The GNU project is working to provide reimplementations of System V features that Berkeley Unix lacks, such as improved shells and make commands." GNU's Bulletin, vol. 1 no. 9, June 1990 https://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull9.html#SEC10 GNU Project Status Report "We have added a collection of utilities for file manipulation to the Pre-Release tape. The collection includes ls, mv, cp, cat, rm, du, head, tail, cmp, chmod, mkdir, and ln." So around same time GNU project didn't publish some the most common tools, but soon did. I didn't check, but I am pretty sure these are all different code than the rewritten BSD code. Duplicated work. From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 18 05:54:18 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:54:18 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <001001d29f58$4406a3f0$cc13ebd0$@ronnatalie.com> I could never convince the principals to call the FreeBSD project "Radio Free Berkeley." As for duplication of effort, I'm not sure anybody cared. Certainly RMS didn't give a rats ass. I suspect some of the stuff came from sources outside of both projects, like stuff we did at BRL (although, those using that tape need to be careful, most of that stuff came right out of the system V sources, hacked over to work on BSD). From pepe at naleco.com Sat Mar 18 06:17:43 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 21:17:43 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 17, 15:19, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > On 16 Mar 2017, at 23:29, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > > > The Mac proclaimed the bitmap screen interface to the world, but X11 (and Sunview) pretty much invented the GUI desktop metaphor. > > As someone who used Xerox machines: no, they didn't. I concur that the Xerox GUI was not a "desktop metaphor". The "GUI desktop metaphor" embodies much more than a graphical canvas where to move a pointer to click around. It needs the concept of "unified session" and of "private session" to happen too. On X11, you have a root window where different remote apps from different remote systems and from different logged users can draw things. That's not a "desktop metaphor", that's just a "blackboard metaphor". A "desktop metaphor" needs the "private unified session" concept to happen too. X was designed at MIT way before the "desktop metaphor", which probably was invented (as such) in the McIntosh. -- Josh Good From ron at ronnatalie.com Sat Mar 18 06:30:49 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:30:49 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> We're waffling here. The Star had more than just a mouse to move things around. It had icons representing the documents on the desktop, something that the X window managers didn't get for quite some time (and don't really still work right). I'm not sure how you are defining the "desktop metaphor" but Apple and Xerox had it long before X. X planning didn't start until after the Lisas were on the market so, it doesn't predate them even in design. From lyndon at orthanc.ca Sat Mar 18 06:44:01 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:44:01 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 17, 2017, at 1:30 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > > I'm not sure how you are defining the "desktop > metaphor" but Apple and Xerox had it long before X. Yeah, I think we're all using different definitions of "desktop metaphor." In my view, the early Macs (and Windows) were bitmap overlays on a single user OS. To me, a "desktop" is a much more virtual abstraction of the user's runtime environment from the underlying OS. I.e., if you can't have two distinct "users" concurrently running independent GUI environments on the same hardware, it's not a "desktop." And I realize that's a very fuzzy definition. Let me ask you this, Ron: how would you classify the Plan 9 terminal environment? :-) --lyndon From crossd at gmail.com Sat Mar 18 07:08:16 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 17:08:16 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > On Mar 17, 2017, at 1:30 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > > > > I'm not sure how you are defining the "desktop > > metaphor" but Apple and Xerox had it long before X. > > Yeah, I think we're all using different definitions of "desktop metaphor." > > In my view, the early Macs (and Windows) were bitmap overlays on a single > user OS. To me, a "desktop" is a much more virtual abstraction of the > user's runtime environment from the underlying OS. I.e., if you can't have > two distinct "users" concurrently running independent GUI environments on > the same hardware, it's not a "desktop." And I realize that's a very fuzzy > definition. > Fuzzy indeed. I'm not sure I understand what you mean at all. "Desktop" tends to have a fairly consistent definition in the context of user environments: It's the graphical component of the interactive facilities of your computer/operating system combination, in the state of the user having logged in (if appropriate) and being in the process of using the machine. What does that have to do with the underlying operating system supporting multiple users with independent desktops? Let me ask you this, Ron: how would you classify the Plan 9 terminal > environment? :-) "Terminals" in the Plan 9 world are just that: terminals. They are the physical computers users use to interact with the rest of the system (to a first order approximation, Plan 9 can be thought of as being something like a "timesharing system built from a network of computers"). Of note, they tend to be single-user (modulo a few processes that may run as e.g. "none" or whatever). They tend to present the user with a GUI that I would argue is a "desktop": rio, acme, etc give one access to one's files and present an interface for accessing the underlying system. While they tend not to use the bitmapped graphical icons of other systems, I argue that limiting the definition of desktops to being characterized by icons representing objects such as files and applications while being present on the screen seems like an implementation detail and unnecessarily limiting. http://pub.gajendra.net/2016/05/plan9part1 - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Sat Mar 18 07:11:33 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 08:11:33 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Jason Stevens wrote: > Well $999 would get you source [for BSD/OS].. Especially if my boss (a very small company) was paying for it... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From pepe at naleco.com Sat Mar 18 07:20:55 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:20:55 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX") In-Reply-To: References: <20170314224547.GB14659@naleco.com> <20170315192815.GA15120@naleco.com> <20170315202723.GG2995@mcvoy.com> <14410fd3-2769-bcc7-740f-3bf54675b03e@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170317212055.GC21805@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 15, 20:45, Clem Cole wrote: > Josh -- all I am asking is you to be respectful of the term and the folks > that created it, industry and frankly the market and opportunity that Linux > and today's tech has so wonderful exploited. Clem, I am respectful of you and of all the list members from whose experience and direct contact with "primordial Unix" I try to constantly learn. I, however, try to express opinion on the "openness" of Unix (post V7). Nobody has been able to write a Unix from scratch without having had access to the Unix source code: Tannenbaum had access to the Unix sources before writing Minix, Linus had access to Minix source before writing Linux, and in Dennis Ritchie's opinion Coherent was a "rewritten Unix" done with the Unix sources printed next to the keyboard ("some parts were written with our source nearby, but at least the effort had been made to rewrite"). GNU rewrote all the surrounding Unix tools from scratch, that's true, but they could not a kernel make. So much for "openness of concepts". It's the source that matters. Anything else, is ivory-towerism. Post Lions' book being forbidden, Unix can boast little openness. > I do fear a problem is that you seem to be equating "open" with "having > access to the source" - where as the term was coined to mean "the ideas are > available for all to see and share in" - as in a mathematical, and academic > style of openness. Regards, -- Josh Good From sauer at technologists.com Sat Mar 18 07:39:00 2017 From: sauer at technologists.com (Charles H Sauer) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:39:00 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] X->VNC->RDP experience [was Re: X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <30254e4d-df07-e060-11ed-f0e6a5a78dc8@kilonet.net> <20170317162107.GI5720@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: It has been almost 20 years since I seriously used X remotely. Even then it was mostly xterms. Almost everything I do in Linux is from bash. I run X locally mostly if I'm trying to figure out how a new release of Fedora has changed configuration files -- I run the settings apps to see what they do to the files. What follows is a bit off-topic from TUHS perspective. About 1999 I began to need to administer a bunch of Windows servers, mostly on a local network, sometimes across town, sometimes farther away. I gravitated to using VNC for Windows and soon used it occasionally for Linux and, eventually, OS X. My primary desktop environment became Windows, using PuTTY for ssh. Back then, my remote access was mostly across POTS (56k) and BRI (128k) connections. Since then, I've tried most of the Windows clients and servers. For my purposes UltraVNC (uvnc.com) is much superior to the others. The client is robust across remote connections using ssh tunnels. The server was the first to work reasonably on Vista and tends to keep up with Microsoft better than the others, in my experience. Tiger (Tight) was my second favorite(s), and I still use them occasionally, mostly on older machines that I setup before using Ultra. The biggest VNC drawbacks from my perspective have been - security (alleviated by ssh tunneling) - lack of macOS versions as robust as UltraVNC on Windows - Windows with RDP interfering with VNC server With recent macOS, Apple includes a pretty good basic VNC client, “Screen Sharing”, and a very good VNC server as “Apple Remote Desktop”. Screen Sharing doesn’t feel as responsive as the better clients on Windows, e.g., TightVNC and UltraVNC, and omits refresh options and other useful features. (Reportedly, there are plans for UltraVNC for macOS. There is a Java version of TightVNC that will run on macOS, but overall doesn’t seem as responsive as Screen Sharing. I just discovered while writing this that there is a TigerVNC dmg, so I plan to try that.) When I upgraded an XP Pro machine to Vista Pro, I discovered that Vista Pro wouldn't allow the UltraVNC server to run. That forced me to get acquainted with RDP, and I was pleasantly surprised. I knew that RDP had existed, but also knew that RDP was based on ITU-T T.128. With all the complexity associated with T.120, I had stayed away from RDP. (20+ years ago I wrote a chapter in Mainstream Videoconferencing, http://notes.technologists.com/notes/2008/02/14/mainstream-videoconferencing-available-again/, trying to make T.120 more accessible than the ITU-T docs. The T.128 doc is at http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-T.128-200806-I/en.) T.120 work started when the principals assumed that videoconferencing over POTS (H.324) would become prominent, and T.120 was intended to work on POTS connections. So it is not surprising to think of RDP as "snappy" on cascaded WiFi connections. I use RDP quite a bit to access Windows machines that don't allow/interfere with UltraVNC server. (Just now I tried to get UltraVNC server to work on a machine running Windows 10 Pro, and failed.) Besides that Windows VNC interference, the main disadvantage of RDP in my experience is lack of (freely available?) servers for Windows Home, macOS and Linux. When my primary Windows laptop failed, I decided to try a MacBook Pro. Mostly I've liked it and have liked the RDP client. Some people disparage the (Microsoft supplied) RDP client as inferior to the Windows client. The specifics of their complaints don't matter on my MacBook, but I can imagine they would be bothersome on an iMac or other larger screen. Charlie -----Original Message----- From: Larry McVoy Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 11:21 AM To: Arthur Krewat Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:39:21AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > On 3/16/2017 8:13 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > >I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if > >that makes sense but RDP is the shit. > > Check out VNC - you run a "server" on the remote side, and the VNC client > on > the client side. The advantage is that everything you run stays running on > the remote side. Unless VNC has evolved it's just nowhere near as snappy as RDP. Can anyone speak to that? From lyndon at orthanc.ca Sat Mar 18 08:50:52 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 15:50:52 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 17, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > > While they tend not to use the bitmapped graphical icons of other systems, I argue that limiting the definition of desktops to being characterized by icons representing objects such as files and applications while being present on the screen seems like an implementation detail and unnecessarily limiting. But I didn't say a desktop requires iconic representations of objects. I don't think the early Oberon implementations had them (but there are >20 years of memory loss between then and now). Was Oberon a desktop? Not to my mind. It was a bitmapped interface vs a text-cell-based interface to a cooperating group of programs. Conceptually I don't see any difference between Oberon and screen(1) in that regard. Would you consider screen a 'desktop'? And likewise, Oberon? I'm not asking this rhetorically. These concepts have fuzzy definitions for a lot of people, and I'm curious to see how they map out. --lyndon From crossd at gmail.com Sat Mar 18 08:58:12 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:58:12 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > On Mar 17, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > > While they tend not to use the bitmapped graphical icons of other > systems, I argue that limiting the definition of desktops to being > characterized by icons representing objects such as files and applications > while being present on the screen seems like an implementation detail and > unnecessarily limiting. > > But I didn't say a desktop requires iconic representations of objects. I > don't think the early Oberon implementations had them (but there are >20 > years of memory loss between then and now). > Sorry; I thought that's what you were saying but I was wrong. But I confess confusion. For instance, you mention Oberon here as not having graphical icons but then in the next sentence two sentences it didn't meet your definition of what a desktop is. So that sort of seems like a non sequitur. What, then, is you definition? (And I'm not asking that to be combative; I'm truly interested.) Was Oberon a desktop? Not to my mind. It was a bitmapped interface vs a > text-cell-based interface to a cooperating group of programs. Conceptually > I don't see any difference between Oberon and screen(1) in that regard. > Would you consider screen a 'desktop'? And likewise, Oberon? I'm not > asking this rhetorically. These concepts have fuzzy definitions for a lot > of people, and I'm curious to see how they map out. > I would definitely call Oberon's graphical interface a desktop (btw, the graphical sorting demo was *cool*). But I'm clearly using a different definition than you are. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lyndon at orthanc.ca Sat Mar 18 09:17:40 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:17:40 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 17, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > > Sorry; I thought that's what you were saying but I was wrong. But I confess confusion. For instance, you mention Oberon here as not having graphical icons but then in the next sentence two sentences it didn't meet your definition of what a desktop is. So that sort of seems like a non sequitur. What, then, is you definition? (And I'm not asking that to be combative; I'm truly interested.) Doh! It just strikes me that the term I have been missing is "window manager." Early Macs, Windows, Oberon, etc., were window managers. > I would definitely call Oberon's graphical interface a desktop (btw, the graphical sorting demo was *cool*). Oberon had many cool things! > But I'm clearly using a different definition than you are. Yes. My fault. Does "window manager" make more sense? So "desktop" in my context means something much more dynamic than "window manager." NeWS was the first example I can think of - an environment that could interpret and modify its environment in context. I'm pretty sure that predated Windows and (what became) CORBA. For me, Irix 5.2 on the Indy (circa 1993?) was the first true "desktop" environment I had hands on. --lyndon From lyndon at orthanc.ca Sat Mar 18 09:22:12 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:22:12 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <48E8D60A-106E-48EA-AAD9-01E5269D73B6@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:17 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > For me, Irix 5.2 on the Indy (circa 1993?) was the first true "desktop" environment I had hands on. And I mean this in the sense of the interactive/immersive environment. I had been hacking on bitmapped/graphical interfaces going back to 1982 or so. From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 18 13:40:25 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 13:40:25 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and sendmail experience? Message-ID: <20170318034025.GA792@minnie.tuhs.org> I know it's a long shot. Does anybody remember how to use the output of pathalias in sendmail.cf? Specifically, we have set up 4.3BSD with uucp-only e-mail, and we have a map file which pathalias digests and outputs fine. I can't find any useful documentation on putting this output into sendmail. There's part of a book in Google books, but two pages are hidden. I also threw out my old bat book ages ago. I have a PDF of Sendmail_4th_Edition_Oct_2007.pdf but it doesn't mention pathalias. Thanks in advance! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dave at horsfall.org Sat Mar 18 14:34:50 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 15:34:50 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and sendmail experience? In-Reply-To: <20170318034025.GA792@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170318034025.GA792@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > I know it's a long shot. Does anybody remember how to use the output of > pathalias in sendmail.cf? Specifically, we have set up 4.3BSD with > uucp-only e-mail, and we have a map file which pathalias digests and > outputs fine. Gadzooks... It uses those funny Sendmail maps, as I dimly recall, but my Sendmail-fu is a bit old (I just use it). > I can't find any useful documentation on putting this output into > sendmail. There's part of a book in Google books, but two pages are > hidden. I also threw out my old bat book ages ago. I have a PDF of > Sendmail_4th_Edition_Oct_2007.pdf but it doesn't mention pathalias. There seems to be "http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2771", if that fits your needs. Most of the rest of the references I've found seem to be crap. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Sat Mar 18 17:09:02 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 00:09:02 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and sendmail experience? In-Reply-To: <20170318034025.GA792@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <7484.1489820942@cesium.clock.org> I still have the sendmail.cf construction kit that I put together in the 1980s and used into the 1990s at Apple and which I made available for FTP long ago at SRI-NIC.ARPA - I was amused to find it was in use at Microsoft also ... Would that help? The key lines from those cf files appear to be: # our pathalias database Op/usr/lib/mail/paths IIRC, sendmail had a generic ${lookup-key$} based on dbm(3) added to it. Before ndbm(3) which could handle multiple databases in the same program, dbm(3) could only handle one. Which explains these old production rules: S8 # magic UUCP shit R$*<@$-.UUCP> $:${$2$}!$1 look up UUCP site in maps R$+!%s!$* $:$1!$2 remove %s database cruft R$-.$+!$+ $@$3<@$1.$2> do.main!user R$-!$+ $@$2<@$1.UUCP> host!user Again, IIRC, the dance was process the UUCP maps through pathalias, feed that to a generic dbm(3) database constructor program (dbm(1)?), and give the base filename of the resulting dbm database to the "p" option of sendmail(8) in the cf file, as above, which then would process queries with ${key$} and substituting the result of the lookup. My kit has sendmail.cf for pure Internet-only, pure UUCP-only, and gateways like Apple was when I ran it. The Apple one also has some hysterical ... I mean historical stuff with how we handled BITNET and an early gateway to AppleLink through DASNET if anyone remembers that gross hack. It was fun to revisit this and read comments. Let me know if you want the full kit, and I'll put it up in my web server. Erik Fair formerly postmaster at apple.com formerly {ucbvax,ihnp4,decwrl,amd70,seismo,zehntel}!dual!fair From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Sat Mar 18 17:17:51 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 00:17:51 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] pathalias and sendmail experience? In-Reply-To: <20170318034025.GA792@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <27926.1489821471@cesium.clock.org> In fact, my "mkglue" awk script explains that the dbm(3) hacks came from UUNET: #!/bin/awk -f # MKGLUE: UUCP map post processor # Idea from Mel Pleasant via Eliot Lear # Erik E. Fair , August, 1988 # # revised from domains.txt on December 31, 1990 # # What we have here is a UUCP map postprocessor. To use: # pathalias uucpmaps > /tmp/paths.raw # mkglue /tmp/paths.raw > /tmp/glue # pathalias uucpmaps /tmp/glue > /tmp/paths.refined # do whatever you do with the maps here # # what this does is find Internet EQUIVALENCES for UUCP sites, e.g. # # ucbvax= ucbvax.berkeley.edu # apple= apple.com # # and then it reverses them, and puts all the domain names it finds into # a completely connected network called "INTERNET", with COST defined # below. That cost was determined experimentally on a Cray X/MP-48 # (pathalias will run on such a beast. It takes only 24 seconds to # process all the maps and the glue file. It's amazing what you can do # with a supercomputer). Your milage may vary. # # The effect of this is to cause nearly all your paths to take their # first hop through the Internet. DO NOT USE THIS POSTPROCESSOR, unless # you're actually on the Internet, or you have multiple UUCP neighbors # who are on the Internet of equivalent call cost to you. # # This script will NOT do anything with domain gateway declarations, e.g. # # foo .bar.com # # because these do not provide a mapping between the Internet name and # the UUCP name of the UUCP host involved. This script makes no # distinction between "real" Internet hosts and "fake" (MX'd) ones (how # can I? The information isn't there). Even with an MX host, someone on # the Internet is accepting mail for them (that's what MX is all about). # # Encourage your Internet friends and neighbors to put all the right # information into the UUCP maps. # # Also, your mailer must be able to transform thusly: # # do.main!foo!bar!bazz -> foo!bar!bazz at do.main # # since that's what the database will generate. I do it with sendmail, # and I installed the uunet hacks to 5.59 sendmail to look stuff up in a # DBM database. I expect that the IDA sendmail stuff can be similarly # coerced to do this. # # If nothing else, you might find the report at the end of the glue file # interesting. # BEGIN{ COST = "DEMAND+LOW"; # domain["arpa"] = 1; domain["nato"] = 1; domain["com"] = 1; domain["gov"] = 1; domain["mil"] = 1; domain["org"] = 1; domain["edu"] = 1; domain["net"] = 1; domain["int"] = 1; domain["ar"] = 1; domain["at"] = 1; domain["au"] = 1; domain["be"] = 1; domain["br"] = 1; domain["ca"] = 1; domain["ch"] = 1; domain["cl"] = 1; domain["cn"] = 1; domain["cr"] = 1; domain["cs"] = 1; domain["de"] = 1; domain["dk"] = 1; domain["eg"] = 1; domain["es"] = 1; domain["fi"] = 1; domain["fr"] = 1; domain["gr"] = 1; domain["hk"] = 1; domain["hu"] = 1; domain["ie"] = 1; domain["il"] = 1; domain["in"] = 1; domain["is"] = 1; domain["it"] = 1; domain["jp"] = 1; domain["kr"] = 1; domain["lk"] = 1; domain["mx"] = 1; domain["my"] = 1; domain["ni"] = 1; domain["nl"] = 1; domain["no"] = 1; domain["nz"] = 1; domain["ph"] = 1; domain["pl"] = 1; domain["pr"] = 1; domain["pt"] = 1; domain["se"] = 1; domain["sg"] = 1; domain["su"] = 1; domain["th"] = 1; domain["tr"] = 1; domain["tw"] = 1; domain["uk"] = 1; domain["us"] = 1; domain["uy"] = 1; domain["yu"] = 1; domain["za"] = 1; nbad = 0; imon_inet = 0; } # ignore domain gateways (no clean mapping - we must know the internet name) /^\./ {next} $2 == "%s" { # hopefully only one of these if ( $1 !~ /\./ ) { localuucpname = $1; next; } } # here's the meat of the matter - find real domains and reverse the # equivalences so that pathalias will give us paths with internet # names in them. $1 ~ /\./ { hostname= $1; curbad = 0; # check top of domain name for validity i = split(hostname, parts, "."); top = parts[i]; if (domain[top] != 1) { printf("# bad domain - %s\n", hostname); badtop[top]++; nbad++; curbad = 1; } else domtop[top]++; n = split($2, path, "!"); if (n > 1) { uucpname= path[n - 1]; if (hostname == uucpname) next; # skip two sided dot aliases i = split(uucpname, parts, "."); if (i < 2) { if (! curbad) { print hostname "=" uucpname; internet[hostname]++; } } else if (domain[parts[i]] == 1) { print uucpname "=" hostname; internet[uucpname]++; } } else if ($2 == "%s") { if (imon_inet && localuucpname != "" && !curbad) { print localinetname "=" localuucpname; internet[localinetname]++; } if (!curbad) { localinetname= $1; internet[localinetname]++; imon_inet++ } } } # now create a completely connected network of the domain names, # with a low cost, so that we mostly use the Internet in preference # to any other path END{ if (imon_inet) { print localinetname "=" localuucpname; } print "INTERNET={" for(hostname in internet) { printf("\t%s,\n", hostname); } printf("\t}(%s)\n", COST); # # report on what we found while perusing the map data # printf("# top level domains\n"); for(top in domtop) { printf("#\t%s\t%d\n", top, domtop[top]); } # if (nbad > 0) { printf("\n# unrecognized summary:\n"); for(dom in badtop) { printf("#\t%s\t%d\n", dom, badtop[dom]); } } } From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Sat Mar 18 22:45:06 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 08:45:06 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux Message-ID: <201703181245.v2ICj6jx000396@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and > rebranded with the GPL. I have seen Gnu code likewise adopted from AT&T. Doug From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Sat Mar 18 23:07:14 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 09:07:14 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux Message-ID: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and > rebranded with the GPL. A small amount of code was likewise adopted from AT&T. Doug From downing.nick at gmail.com Sat Mar 18 23:27:15 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 00:27:15 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: Is this really true, can you give specific examples? AFAIK the GPL cannot be applied retrospectively except by the BSD- or commercial licensor, perhaps you could GPL your changes but I am not quite sure how this would work unless your release was in the form of a patch. cheers, Nick On Mar 19, 2017 12:07 AM, "Doug McIlroy" wrote: > > Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and > > rebranded with the GPL. > > A small amount of code was likewise adopted from AT&T. > > Doug > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From imp at bsdimp.com Sun Mar 19 01:19:03 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 09:19:03 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: References: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: You're right. The GPL can't be applied in this way. However, there were a few attempts (accidental it was claimed) to do this back in the day, mostly by cutting and pasting bits out of NET2 for this or that GPL thing. I don't recall the specifics, since it was fixed like 25-odd years ago. Accidental, as claimed, or sneaky, the incidents (and talk of the incident) left a bad taste in people's mouths. A couple of times the code in question passed from one person to the next until the knowledge of the original copying was lost until discovered by someone who was familiar with the original sources and did a comparison. The reactions and the personalities didn't help to smooth over the ruffled feathers either. To be fair, it was a different time. The knowledge of what was and wasn't permissible simply isn't at all what it is today. For many people, it tended to fall into "OK to copy" and "NOT OK to copy". The nuances of license compliance did not have the benefits of the last two and a half decades of public education. While some people knew and respected, it wasn't as universal as it is today. So it was natural that people would just copy and not attribute. It didn't take too many incidents of that happening for the word to spread it wasn't cool and that just because you could copy an entire file w/o a problem doesn't mean you could cut a dozen routines out of it and paste it into your own work. That's why any projects that started out as a copy from BSD (or worse AT&T) were thoroughly reworked to expunge that taint and you don't hear about it today. It stopped being more than an incidental problem in the mid 90's. And it wasn't just BSD->GPL either, again to be fair, the same ignorance allowed code to flow the other way a time or two... Warner On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Nick Downing wrote: > Is this really true, can you give specific examples? AFAIK the GPL cannot be > applied retrospectively except by the BSD- or commercial licensor, perhaps > you could GPL your changes but I am not quite sure how this would work > unless your release was in the form of a patch. > cheers, Nick > > On Mar 19, 2017 12:07 AM, "Doug McIlroy" wrote: >> >> > Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and >> > rebranded with the GPL. >> >> A small amount of code was likewise adopted from AT&T. >> >> Doug From steffen at sdaoden.eu Sun Mar 19 01:43:57 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:43:57 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <20170317123935.Zj3Be%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <20170318154357.otN-Y%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Tony Finch wrote: |Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: |> And it makes it possible to run browsers in a separate KVM into |> which you log in with X11 forwarding enabled, for very insecure |> things, and if your machine is strong enough. | |Nice! If you want a less-DIY more-packaged version of this idea, have a Indeed there was also a nice thing on VDE2 which i searched but could not find, so i posted the second best i remembered.. ^.^ |look at https://www.qubes-os.org/intro/ This sent me on an interesting journey, reiterating all the Xen / KVM / etc. things, and which lead me to Librem, and i think i will participate in one of the next batches of a Librem 13 -- i still haven't replaced my main machine that died more than one and half a year ago. I wanted to go Zenbook for quite some time (ever since), but this indeed looks very nice, too. Yes, the Xen hypervisor approach is more like the supercomputer compartments that some of the members of this list know about. But, you know, if possible i really want to avoid such a huge installation as a base system, i would prefer a small NanoBSD, or a minimal-installation Linux (because i am a loser and prefer a very good performing base system with binary security update support), say, nothing more than the kernel, iptables, iproute2, VDE2, qemu (minimal), openssl and openssh. And it needs X. And i have found out that AlpineLinux offers a Xen Dom0 installation image: likely that it ships with Python preinstalled, and Python and me is no-no-no. (If at all avoidable, that is.) KVM/Qemu you can drive with a few shell scripts. You know, i am so undecided. If someone would come around with a modern mobile phone with a quad-processor and say 8GB RAM (free) and a "Lapdock-station" that has a good keyboard and monitor, and the possibility to boot a "normal" operating system "directly via KVM/xy" (when plugging in), then i really would be satisfied. I/O performance is what counts for me -- and here SSD and a virtual machine with dedicated partition is much better than anything i ever had before! --, CPU power i miss only when compiling, but having four or even eight truly parallel threads would surely make this acceptable -- i am used to two-core 1.4 GHz Core 2... Yet of course noone will mix the markets of phones and laptops. And what do you mean by DIY? Isn't it a pretty common abstraction to have several users with different privileges? It must be doable, of course -- if i recall correctly, switching users on a Mac freezes anything of the current user, for example, and the graphical firewall tool either allows ssh or not, so that the scenario shown wouldn't even work (when using the Mac-GUI-provided ways of doing things). --steffen From steffen at sdaoden.eu Sun Mar 19 01:45:11 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:45:11 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <20170318154511.o8KWC%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: |> On Mar 17, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Dan Cross wrote: |Doh! It just strikes me that the term I have been missing is "window \ |manager." Early Macs, Windows, Oberon, etc., were window managers. Not to forget GEOS on Commodore 64, years before Windows. --steffen From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Sun Mar 19 02:25:52 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 12:25:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: References: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <201703181625.v2IGPq1X066486@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Nick asked for an exmple of AT&T code in Gnu. Warner explained a spectrum of ways and degrees of innocence by which that might happen. The example I have in mind is "calendar" from v7, whose very idiosyncratic implementation appeared in Gnu with only cosmetic changes. It has been modified since by discarding archaic efficiency hacks, but still uses the same quirky basic method. Conceivably Gnu's implementation was done only after v7 code was made public. But in any event, it has been distributed without attribution. Doug From akosela at andykosela.com Sun Mar 19 02:59:01 2017 From: akosela at andykosela.com (Andy Kosela) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 11:59:01 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170318154511.o8KWC%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> <20170318154511.o8KWC%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: On Saturday, March 18, 2017, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > Lyndon Nerenberg > wrote: > |> On Mar 17, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Dan Cross > wrote: > |Doh! It just strikes me that the term I have been missing is "window \ > |manager." Early Macs, Windows, Oberon, etc., were window managers. > > Not to forget GEOS on Commodore 64, years before Windows. > > Actually it was not "years before Windows". Windows 1.0 was released in 1985, while GEOS for Commodore 64 in 1986. If we are talking about early "window managers" I think it is desirable to also mention early text mode window managers like PathMinder which was released before Windows, in 1984. --Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Sun Mar 19 03:45:33 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 13:45:33 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: <201703181625.v2IGPq1X066486@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <201703181625.v2IGPq1X066486@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <1489859133.340763.915600080.44C5EE3F@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017, at 12:25, Doug McIlroy wrote: > Nick asked for an exmple of AT&T code in Gnu. > Warner explained a spectrum of ways and degrees of innocence > by which that might happen. > > The example I have in mind is "calendar" from v7, whose very > idiosyncratic implementation appeared in Gnu with only > cosmetic changes. It has been modified since by discarding > archaic efficiency hacks, but still uses the same quirky > basic method. The "calendar" available my Linux machine is from the "bsdmainutils" package (which has never been put under the GPL, incidentally) which is stuff copied with attribution from FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD, and calendar.c has a UCB copyright/license and OpenBSD RCS ID at the top of the file. (In the TUHS archive, this implementation first appears in 4.3BSD-Reno, with earlier versions having code clearly derived from V7). The earliest version (from Debian 1.1) that I can find has a UCB copyright dated 1993 and SCCS ID 8.3 3/25/94, not much removed from 4.4BSD in the archive (which has SCCS ID 8.1 6/6/93) - my guess is that the actual source is 4.4BSD-Lite, which is mentioned in the bsdmainutils README. In the converted-to-git CSRG archive, the implementation first appears in 1989 by "bostic" (Keith Bostic, presumably) https://github.com/weiss/original-bsd/commit/46857f6fe723eff85f22986beb78063f05b60f78 with the change note "redone from scratch as a C program to fix cpp security problem" - this is the first version to have a UCB copyright notice. [Using cpp seems to have itself been a BSD innovation circa 4.1cBSD] V7 calendar consists of a C program that outputs a set of regexes, and a shell script that runs egrep. Unless by "same quirky basic method" you mean the fact that it reads events from a text file at all, I'm not sure what you're referring to... but that's functionality rather than implementation. There's a lot of code in a handful of not-part-of-GNU-proper core utility packages used in Linux distributions - bsdmainutils, bsdgames, bsdutils, and util-linux [only the last of which has the GPL] - which come from some BSD or another and mostly have intact UCB copyright statements and licenses at the top. If any of these are improperly attributed, it's likely that UCB is to blame. > Conceivably Gnu's implementation was done only after v7 > code was made public. But in any event, it has been > distributed without attribution. > > Doug From imp at bsdimp.com Sun Mar 19 05:23:23 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 13:23:23 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: <1489859133.340763.915600080.44C5EE3F@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <201703181307.v2ID7E7J000817@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <201703181625.v2IGPq1X066486@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <1489859133.340763.915600080.44C5EE3F@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Random832 wrote: > There's a lot of code in a handful of not-part-of-GNU-proper core > utility packages used in Linux distributions - bsdmainutils, bsdgames, > bsdutils, and util-linux [only the last of which has the GPL] - which > come from some BSD or another and mostly have intact UCB copyright > statements and licenses at the top. If any of these are improperly > attributed, it's likely that UCB is to blame. Anything in 4.4-lite was specifically blessed by USL as non-infringing as part of the settlement of that suit... But the bsd* packages aren't what's being talked about here. Those generally came about later as these BSD programs ported to Linux and resistance to non-gpl'd code in distributions waned. Warner From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 18 23:09:00 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 06:09:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] VAX SysVr2: tape /dev entries missing Message-ID: All, Seems my SysVR2 simulation instance has at one point or another lost its /dev/mt/* and /dev/rmt/* device entries. Is there a script anywhere to regenerate these, or does anyone know the major/minor off hand for the SIMH TS device? -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From b4 at gewt.net Sat Mar 18 23:47:22 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 06:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] VAX SysVr2: tape /dev entries missing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Mar 2017, Cory Smelosky wrote: > All, > > Seems my SysVR2 simulation instance has at one point or another lost its > /dev/mt/* and /dev/rmt/* device entries. > > Is there a script anywhere to regenerate these, or does anyone know the > major/minor off hand for the SIMH TS device? > > Figured it out. # sysdef /unix > /tmp/system # config -t /tmp/system Block Devices major device handler count 0 disk gd 1 1 ts11 ts 1 2 cdt cdt 1 Character Devices major device handler count 0 con con 1 1 dz11 dz 8 2 tty sy 1 3 memory mm 1 4 disk gd 1 5 ts11 ts 1 8 errlog err 1 -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From steffen at sdaoden.eu Sun Mar 19 09:05:28 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 00:05:28 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> <20170318154511.o8KWC%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <20170318230528.hiqJq%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Andy Kosela wrote: |On Saturday, March 18, 2017, Steffen Nurpmeso <[1]steffen at sdaoden.eu[/1]> \ |wrote: |Lyndon Nerenberg <[2]lyndon at orthanc.ca[/2]> wrote: | |> On Mar 17, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Dan Cross <[3]crossd at gmail.com[/3]> wrote: | |Doh!  It just strikes me that the term I have been missing is "window \ | |manager."  Early Macs, Windows, Oberon, etc., were window managers. | | [1] mailto:steffen at sdaoden.eu | [2] javascript:; | [3] javascript:; | |Not to forget GEOS on Commodore 64, years before Windows. | |Actually it was not "years before Windows".  Windows 1.0 was released in | |1985, while GEOS for Commodore 64 in 1986.  If we are talking about early That is Wikipedia, but i bet i was not more than a quarter of a year. In fact i am a bit surprised, my parents divorced when i was fourteen, and i really can remember myself using GEOS proper. And then, this was all in 8-bit, 64 KB, 1 MHz! However they did that! With paint program, write program.. |"window managers" I think it is desirable to also mention early text mode | |window managers like PathMinder which was released before Windows, in | |1984. Ya, hm, i surely was a books rat at that time. --steffen From downing.nick at gmail.com Sun Mar 19 09:32:39 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 10:32:39 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170318230528.hiqJq%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> <20170318154511.o8KWC%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <20170318230528.hiqJq%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: There was a dude who came to our school in Melbourne Australia from the United States, I would have been 13 so that makes it 1988. We had C64s and this American dude loaded GEOS onto one and started using it for a bit of stuff. We were flabbergasted as we didn't think the C64 was capable more than just Logo or a few games, I think we might have had some terrible CBM wordprocessor but GEOS kicked the pants off it. Sadly by this time we were getting PC based and there was also a Mac 512k in head teacher's office that you could use with permission. So it was not more than a novelty but I still think that GEOS is an amazing bit of kit. cheers Nick On Mar 19, 2017 10:05 AM, "Steffen Nurpmeso" wrote: > Andy Kosela wrote: > |On Saturday, March 18, 2017, Steffen Nurpmeso <[1]steffen at sdaoden.eu[/1]> > \ > |wrote: > |Lyndon Nerenberg <[2]lyndon at orthanc.ca[/2]> wrote: > | |> On Mar 17, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Dan Cross <[3]crossd at gmail.com[/3]> > wrote: > | |Doh! It just strikes me that the term I have been missing is "window \ > | |manager." Early Macs, Windows, Oberon, etc., were window managers. > | > | [1] mailto:steffen at sdaoden.eu > | [2] javascript:; > | [3] javascript:; > | > |Not to forget GEOS on Commodore 64, years before Windows. > | > |Actually it was not "years before Windows". Windows 1.0 was released in > | > |1985, while GEOS for Commodore 64 in 1986. If we are talking about early > > That is Wikipedia, but i bet i was not more than a quarter of > a year. In fact i am a bit surprised, my parents divorced when > i was fourteen, and i really can remember myself using GEOS > proper. And then, this was all in 8-bit, 64 KB, 1 MHz! However > they did that! With paint program, write program.. > > |"window managers" I think it is desirable to also mention early text mode > | > |window managers like PathMinder which was released before Windows, in > | > |1984. > > Ya, hm, i surely was a books rat at that time. > > --steffen > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mah at mhorton.net Sun Mar 19 09:46:06 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:46:06 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? Message-ID: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> I'd like the opinion of this August Group. Should I make a claim to be the inventor of the email attachment? (It would go on my web site, resume, the Wikipedia page, that sort of thing.) Here's my understanding of the time line on all of this. 1. Originally, our files were all plain text and we just included them in the email message body. The ~r command in Kurt Shoen's Mail program was typical. There was no name for this, we were just emailing files. 2. In 1980, I wrote uuencode. It's stated purpose was to "encode a binary file for transmission by email". I didn't use the term "attachment". It became part of 4.0BSD and later systems, and was widely used. 3. In 1985, Lotus created cc:Mail. It eventually included attachments, using a file store method. When they added an SMTP gateway later, it used uuencode as the format. I believe cc:Mail first used the term "attachment". 4. Microsoft did the same thing with MS Mail somewhat later, possibly in the 1990s. It also used uuencode in the SMTP gateway. 5. In 1992, Nathaniel Borenstein and Ned Freed invented MIME. It had a different (and IMHO much better) way to send attachments, and it became an Internet Standard sometime later, possibly in 1996. What do you all think? Mary Ann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wlc at jctaylor.com Sun Mar 19 10:12:14 2017 From: wlc at jctaylor.com (William Corcoran) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 20:12:14 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <3CE13941-3218-40AD-81F7-EDEC379A97E0@jctaylor.com> Hello Ms. Horton, In reading your initial part of your question, my visceral response was to think "the email attachment was created by whoever developed uuencode." Only, to discover you wrote uuencode. So, who created the email attachment? Mary Ann Horton created the email attachment. That's who. Truly, Bill Corcoran On Mar 18, 2017, at 7:46 PM, Mary Ann Horton > wrote: I'd like the opinion of this August Group. Should I make a claim to be the inventor of the email attachment? (It would go on my web site, resume, the Wikipedia page, that sort of thing.) Here's my understanding of the time line on all of this. 1. Originally, our files were all plain text and we just included them in the email message body. The ~r command in Kurt Shoen's Mail program was typical. There was no name for this, we were just emailing files. 2. In 1980, I wrote uuencode. It's stated purpose was to "encode a binary file for transmission by email". I didn't use the term "attachment". It became part of 4.0BSD and later systems, and was widely used. 3. In 1985, Lotus created cc:Mail. It eventually included attachments, using a file store method. When they added an SMTP gateway later, it used uuencode as the format. I believe cc:Mail first used the term "attachment". 4. Microsoft did the same thing with MS Mail somewhat later, possibly in the 1990s. It also used uuencode in the SMTP gateway. 5. In 1992, Nathaniel Borenstein and Ned Freed invented MIME. It had a different (and IMHO much better) way to send attachments, and it became an Internet Standard sometime later, possibly in 1996. What do you all think? Mary Ann -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Sun Mar 19 12:14:28 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 22:14:28 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? Message-ID: <201703190214.v2J2ESXg006647@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > Should I make a claim to be the inventor of the email attachment? uuencode was critical to attaching arbitrary files, and I am sure one can find emails with uuencoded bits in them that read, "please find attached ...". But they would have said the same thing if what was being sent was source code. So attachment in that sense obviously predated uuencode. But to identify that kind of attachment with what mean by the word today is like identifying cat with tar. Doug From dave at horsfall.org Sun Mar 19 12:34:47 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 13:34:47 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode In-Reply-To: <12de3888-3a82-4a8c-9177-50e6cb4cb931.maildroid@localhost> References: <71748884-ac1a-d565-aa08-80f9220594ac@mhorton.net> <12de3888-3a82-4a8c-9177-50e6cb4cb931.maildroid@localhost> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Mar 2017, William Pechter wrote: > Talk about security Remember when Shar files were sent to /bin/sh... > Often as root. > > We forget how safe we felt the environment was. Yep, which is why "unshar" came to be. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From dave at horsfall.org Sun Mar 19 12:41:31 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 13:41:31 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Mar 2017, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > 1. Originally, our files were all plain text and we just included them in > the email message body.  The ~r command in Kurt Shoen's Mail program was > typical.  There was no name for this, we were just emailing files. 1.5 They started to include in-line shell scripts, then we piped them into the "unshar" utility, which did basic security checks. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From downing.nick at gmail.com Sun Mar 19 14:11:53 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:11:53 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: I can't speak to the original question since I was not around at the time, but uuencode is really cool. When I first saw it, probably in connexion with a BBS of some kind, I immediately went and wrote my own 6.5 bit encoder based on some number corresponding to the number of printable characters available which when squared gave a 13 bit number. Played around with this and gave it to a friend for fun to exchange messages in. But the original is obviously much more in use :) Nick On Mar 19, 2017 1:41 PM, "Dave Horsfall" wrote: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2017, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > > 1. Originally, our files were all plain text and we just included them > in > > the email message body. The ~r command in Kurt Shoen's Mail program > was > > typical. There was no name for this, we were just emailing files. > > 1.5 They started to include in-line shell scripts, then we piped them > into the "unshar" utility, which did basic security checks. > > -- > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will > suffer." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 19 15:57:36 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:57:36 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status Message-ID: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> Hi all, over on the uucp project we are struggling with a problem. If a user is logged in with telnet, and they disconnect the telnet session, their shell hangs around. The next person that telnets in gets the shell. SimH, with the -a -m flags on a simulated DZ line, has these modem flags: Telnet connected: Modem Bits: DTR RTS DCD CTS DSR Telnet disconnected: Modem Bits: DTR RTS DSR So, DCD and CTS are being dropped, but getty (or something) isn't responding and (presumably) sending a HUP signal to the shell. Is there anybody with some modem or getty knowledge that can help? Thanks, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Sun Mar 19 16:18:54 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 23:18:54 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170319061854.GA28286@mcvoy.com> This sounds like a setsid() like problem. As in the server is not cleaning up. BSD didn't have setsid, I think that was a POSIX thing and it was one of the good things that POSIX added. That's my memory, someone will correct it. On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 03:57:36PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Hi all, over on the uucp project we are struggling with a problem. If a > user is logged in with telnet, and they disconnect the telnet session, > their shell hangs around. The next person that telnets in gets the shell. > > SimH, with the -a -m flags on a simulated DZ line, has these modem flags: > > Telnet connected: Modem Bits: DTR RTS DCD CTS DSR > Telnet disconnected: Modem Bits: DTR RTS DSR > > So, DCD and CTS are being dropped, but getty (or something) isn't responding > and (presumably) sending a HUP signal to the shell. > > Is there anybody with some modem or getty knowledge that can help? > > Thanks, Warren -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From robert at timetraveller.org Sun Mar 19 16:11:06 2017 From: robert at timetraveller.org (Robert Brockway) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 16:11:06 +1000 (AEST) Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 > forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) > which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only > bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, > self-contained, GUI desktop". Personally I've always strongly preferred that remote apps display on the same desktop as local apps. This offers seemless integration, especially if the various servers share /home. Putting remote apps in a box always struck me as klunky. Different people prefer each of these approaches and there is no need to force everyone in to one solution. Losing the ability to remote display individual apps would be a great leap backwards for me, and for lots of others. FWIW I believe RDP does support per app remote display. Cheers, Rob From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Mar 19 16:37:12 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 02:37:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status Message-ID: <20170319063712.3E54C18C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Warren Toomey > So, DCD and CTS are being dropped, but getty (or something) isn't > responding and (presumably) sending a HUP signal to the shell. > Is there anybody with some modem or getty knowledge that can help? I know very little of 4.x, but I did write a V6 DZ driver, back in the Cenozoic or some such time period... :-) Looking at the 4.3Tahoe (which particular 4.3 version is in question here, anyway?) DZ driver: http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=4.3BSD-Tahoe/usr/src/sys/vaxuba/dz.c I find it hard (without further digging) to figure out how it gets from where it should discover carrier has gone away (in dzrint(), from dztimer()) to the rest of the system; they have added some linesw[] thing I don't know about. Looking at the 4.2 driver: http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=4.2BSD/usr/src/sys/vaxuba/dz.c it seems (in the same routine) to do the right thing: gsignal(tp->t_pgrp, SIGHUP); so in that version, it's sending a SIGHUP to the whole pgroup when the carrier goes away - which should be the right thing. Noel From arnold at skeeve.com Sun Mar 19 17:18:58 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 01:18:58 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <201703190718.v2J7IwQs025612@freefriends.org> "Jeremy C. Reed" wrote: > So around same time GNU project didn't publish some the most common > tools, but soon did. I didn't check, but I am pretty sure these are all > different code than the rewritten BSD code. Duplicated work. ISTR that the smaller utils were duplicated. 4.4BSD shipped gawk instead of original Unix awk, and used GCC (and I guess the binutils) as the compiler suite. So some GNU stuff was used. Arnold From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sun Mar 19 17:20:11 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:20:11 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <44029610-41EA-404A-AF14-F02A6EAC6143@orthanc.ca> <1BF96B93-740B-4CE5-8B66-CB5B4504B8AD@tfeb.org> <20170317201742.GB21805@naleco.com> <001201d29f5d$5e23dff0$1a6b9fd0$@ronnatalie.com> <836C637F-A0B1-442D-996A-78D538E332B1@orthanc.ca> <7951FBB1-CCF2-4EA6-85DC-3A1D707B5D85@orthanc.ca> <9BA2B037-C736-4545-B57B-242C9779F992@orthanc.ca> <20170318154511.o8KWC%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <20170318230528.hiqJq%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <0EFF56B4-F180-4B8D-8036-28A72750BA33@superglobalmegacorp.com> It was a very constrained environment, but it's real power was in its WYSIWYG, and it's soft fonts. I blame GEOS for making my c64 too productive as a kid as I so wanted one of those fancy 16bit machines. I ended up buying used pc parts to amass my first PC, as my parents were dead set that you could do anything on the c64, and upgrading was pointless... On March 19, 2017 7:32:39 AM GMT+08:00, Nick Downing wrote: >There was a dude who came to our school in Melbourne Australia from the >United States, I would have been 13 so that makes it 1988. We had C64s >and this American dude loaded GEOS onto one and started using it for a >bit of stuff. We were flabbergasted as we didn't think the C64 was >capable more than just Logo or a few games, I think we might have had >some terrible CBM wordprocessor but GEOS kicked the pants off it. Sadly >by this time we were getting PC based and there was also a Mac 512k in >head teacher's office that you could use with permission. So it was not >more than a novelty but I still think that GEOS is an amazing bit of >kit. >cheers Nick > >On Mar 19, 2017 10:05 AM, "Steffen Nurpmeso" < steffen at sdaoden.eu > > wrote: > > >Andy Kosela < akosela at andykosela.com > >wrote: > |On Saturday, March 18, 2017, Steffen Nurpmeso <[1] steffen at sdaoden.eu > [/1]> \ > |wrote: > |Lyndon Nerenberg <[2] lyndon at orthanc.ca >[/2]> wrote: > | |> On Mar 17, 2017, at 3:58 PM, Dan Cross <[3] crossd at gmail.com > [/3]> wrote: > | |Doh! It just strikes me that the term I have been missing is >"window \ > | |manager." Early Macs, Windows, Oberon, etc., were window managers. > | > | [1] mailto: steffen at sdaoden.eu > | [2] javascript:; > | [3] javascript:; > | > |Not to forget GEOS on Commodore 64, years before Windows. > | > |Actually it was not "years before Windows". Windows 1.0 was released >in > | > |1985, while GEOS for Commodore 64 in 1986. If we are talking about >early > >That is Wikipedia, but i bet i was not more than a quarter of >a year. In fact i am a bit surprised, my parents divorced when >i was fourteen, and i really can remember myself using GEOS >proper. And then, this was all in 8-bit, 64 KB, 1 MHz! However >they did that! With paint program, write program.. > > |"window managers" I think it is desirable to also mention early text >mode > | > |window managers like PathMinder which was released before Windows, in > | > |1984. > >Ya, hm, i surely was a books rat at that time. > >--steffen -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 19 17:46:02 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 17:46:02 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <20170319063712.3E54C18C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170319063712.3E54C18C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170319074602.GA5531@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 02:37:12AM -0400, Noel Chiappa wrote: > Looking at the 4.3Tahoe (which particular 4.3 version is in question here, > anyway?) DZ driver: > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=4.3BSD-Tahoe/usr/src/sys/vaxuba/dz.c > > I find it hard (without further digging) to figure out how it gets from where > it should discover carrier has gone away (in dzrint(), from dztimer()) to the > rest of the system; they have added some linesw[] thing I don't know about. Thanks for digging Noel. Strangely, I've just installed a vanilla 4.2BSD and it does the same thing. The 4.3BSD dz(4) manual does say: FILES /dev/tty[0-9][0-9] /dev/ttyd[0-9a-f] dialups but /dev/MAKEDEV doesn't seem to have a way to make /dev/ttyd* Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 19 18:06:40 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 18:06:40 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170319080640.GA7563@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 03:57:36PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Hi all, over on the uucp project we are struggling with a problem. If a > user is logged in with telnet, and they disconnect the telnet session, > their shell hangs around. The next person that telnets in gets the shell. Some more data points. Vanilla 32V and 3BSD do HUP the shell when the DCD drops on a SimH telnet disconnect. Vanilla 4.2BSD and 4.3BSD don't! Very curious. Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sun Mar 19 19:05:38 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 22:05:38 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: <201703190718.v2J7IwQs025612@freefriends.org> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <201703190718.v2J7IwQs025612@freefriends.org> Message-ID: <1489914338.58ce49e233019@www.paradise.net.nz> If you read the early GNUs Bulletins you find a quite positive attitude towards the BSD community. Wesley Parish Quoting arnold at skeeve.com: > "Jeremy C. Reed" wrote: > > > So around same time GNU project didn't publish some the most common > > tools, but soon did. I didn't check, but I am pretty sure these are > all > > different code than the rewritten BSD code. Duplicated work. > > ISTR that the smaller utils were duplicated. 4.4BSD shipped gawk > instead > of original Unix awk, and used GCC (and I guess the binutils) as the > compiler suite. So some GNU stuff was used. > > Arnold > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From dugo at xs4all.nl Sun Mar 19 19:57:10 2017 From: dugo at xs4all.nl (Jacob Goense) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 10:57:10 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <20170319080640.GA7563@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170319080640.GA7563@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On 2017-03-19 09:06, Warren Toomey wrote: > Some more data points. Vanilla 32V and 3BSD do HUP the shell when the > DCD > drops on a SimH telnet disconnect. Vanilla 4.2BSD and 4.3BSD don't! > Very curious. Does `exit' log you out there? From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 19 20:08:07 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 20:08:07 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <20170319080640.GA7563@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170319055736.GA26709@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170319080640.GA7563@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170319100807.GA15066@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 06:06:40PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Some more data points. Vanilla 32V and 3BSD do HUP the shell when the DCD > drops on a SimH telnet disconnect. Vanilla 4.2BSD and 4.3BSD don't! Found it. In /sys/conf/GENERIC, the dz lines have flags turned on to ignore DCD: device dz0 at uba? csr 0160100 flags 0xff vector dzrint dzxint I just turned off the flags and now a Telnet disconnect causes the shell to be HUP'd and killed. Phew! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pepe at naleco.com Sun Mar 19 21:42:18 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 12:42:18 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <20170319114216.GE21805@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 18, 16:46, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > > Should I make a claim to be the inventor of the email attachment? [...] > > 2. In 1980, I wrote uuencode. [...] I would say yes to your question. More or less. However, the "attachment" as a concept has more to do with "presentation" of the email message: the "attached" part is always, even in MIME messages, part of the body of the RFC822 message. In that sense, it does not matter whether it is inline source code, inline 'shar'-ed files, inline UUencoded, or inline MIME. What makes it an "attachment", is the MUA ability to present it and to manage it as a distinct part of the email message, different from the headers and different from the "textual" body. So, according to that, the inventor of the "attachment" was whoever wrote the first MUA capable of presenting and managing certain body parts of a RFC822 message as such separate entity. The "attachment", therefore, would be a user interface design decision, undoubtedly facilitated by some underlying technology such as uuencode which defined a boundary to mark the 'begin' and 'end' of the inlined non-textual data. But I have been wrong before - many times. -- Josh Good From pepe at naleco.com Sun Mar 19 21:56:17 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 12:56:17 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170319115617.GF21805@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 19, 16:11, Robert Brockway wrote: > On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > > >The real problem is that X11 predates the "GUI desktop metaphor". In X11 > >forwarding you remote bitmaps (or vectors or primitives or whatever) > >which belong to an app, whereas in RDP you remote bitmaps (and only > >bitmaps, and never anything more than bitmaps) which belong to a "full, > >self-contained, GUI desktop". > > Personally I've always strongly preferred that remote apps display on the > same desktop as local apps. This offers seemless integration, especially > if the various servers share /home. > > Putting remote apps in a box always struck me as klunky. Remoting single GUI apps can be useful in a scientific workstation and similar settings (for example, managing some turbine in a power plant, etc.). But remoting full, integrated desktop environments is more useful for clerical office work and for remote administration of GUI-based operating systems, or for remote administration of some workflow which involves several GUI applications in a tool-chain kind of workflow. IMHO. -- Josh Good From pnr at planet.nl Sun Mar 19 23:44:49 2017 From: pnr at planet.nl (Paul Ruizendaal) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 14:44:49 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <20170319063712.3E54C18C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170319063712.3E54C18C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 19 Mar 2017, at 7:37 , Noel Chiappa wrote: > rest of the system; they have added some linesw[] thing I don't know about. I believe this switches the serial interface between the normal tty driver and the SLIP driver. From imp at bsdimp.com Mon Mar 20 04:37:52 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 12:37:52 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] GNU vs BSD before the lawsuit and before Linux In-Reply-To: <201703190718.v2J7IwQs025612@freefriends.org> References: <20170314153815.GA32726@mcvoy.com> <9deec795-ecd6-7924-c10f-b722ee388a0c@kilonet.net> <20170314155718.GH32139@yeono.kjorling.se> <47c38ea0-accb-407b-26c8-6b4877657b21@kilonet.net> <201703190718.v2J7IwQs025612@freefriends.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 1:18 AM, wrote: > "Jeremy C. Reed" wrote: > >> So around same time GNU project didn't publish some the most common >> tools, but soon did. I didn't check, but I am pretty sure these are all >> different code than the rewritten BSD code. Duplicated work. > > ISTR that the smaller utils were duplicated. 4.4BSD shipped gawk instead > of original Unix awk, and used GCC (and I guess the binutils) as the > compiler suite. So some GNU stuff was used. All the GNU and X11 stuff was under contrib in 4.4-lite. This included gawk, gcc, binutils, perl, emacs, flex, gdb, groff, kermit, libg++, mh, nvi, rcs, gnu sort and a few other sundries. But the research awk was also included. The build system by default included gawk though... Warner From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Mar 20 10:11:51 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:11:51 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? Message-ID: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png and the build software is quite stable: https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever wanted to "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From b4 at gewt.net Mon Mar 20 03:13:33 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 10:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png > and the build software is quite stable: https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp > > We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever wanted to > "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! > Warren > Is there much floating-point in netnews/UUCP? (serious question). If not, I claim decwrl on real hardware (bad FPU) -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From b4 at gewt.net Mon Mar 20 03:14:01 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 10:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png > and the build software is quite stable: https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp > Zilog and cae780 are downstream of ucbvax. > We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever wanted to > "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! > Warren > -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Mon Mar 20 10:47:03 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 17:47:03 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: References: <20170319063712.3E54C18C09F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <24849.1489970823@cesium.clock.org> See gettytab(5) followed by ttys(5). /etc/gettytab has entries for various types of terminals in a very generic sense (not in the termcap(5) sense), and /etc/ttys is where the arguments to getty(8) are placed as part of the configuration of init(8) a.k.a. /etc/init or in modern BSD /sbin/init Erik From mah at mhorton.net Mon Mar 20 11:21:44 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 18:21:44 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: This is great feedback, and the shar mechanism would seem applicable here too. But I can't seem to find a date for shar. I'm under the impression that shar came later in the 1980s. Google's archive for net.sources only goes back to 1987 (unless I'm doing it wrong) and clearly shar was already well established by then. Can anyone put a date on shar, or at least before/after 6/1/1980? Thanks! Mary Ann On 03/18/2017 07:41 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Sat, 18 Mar 2017, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > >> 1. Originally, our files were all plain text and we just included them in >> the email message body. The ~r command in Kurt Shoen's Mail program was >> typical. There was no name for this, we were just emailing files. > 1.5 They started to include in-line shell scripts, then we piped them > into the "unshar" utility, which did basic security checks. > From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Mon Mar 20 11:25:03 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 18:25:03 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <24849.1489970823@cesium.clock.org> References: Message-ID: <12242.1489973103@cesium.clock.org> One more thing: it's impossible to get an 8-bit clean connection through the TELNET protocol without speaking the TELNET protocol: even in binary mode, you have to escape IAC (0377, 0x7F) in transmission, and eat the IAC byte doubling in reception. See RFC-854. I wrote an implementation of TELNET specifically for the AppleLink/Internet E-mail gateway at Apple because we had to speak X.25 (sort of) to the GEIS network & mainframe, and I didn't want to buy system-specific, proprietary HDLC/LAPB serial gear that would lock me into a particular hardware platform, so I used a Cisco protocol translator instead - it could be configured to map a TELNET server connection to a given X.25/X.3 PAD call (akin to a terminal server in "milking machine" mode). Worked great, once I had that streaming TELNET implementation going to get binary data through the connection. That design left me free to run the gateway on any Unix system I felt like: it started on a Mac SE/30 (A/UX), moved to an SGI-4D/380 (Irix), and ended life on a Sun SPARCstation ... 10 or 20 (SunOS 4? Solaris? I forget). So long as the Unix in question had TCP/IP, Berkeley sockets, a network interface (preferably Ethernet), sendmail(8) and perl(1), the gateway could be run on it. Didn't even need to be proximate to the Cisco protocol translator - just somewhere on the same IP network. Most of the code was actually Perl 3 & 4 because E-mail gatewaying is mostly about string manipulation. happy solstice! Erik Fair From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 20 12:06:24 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 19:06:24 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> So I've been lame on this project, I want to be uwvax, need to step up. I've been distracted because where I live has been hit with a crazy amount of rain, I have multiple landsides that have washed out roads on just my property, the county has over 100 roads that are damaged or closed, and I've stepped up to help a bit: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/17/mountain-vigilantes-tackle-plague-of-potholes/ It's gonna start raining again tomorrow which means I won't be patching roads but I also help the fire department with downed trees (I used to run a tree service in college) so maybe more distractions. Anyhoo, is there a cheatsheet for dummies on how to get set up? On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:11:51AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png > and the build software is quite stable: https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp > > We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever wanted to > "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! > Warren -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From b4 at gewt.net Mon Mar 20 05:11:42 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 12:11:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: > So I've been lame on this project, I want to be uwvax, need to step up. > I've been distracted because where I live has been hit with a crazy > amount of rain, I have multiple landsides that have washed out roads > on just my property, the county has over 100 roads that are damaged > or closed, and I've stepped up to help a bit: > > http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/17/mountain-vigilantes-tackle-plague-of-potholes/ > Must be having fun fixing the missing parts of Hwy 17... > > It's gonna start raining again tomorrow which means I won't be patching roads > but I also help the fire department with downed trees (I used to run a tree > service in college) so maybe more distractions. > Hopefully not too badly...Coyote Creek is /still/ high over here. > Anyhoo, is there a cheatsheet for dummies on how to get set up? > The github repo is a good ready-to-run environment - feel free to poke me if you run in to any weird issues...I rolled my own so hit many of 'em. > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:11:51AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >> Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: >> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png >> and the build software is quite stable: https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp >> >> We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever wanted to >> "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! >> Warren > > > > -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 20 12:23:07 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 22:23:07 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Mary Ann Horton wrote: > ​I​ > 'm under the impression that shar came later in the 1980s. ​That would be my memory. After I left UCB in the mid 1980s.​ Your work with uuencode certain predated it. But as Doug points out, putting sources in email was done before that, al biet fought with error. I used to a couple capital X's in column 1 to and other such things to deal with mailer issues. You certainly automated that a bit. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Mon Mar 20 12:25:15 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 22:25:15 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 4.3BSD help: getty ignoring modem status In-Reply-To: <12242.1489973103@cesium.clock.org> References: <24849.1489970823@cesium.clock.org> <12242.1489973103@cesium.clock.org> Message-ID: Eric you are digging out painful memories... he is absolutely right. On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Erik E. Fair wrote: > One more thing: it's impossible to get an 8-bit clean connection through > the > TELNET protocol without speaking the TELNET protocol: even in binary mode, > you have to escape IAC (0377, 0x7F) in transmission, and eat the IAC byte > doubling in reception. See RFC-854. > > I wrote an implementation of TELNET specifically for the AppleLink/Internet > E-mail gateway at Apple because we had to speak X.25 (sort of) to the GEIS > network & mainframe, and I didn't want to buy system-specific, proprietary > HDLC/LAPB serial gear that would lock me into a particular hardware > platform, > so I used a Cisco protocol translator instead - it could be configured to > map > a TELNET server connection to a given X.25/X.3 PAD call (akin to a terminal > server in "milking machine" mode). Worked great, once I had that streaming > TELNET implementation going to get binary data through the connection. > > That design left me free to run the gateway on any Unix system I felt like: > it started on a Mac SE/30 (A/UX), moved to an SGI-4D/380 (Irix), and ended > life on a Sun SPARCstation ... 10 or 20 (SunOS 4? Solaris? I forget). So > long > as the Unix in question had TCP/IP, Berkeley sockets, a network interface > (preferably Ethernet), sendmail(8) and perl(1), the gateway could be run on > it. Didn't even need to be proximate to the Cisco protocol translator - > just > somewhere on the same IP network. Most of the code was actually Perl 3 & 4 > because E-mail gatewaying is mostly about string manipulation. > > happy solstice! > > Erik Fair > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Mon Mar 20 17:32:11 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 01:32:11 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> Message-ID: <201703200732.v2K7WBLo022093@freefriends.org> Mary Ann Horton wrote: > This is great feedback, and the shar mechanism would seem applicable > here too. But I can't seem to find a date for shar. > > I'm under the impression that shar came later in the 1980s. Google's > archive for net.sources only goes back to 1987 (unless I'm doing it > wrong) and clearly shar was already well established by then. > > Can anyone put a date on shar, or at least before/after 6/1/1980? > > Thanks! > > Mary Ann ISTR that there was a shar-style program in Kernighan & Pike's "The UNIX Programming Environment". That was circa 1984 but shar had been around for a while before that. Writing a simple shar creator in shell was pretty trivial: for i in "$@" do echo echo ---- Extracting $i ---- echo "cat << 'EOF' > $i" cat $i echo EOF done > file.shar And I think many people just did that sort of thing on the fly at first. Over time shar creators got fancier, with the ability to make directories, uuencode binaries, and split large files and put them back together again. (Cf. the kind of postings in the netnews *.sources groups.) Not sure this helps to put a date on shar, but certainly shar archives were widely used in the 1983-1985 time frame... Arnold From lars at nocrew.org Mon Mar 20 22:35:37 2017 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:35:37 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> (Warren Toomey's message of "Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:11:51 +1000") References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <86lgs0qg6e.fsf@molnjunk.nocrew.org> Warren Toomey wrote: > We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever wanted to > "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! > Warren I don't particularly want to run the Swedish enea site myself, but if no one else wants it, I'll run it. I have made arrangements to connect it to mcvax. But I have run into some problems getting enea up and running, so I'll be a while yet. From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Mon Mar 20 23:12:27 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:12:27 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: After years of listening to John C Dvorak bitch about potholes, it's great to see it's finally being addressed... On March 20, 2017 10:06:24 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: >So I've been lame on this project, I want to be uwvax, need to step up. >I've been distracted because where I live has been hit with a crazy >amount of rain, I have multiple landsides that have washed out roads >on just my property, the county has over 100 roads that are damaged >or closed, and I've stepped up to help a bit: > >http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/17/mountain-vigilantes-tackle-plague-of-potholes/ > >It's gonna start raining again tomorrow which means I won't be patching >roads >but I also help the fire department with downed trees (I used to run a >tree >service in college) so maybe more distractions. > >Anyhoo, is there a cheatsheet for dummies on how to get set up? > >On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:11:51AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >> Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: >> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png >> and the build software is quite stable: >https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp >> >> We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever >wanted to >> "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! >> Warren > > > >-- >--- >Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com >http://www.mcvoy.com/lm -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Mon Mar 20 23:12:27 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:12:27 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170320020624.GH7783@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: After years of listening to John C Dvorak bitch about potholes, it's great to see it's finally being addressed... On March 20, 2017 10:06:24 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: >So I've been lame on this project, I want to be uwvax, need to step up. >I've been distracted because where I live has been hit with a crazy >amount of rain, I have multiple landsides that have washed out roads >on just my property, the county has over 100 roads that are damaged >or closed, and I've stepped up to help a bit: > >http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/17/mountain-vigilantes-tackle-plague-of-potholes/ > >It's gonna start raining again tomorrow which means I won't be patching >roads >but I also help the fire department with downed trees (I used to run a >tree >service in college) so maybe more distractions. > >Anyhoo, is there a cheatsheet for dummies on how to get set up? > >On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:11:51AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >> Ok, the nascent historical uucp network now has 11 sites: >> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp/4.3BSD/uucp.png >> and the build software is quite stable: >https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp >> >> We'd like to get a few more sites up and running. If you've ever >wanted to >> "be" an important uucp/Usenet site, here's your chance. E-mail me! >> Warren > > > >-- >--- >Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com >http://www.mcvoy.com/lm -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mah at mhorton.net Tue Mar 21 03:34:54 2017 From: mah at mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:34:54 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] who invented the email attachment? In-Reply-To: <58cfaea1.7iwnMeBm9Gzvxy4O%schily@schily.net> References: <61ff3fb7-7b96-d129-6a02-a56059bfe991@mhorton.net> <58cfaea1.7iwnMeBm9Gzvxy4O%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: <9cb685640bb464ef39876b3827c05f10@mhorton.net> I was at Berkeley until July 1981. The oldest SCCS file I have is 4/1/81 (for my dissertation project) and that was clearly my first use of it. I wasn't using SCCS in 1980 when I wrote uuencode. uuencode got SCCS-ized later when they put all of 4.xBSD under SCCS. On 2017-03-20 03:27, schily at schily.net wrote: > Mary Ann Horton wrote: > >> I'm under the impression that shar came later in the 1980s. Google's >> archive for net.sources only goes back to 1987 (unless I'm doing it >> wrong) and clearly shar was already well established by then. >> >> Can anyone put a date on shar, or at least before/after 6/1/1980? > > BTW: do you remember why you did not check in uuencode into the SCCS? > > /*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ > ... > Wed Jul 6 11:06:51 1988 bostic > * uuencode.c 5.6 > * uudecode.c 5.4 > written by Mark Horton; add Berkeley specific copyrights > > Wed Feb 24 20:03:58 1988 rick > * uuencode.c 5.5 > use library fread instead of rolling your own > > Mon Dec 22 14:43:09 1986 bostic > * uuencode.c 5.4 > bug report 4.1BSD/usr.bin/2 and 4.1BSD/usr.bin/3 > > Wed Apr 10 15:22:23 1985 ralph > * uudecode.c 5.3 > more changes from rick adams. > > Tue Jan 22 14:13:07 1985 ralph > * uuencode.c 5.3 > * uudecode.c 5.2 > bug fixes and changes from Rick Adams > > Mon Dec 19 15:42:38 1983 ralph > * uuencode.c 5.2 > use a reasonable mode for encoding data piped in. > > Sat Jul 2 17:57:51 1983 sam > * uuencode.c 5.1 > date and time created 83/07/02 17:57:51 by sam > > Sat Jul 2 17:57:49 1983 sam > * uudecode.c 5.1 > date and time created 83/07/02 17:57:49 by sam > /*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/ > > In special, do you know why it has been checked in by Samuel Leffler and > whether it existed before July 1983? > > Jörg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steffen at sdaoden.eu Tue Mar 21 07:48:58 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 22:48:58 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Maybe of interest, here is something spacewarish.. |I was at Berkeley until July 1981. I had to face a radio program which purported that.. Alles, was die digitale Kultur dominiert, haben wir den Hippies zu verdanken. Anything which dominates the digital culture is owed to the Hippies This "We owe it all to the Hippies" as well as "The real legacy of the 60s generation is the Computer Revolution" actually in English on [1] (talking about the beginning of the actual broadcast), the rest in German. But it also lead(s) (me) to an article of the Rolling Stone, December 1972, on "Fanatic Life and Symbolic Death Among the Computer Bums"[2]. [1] http://www.swr.de/swr2/programm/sendungen/essay/swr2-essay-flowerpowerdatenterror/-/id=659852/did=18984524/nid=659852/1cbfavu/index.html [2] http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/stone/rolling_stone.html That makes me quite jealous of your long hair, i see manes streaming in the warm wind of a golden Californian sunset. I don't think the assessment is right, though, i rather think it is a continous progress of science and knowledge, then maybe also pushed by on-all-fronts efforts like "bringing a moon to the moon by the end of the decade", and, sigh, SDI, massive engineer and science power concentration, etc. And crumbs thereof approaching the general public, because of increased knowledge in the industry. (E.g., the director of the new experimental German fusion reactor that finally sprang into existence claimed something like "next time it will not be that expensive due to what everybody has learned".) And hunger for money, of course, already in the 70s we had game consoles en masse in Italy, for example, with Pacman, Donkey Kong and later then with Dragons Lair or what its name was ("beautiful cool graphics!" i recall, though on the street there were Italian peacocks, and meaning the birds!). --steffen From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Mar 21 08:17:59 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:17:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Steffen Nurpmeso > This "We owe it all to the Hippies" Well, yes and no. Read "Hackers". There wasn't a tremendous overlap between the set of 'nerds' (specifically, computer nerds) and 'hippies', especially in the early days. Not that the two groups were ideologically opposed, or incompatible, or anything like that. Just totally different. Later on, of course, there were quite a few hackers who were also 'hippies', to some greater or lesser degree - more from hackers taking on the hippie vibe, than the other way around, I reckon. (I think that to be a true computer nerd, you have to start down that road pretty early on, and with a pretty severe commitment - so I don't think a _lot_ of hippied turned into hackers. Although I guess the same thing, about starting early, is true of really serious musicians.) > "The real legacy of the 60s generation is the Computer Revolution" Well, there is something to that (and I think others have made this observation). The hippie mentality had a lot of influence on everyone in that generation - including the computer nerds/hackers. Now, the hackers may have had a larger, impact, long-term, than the hippies did - but in some sense a lot of hippie ideals are reflected in the stuff a lot of hackers built: today's computer revolution can be seen as hippie idealism filtered through computer nerds... But remember things like this, from the dust-jacket of the biography of Prof. Licklider: "More than a decade will pass before personal computers emerge from the garages of Silicon Valley, and a full thirty years before the Internet explosion of the 1990s. The word computer still has an ominous tone, conjuring up the image of a huge, intimidating device hidden away in an over-lit, air-conditioned basement, relentlessly processing punch cards for some large institution: _them_. Yet, sitting in a nondescript office in McNamara's Pentagon, a quiet ... civilian is already planning the revolution that will change forever the way computers are perceived. Somehow, the occupant of that office ... has seen a future in which computers will empower individuals, instead of forcing them into rigid conformity. He is almost alone in his conviction that computers can become not just super-fast calculating machines, but joyful machines: tools that will serve as new media of expression, inspirations to creativity, and gateways to a vast world of online information. Now, technically Lick wasn't a hippie (he was, after all, 40 years old in 1965), and he sure didn't have a lot of hippie-like attributes - but he was, in some ways, an ideological close relative of some hippies. Noel From dave at horsfall.org Tue Mar 21 08:10:53 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:10:53 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: Well, I certainly had long hair and a beard (still do, at 64!), a Unix user since about 1976 (basically when it first arrived in Australia), and have "liberal" views (as in: not conservative); does that count? -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From ron at ronnatalie.com Tue Mar 21 08:32:00 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 18:32:00 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Just a bunch of Unix-smoking dope gurus. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dave Horsfall Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:11 PM To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Well, I certainly had long hair and a beard (still do, at 64!), a Unix user since about 1976 (basically when it first arrived in Australia), and have "liberal" views (as in: not conservative); does that count? -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From rminnich at gmail.com Tue Mar 21 09:05:57 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 23:05:57 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: At the time I got into Unix in 1976, E. F. Schumacher's "Small is Beautiful" book was fairly popular, with IBM and the BUNCH as the bloated counterpoint (OS/MVS kernels were 256K!), and the idea of Unix as the small is beautiful operating system was a common theme. It wasn't really about small. Small was the happy result of a way of approaching problems. It was about putting in the time to think things through, rather than just emitting gobs of code. Hence a common theme was the idea you did your best to avoid writing code by spending time working things through. RK05s, 16 bit address space, and Decwriter II terminals tended to encourage that kind of economy. Those days are long gone of course; I noticed the other day that on Linux there are 16 commands that start with ls, that do roughly the same function, and nobody seems to think this is a bad thing. The only place the original 'small is beautiful' Unix ideas continue on that I know of is Plan 9. ron On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:32 PM Ron Natalie wrote: > Just a bunch of Unix-smoking dope gurus. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dave > Horsfall > Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:11 PM > To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? > > Well, I certainly had long hair and a beard (still do, at 64!), a Unix user > since about 1976 (basically when it first arrived in Australia), and have > "liberal" views (as in: not conservative); does that count? > > -- > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will > suffer." > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Tue Mar 21 09:08:25 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:08:25 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > Just a bunch of Unix-smoking dope gurus. Hey, I resemble that! To be honest, I only tried the stuff once (at my boss's behest -- another hippie geek) and didn't like it. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Tue Mar 21 09:28:21 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 19:28:21 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <201703202328.v2KNSL6H029025@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > The hippie mentality had a lot of influence on everyone in that > generation - including the computer nerds/hackers. I'm not sure what hippie attributes you had in mind, but one candidate would be "free and open". In software, though, free and open was the style of the late 50s. By the hippie heyday p p From dave at horsfall.org Tue Mar 21 09:31:12 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:31:12 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Uucp project: more sites? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320001151.GA15391@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Mar 2017, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Is there much floating-point in netnews/UUCP? (serious question). Probably only those programs (if any) generating stats. FP was probably used in path cost, but that's external. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From crossd at gmail.com Tue Mar 21 10:10:23 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:10:23 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Mar 20, 2017 7:08 PM, "Dave Horsfall" wrote: On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > Just a bunch of Unix-smoking dope gurus. Hey, I resemble that! To be honest, I only tried the stuff once (at my boss's behest -- another hippie geek) and didn't like it But did you inhale? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ag4ve.us at gmail.com Tue Mar 21 11:24:03 2017 From: ag4ve.us at gmail.com (shawn wilson) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:24:03 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <201703202328.v2KNSL6H029025@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: Maybe there's a generation / technology gap here. But from history, it doesn't seem like there was much free - though most did indeed to be open - I suppose much like the VMS model. At least not until the 80s (or maybe bash predates that trend). The C language might've been free, but I wonder if there were any free compilers until gcc (hell I remember pirating Borland). Even most copies of *BSD were mainly sold on CD vs downloaded until 10 years or so ago (even though it was technically free - not including BSDi) On Mar 20, 2017 7:28 PM, "Doug McIlroy" wrote: > The hippie mentality had a lot of influence on everyone in that > generation - including the computer nerds/hackers. I'm not sure what hippie attributes you had in mind, but one candidate would be "free and open". In software, though, free and open was the style of the late 50s. By the hippie heyday p p -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dwalker at doomd.net Tue Mar 21 11:45:19 2017 From: dwalker at doomd.net (Derrik Walker v2.0) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:45:19 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <201703202328.v2KNSL6H029025@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703202328.v2KNSL6H029025@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On 03/20/2017 07:28 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote: >> The hippie mentality had a lot of influence on everyone in that >> generation - including the computer nerds/hackers. > I'm not sure what hippie attributes you had in mind, but one > candidate would be "free and open". In software, though, free > and open was the style of the late 50s. By the hippie heyday > p > p Wouldn't that depend on the generation? As a long haired metal head x-gener ... yea, I'm NO hippy!! - Derrik -- -- Derrik Derrik Walker v2.0, RHCE dwalker at doomd.net "Those UNIX guys, they think weird!" -- John C. Dvorak -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3703 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From dave at horsfall.org Tue Mar 21 12:09:36 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:09:36 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Dan Cross wrote: > > Hey, I resemble that!  To be honest, I only tried the stuff once (at > > my boss's behest -- another hippie geek) and didn't like it > > But did you inhale? Only once, and that was enough... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From downing.nick at gmail.com Tue Mar 21 12:51:38 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:51:38 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: For me the nerd stage was a bit like the caterpillar whereas the hippy stage was the butterfly. So you know, I'm a proud ex-nerd and a proud ex-hippy, however I moved past both things a long time ago. If my kids were to become nerds or hippies though, I would understand, since we all need to make our own mistakes to move forward. As to the other topic of Ron's post, well "small is beautiful" continues here, however I find my ideas not gaining much currency on this forum. That could be, because it's a historical forum rather than a "how to develop and improve unix" forum. Or it could be, because people after using something for a lifetime tend to take for granted a lot of the design ideas in it. cheers, Nick On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:05 AM, ron minnich wrote: > At the time I got into Unix in 1976, E. F. Schumacher's "Small is Beautiful" > book was fairly popular, with IBM and the BUNCH as the bloated counterpoint > (OS/MVS kernels were 256K!), and the idea of Unix as the small is beautiful > operating system was a common theme. > > It wasn't really about small. Small was the happy result of a way of > approaching problems. It was about putting in the time to think things > through, rather than just emitting gobs of code. Hence a common theme was > the idea you did your best to avoid writing code by spending time working > things through. RK05s, 16 bit address space, and Decwriter II terminals > tended to encourage that kind of economy. Those days are long gone of > course; I noticed the other day that on Linux there are 16 commands that > start with ls, that do roughly the same function, and nobody seems to think > this is a bad thing. The only place the original 'small is beautiful' Unix > ideas continue on that I know of is Plan 9. > > ron > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:32 PM Ron Natalie wrote: >> >> Just a bunch of Unix-smoking dope gurus. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dave >> Horsfall >> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:11 PM >> To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society >> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? >> >> Well, I certainly had long hair and a beard (still do, at 64!), a Unix >> user >> since about 1976 (basically when it first arrived in Australia), and have >> "liberal" views (as in: not conservative); does that count? >> >> -- >> Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will >> suffer." >> > From steffen at sdaoden.eu Tue Mar 21 22:19:07 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:19:07 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170321121907.ErKFp%steffen@sdaoden.eu> jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) wrote: |> From: Steffen Nurpmeso | |> This "We owe it all to the Hippies" | |Well, yes and no. Read "Hackers". There wasn't a tremendous overlap between So you went through this 30 years ago already. I see, maybe. From Steven Levy?! Have it now, but it could be i won't be able to read it all, it seems to have this language of the 80s, wadded shoulders and neon colours, that decade nothing but the decay of the 70s. And i have grown up with "Wargames", which was earlier. |But remember things like this, from the dust-jacket of the biography of |Prof. Licklider: Hmm, i have the feeling that "Biographies" tend more and more into fictional direction. A few decades back (say, at the end of the 90s i think it was) we in Germany had a "Sow of the Week" ("Die Sau durch's Dorf treiben", "Compelling the Sow through the Village", i _think_ based on Prussian Military tradition of a fustigation for soldiers who need to pass a lane of other soldiers with sticks) caused by a professor who proclaimed that entire centuries of history (anno domini) did not exist, were plain "fake news". Just this weekend there was a book review on Julian Barnes "The Noise of Time", referring to Dmitri Shostakovich, it seems to be thrilling. I haven't read it on my own, however. But anyway all this feels like a decline compared to that mankind was based on either purely oral or also written tradition for so many thousand years. The Bushmen and Aborigine put full trust in oral tradition, i think we put trust in the hieroglyphs of the Egyptians. Noone will put trust in us, and that only if bitsavers.org will survive. ... | that will change forever the way computers are perceived. Somehow, the | occupant of that office ... has seen a future in which computers will \ | empower | individuals, instead of forcing them into rigid conformity. He is almost | alone in his conviction that computers can become not just super-fast | calculating machines, but joyful machines: tools that will serve as \ | new media | of expression, inspirations to creativity, and gateways to a vast world of | online information. | |Now, technically Lick wasn't a hippie (he was, after all, 40 years old in |1965), and he sure didn't have a lot of hippie-like attributes - but \ |he was, |in some ways, an ideological close relative of some hippies. It seems to me that many attributes of the hippie movement can at least in parts be found in the international squad of scientists. I think in science some core values of "the light" make a living, for example it doesn't really matter where you come from, what counts is your intellectual output. Mistakes "don't matter" as long as you can prove that it was based on some real thoughts. Of course that is "the light" only from the intellectual side, not the spiritual or emotional, therefore not being holistical, which was, to me, the Hippies, though as always, it depends on the end-user. Having watched films of sessions with Leary, and seeing a young man on trip with his sheepdog on his crossed legs, stroking her (the dog), and obviously having the realization that this person (the dog) would die for him (the young man) as necessary, is an example of the other side. --steffen From arnold at skeeve.com Tue Mar 21 22:48:14 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 06:48:14 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <201703211248.v2LCmEhh007310@freefriends.org> > Later on, of course, there were quite a few hackers who were also 'hippies', > to some greater or lesser degree - more from hackers taking on the hippie > vibe, than the other way around, I reckon. I think that's pretty true. Look at RMS. He still looks like a hippie, and his ideals seem pretty influenced by what was going on then. I was a child during the 60s and 70s, but I remember a lot of what went on from TV, newspapers etc. I was never a hippie myself. :-) My $0.02, Arnold From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Tue Mar 21 23:29:07 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:29:07 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <60725137-6AEB-4C3D-A705-FD66A4AA0C59@superglobalmegacorp.com> Speaking of Licklider, here is an amazingly prophetic video from 1972 https://youtu.be/GjZ7ktIlSM0 On March 21, 2017 6:17:59 AM GMT+08:00, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Steffen Nurpmeso > > > This "We owe it all to the Hippies" > >Well, yes and no. Read "Hackers". There wasn't a tremendous overlap >between >the set of 'nerds' (specifically, computer nerds) and 'hippies', >especially in >the early days. Not that the two groups were ideologically opposed, or >incompatible, or anything like that. Just totally different. > >Later on, of course, there were quite a few hackers who were also >'hippies', >to some greater or lesser degree - more from hackers taking on the >hippie >vibe, than the other way around, I reckon. (I think that to be a true >computer >nerd, you have to start down that road pretty early on, and with a >pretty >severe commitment - so I don't think a _lot_ of hippied turned into >hackers. >Although I guess the same thing, about starting early, is true of >really >serious musicians.) > > > "The real legacy of the 60s generation is the Computer Revolution" > >Well, there is something to that (and I think others have made this >observation). The hippie mentality had a lot of influence on everyone >in that >generation - including the computer nerds/hackers. Now, the hackers may >have >had a larger, impact, long-term, than the hippies did - but in some >sense a >lot of hippie ideals are reflected in the stuff a lot of hackers built: >today's computer revolution can be seen as hippie idealism filtered >through >computer nerds... > >But remember things like this, from the dust-jacket of the biography of >Prof. Licklider: > >"More than a decade will pass before personal computers emerge from the > garages of Silicon Valley, and a full thirty years before the Internet > explosion of the 1990s. The word computer still has an ominous tone, >conjuring up the image of a huge, intimidating device hidden away in an >over-lit, air-conditioned basement, relentlessly processing punch cards >for >some large institution: _them_. Yet, sitting in a nondescript office in >McNamara's Pentagon, a quiet ... civilian is already planning the >revolution > that will change forever the way computers are perceived. Somehow, the >occupant of that office ... has seen a future in which computers will >empower >individuals, instead of forcing them into rigid conformity. He is >almost > alone in his conviction that computers can become not just super-fast >calculating machines, but joyful machines: tools that will serve as new >media >of expression, inspirations to creativity, and gateways to a vast world >of > online information. > >Now, technically Lick wasn't a hippie (he was, after all, 40 years old >in >1965), and he sure didn't have a lot of hippie-like attributes - but he >was, >in some ways, an ideological close relative of some hippies. > > Noel -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Wed Mar 22 02:20:37 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 12:20:37 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <201703202328.v2KNSL6H029025@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <010501d2a25f$13aec7a0$3b0c56e0$@ronnatalie.com> I had a student when I was Associate Director at Rutgers. He was sure that his key to getting a job on graduation was to go smooze people at Uniforum. So he got on one of our “social” mailing lists at the time and inquired what appropriate dress would be (i.e., should he wear a suit). Before anybody else could answer Erik Fair told him that the dress was indeed casual, usually shorts, but you had to wear Birkenstocks. So here goes this kid hunting around in New Jersey in December looking for Birkenstocks. A few weeks after the conference he came back sporting a hair style more commonly found on the gay men in the community. I asked if he had gone through a lifestyle change, and he said this was how the guys he met at the conference had their hair. I had to point out that most of the crowd we were hanging out with were indeed gay. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dds at aueb.gr Wed Mar 22 03:38:05 2017 From: dds at aueb.gr (Diomidis Spinellis) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:38:05 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports Message-ID: I was searching today to find where the Unix pipeline spell checking method "tr | sort | uniq | comm" was first published. I found it in a document by Brian Kernighan titled "UNIX for Beginners". "The pipe mechanism lets you fabricate quite complicated operations out of spare parts already built. For example, the first draft of the spell program was (roughly) [...]" http://www.psue.uni-hannover.de/wise2014_2015/material/Unix-Beginners.pdf#page=11 Then my problem became properly citing the document. Searching on Google, Google Scholar, and IEEE Xplore didn't help me. In the end I found the reference in a 1993 refer file of all Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports I had saved from my student days. %cstr 75 %report Comp. Sci. Tech. Rep. No. 75 %keyword CSTR OBS %author B. W. Kernighan %title UNIX for Beginners %date February 1979 %journal UNIX Programmer's Manual %volume 2 %other Section 3 %date January 1979 %type techreport obsolete I couldn't find the refer file online, so I'll send a copy to Warren for archiving. However, I'm wondering whether we should/could do something to also archive the actual pages of all the Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports. I think some are the only authoritative primary source for many Unix-related gems and a lack of an electronic archive means they will slowly fade into non-existence. I remember we had many of those at the library of Imperial College London. Any suggestions on what we can do to archive this material? Diomidis From pepe at naleco.com Wed Mar 22 06:28:40 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:40 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 20, 23:05, ron minnich wrote: > At the time I got into Unix in 1976, E. F. Schumacher's "Small is > Beautiful" book was fairly popular > (...) Those days are long gone of course; I noticed the other day that > on Linux there are 16 commands that start with ls, that do roughly > the same function, and nobody seems to think this is a bad thing. The > only place the original 'small is beautiful' Unix ideas continue on > that I know of is Plan 9. In RedHat Enterprise Linux 5.11 (without X-Window) I get: $ ls ls lsattr lsb_release lshal lspgpot Whereas in Ubuntu 14.04 (full desktop install) I get: $ ls ls lsblk lscpu lsdvd lsinitramfs lsof lspcmcia lss16toppm lsattr lsb_release lsdiff lshw lsmod lspci lspgpot lsusb But then, in UnixWare 2.1 I get: $ bash bash-2.01$ ls (...no output...) So yeah, it's getting more bloated by the day. Anyone can contribute how is it on a recent OpenBSD without X-Window? -- Josh Good From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Mar 22 06:29:50 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 06:29:50 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170321202950.GA14540@minnie.tuhs.org> > However, I'm wondering whether we should/could do something to also archive > the actual pages of all the Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports. I > think some are the only authoritative primary source for many Unix-related > gems and a lack of an electronic archive means they will slowly fade into > non-existence. I remember we had many of those at the library of Imperial > College London. Any suggestions on what we can do to archive this material? I've got the Unix-related BSTJ articles at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Papers/BSTJ/ But yes, if we can get hold of the technical report I'd be happy to host them. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dave at horsfall.org Wed Mar 22 07:34:57 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 08:34:57 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! Message-ID: OT, but of interest to a few people here :-) The venerable PDP-8 was introduced in 1965 today (or tomorrow if you're on the wrong side of the date line). It was the first computer I ever used, back around 1970 (I think I'd just left school and was checking out the local University's computer department, with a view to majoring in Computer Science (which I did)). -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 22 08:55:14 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:55:14 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports In-Reply-To: <20170321202950.GA14540@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170321202950.GA14540@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170321225514.GO7783@mcvoy.com> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:29:50AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > However, I'm wondering whether we should/could do something to also archive > > the actual pages of all the Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports. I > > think some are the only authoritative primary source for many Unix-related > > gems and a lack of an electronic archive means they will slowly fade into > > non-existence. I remember we had many of those at the library of Imperial > > College London. Any suggestions on what we can do to archive this material? > > I've got the Unix-related BSTJ articles at > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Papers/BSTJ/ As a troff fan, I'd *love* to see the original sources. I bet anything they roff just fine today. From atindra at mindspring.com Wed Mar 22 09:57:51 2017 From: atindra at mindspring.com (Atindra Chaturvedi) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:57:51 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! Message-ID: <27014037.20741.1490140671733@mswamui-swiss.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Brings back memories... Back in early 1981 I worked for a shipping line in Cranford NJ in their IT department. The company had just ordered 4 new super-wide cargo ships that just fit the Panama Canal and the Chief Marine Architect came to the IT department to ask for assistance in programming a PDP-8 to write a load distribution check program so that the ship would not keel over, or break in the middle - when being loaded 12 stack high containers. Had to take into account stress and strain - mathematical algorithms. My boss called me in to talk to him and he asked " if I knew how to determine the area under a curve..." - I knew my engineering math - Simpson's rule and also FORTRAN IV and was immediately drafted. What was needed also was a graphical way of entering the data, and displaying the results optionally graphically on the screen (tty ?). My friend Wayne Rawls knew BASIC - he wrote the front end - passed me the input on a large floppy - my FORTRAN IV program ran and did the stress/strain analysis for the ship - and I passed the output back to him on the floppy that he then displayed on-screen. A lot of grinding of the floppy drives for the FORTRAN compiler - no spinning hard disks as the PDP-8 would be installed on-board ship - and in those days of A/C computer rooms would be a non-starter. It all worked well - Wayne took the PDP-8 on a ship to Norfolk to get it checked out and the company used it for many years ! Atindra. -----Original Message----- >From: Dave Horsfall >Sent: Mar 21, 2017 5:34 PM >To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society >Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! > >OT, but of interest to a few people here :-) > >The venerable PDP-8 was introduced in 1965 today (or tomorrow if you're on >the wrong side of the date line). It was the first computer I ever >used, back around 1970 (I think I'd just left school and was checking out >the local University's computer department, with a view to majoring in >Computer Science (which I did)). > >-- >Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Wed Mar 22 10:25:21 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:25:21 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] [Uucp] News readers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <15202.1490142321@cesium.clock.org> One historical side note about rn(1): that was the news reader program we modified into an NNTP client for the first NNTP software distribution in 1986 for two reasons: filters (KILL files), and it engaged in prefetching the next article to be read which we thought would be especially important for an NNTP client experiencing network latency to fetch an article for a reader - we wanted to try and preserve a snappy user interface for netnews. Erik Fair From toby at telegraphics.com.au Wed Mar 22 11:31:16 2017 From: toby at telegraphics.com.au (Toby Thain) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:31:16 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports In-Reply-To: <20170321225514.GO7783@mcvoy.com> References: <20170321202950.GA14540@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170321225514.GO7783@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <960d98eb-3752-42e7-6071-335d439a9d94@telegraphics.com.au> On 2017-03-21 6:55 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:29:50AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >>> However, I'm wondering whether we should/could do something to also archive >>> the actual pages of all the Bell Labs Computer Science Technical Reports. I >>> think some are the only authoritative primary source for many Unix-related >>> gems and a lack of an electronic archive means they will slowly fade into >>> non-existence. I remember we had many of those at the library of Imperial >>> College London. Any suggestions on what we can do to archive this material? >> >> I've got the Unix-related BSTJ articles at >> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Papers/BSTJ/ > > As a troff fan, I'd *love* to see the original sources. I bet anything > they roff just fine today. > As somebody who's brushed against software and markups and reproducibility of its combinations, that's a bet I'd very happily be on the other side of. --T From tfb at tfeb.org Wed Mar 22 22:50:49 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:50:49 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <393696FA-20FC-4CBE-B95D-A82DBCE75BAC@tfeb.org> On 20 Mar 2017, at 22:32, Ron Natalie wrote: > > Just a bunch of Unix-smoking dope gurus. I don't know about other people, but I think the whole dope thing is why computer people tend *not* to be hippies in the 'dope smoking' sense. I need to be *really awake* to write reasonably good code (if ever I do write reasonably good code) in the same way I need to be really awake to do maths or physics. So I live on a diet of coffee and sugar and walk around twitching as a result (this is an exaggeration, but you get the idea). I have the strength of will to not use stronger stimulants (coffee is mostly self-limiting, speed not so much). So I think that computer people have more in common with some kind of 50s coffee-shop jazz-listening hipster or 70/80s punk & post-punk (UK sense of both) people. We're basically twitchy and unpleasant not mellow new-age easy-going people and our drugs of choice are stimulants not depressants. Or perhaps I just want to be jack Kerouac (who, OK, was an alcoholic I think, but never mind I can imagine). --tim From dave at horsfall.org Thu Mar 23 01:27:19 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 02:27:19 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <393696FA-20FC-4CBE-B95D-A82DBCE75BAC@tfeb.org> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <393696FA-20FC-4CBE-B95D-A82DBCE75BAC@tfeb.org> Message-ID: For some reason I'm thinking of that immortal phrase about LSD and BSD both coming out of Berkeley, and not being a coincidence.. I was brought up on V6/V7/SunOS/BSD, but was then forced to support SysVile to earn my crust (after an even worse period with WICAT's SysIII). (Please don't ask me about WICAT, and the lies I had to tell when I was doing pre-sales demos on behalf of Lionel Singer...) -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 23 02:26:28 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:26:28 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Coffee Message-ID: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> Early on when I was consulting for what would become my company, I got stuck on a weekend to fix something with the coffee pot and a box of Entenmann's chocolate donuts. These have a coating that's kind of like wax you have to soften up in the hot coffee to be digestable. As a result of that weekend any crunch time was referred to as waxy chocolate donut time. Another crunch weekend I was working on the firmware for an esoteric digital data tape player. I would test it. Find the fault. Go to one machine running Xenix on a 286 which had the editor and the assembler. I'd then floppy it over to a DOS machine that had the EPROM burner. I then would take the eprom and stick it into the controller. The president of the company had two jobs. He was to follow behind me and refill my coffee cup and scarf up the used EPROMS and dump them into the eraser so we wouldn't run out of ones to program. For years, we were a six person company of which only me and the president drank coffee. When the one pot we made in the morning was gone, that was it for coffee. As the company got larger and there were more coffee drinkers, people would just make a new pot. This coincided with me having my office moved adjacent to the coffee maker. Every time I had a long compile or something I'd look down and see my cup was empty and I'd pop outside and get a new cup. Not surprisingly, I started to get heart palpitations. The doctor asks how much coffee I drank, and I tell her something like thirty cups a day. She tells me I may want to cut back on that. My best job was working for a friend whose company operates out of his home. He'd make espresso for me and we'd drink that (and eat his wife's excellent leftover food) until about six and then being another wine judge, we'd switch to wine. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Bradshaw [mailto:tfb at tfeb.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:51 AM To: Ron Natalie Cc: Dave Horsfall; The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? I don't know about other people, but I think the whole dope thing is why computer people tend *not* to be hippies in the 'dope smoking' sense. I need to be *really awake* to write reasonably good code (if ever I do write reasonably good code) in the same way I need to be really awake to do maths or physics. So I live on a diet of coffee and sugar and walk around twitching as a result (this is an exaggeration, but you get the idea). I have the strength of will to not use stronger stimulants (coffee is mostly self-limiting, speed not so much). From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 23 02:34:03 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:34:03 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01db01d2a32a$1eae0280$5c0a0780$@ronnatalie.com> Ah yes, the machine with only 8 instructions (of course not counting all the multiplexing of OPR). I was always fond of TAD. Not particularly reentrant version of subroutine linkage. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Dave Horsfall Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:35 PM To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! OT, but of interest to a few people here :-) The venerable PDP-8 was introduced in 1965 today (or tomorrow if you're on the wrong side of the date line). It was the first computer I ever used, back around 1970 (I think I'd just left school and was checking out the local University's computer department, with a view to majoring in Computer Science (which I did)). -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From krewat at kilonet.net Thu Mar 23 02:34:03 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:34:03 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Coffee In-Reply-To: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> References: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: Possibly NSFW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhdCslFcKFU On 3/22/2017 12:26 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: > Early on when I was consulting for what would become my company, I got stuck > on a weekend to fix something with the coffee pot and a box of Entenmann's > chocolate donuts. These have a coating that's kind of like wax you have to > soften up in the hot coffee to be digestable. As a result of that weekend > any crunch time was referred to as waxy chocolate donut time. Another > crunch weekend I was working on the firmware for an esoteric digital data > tape player. I would test it. Find the fault. Go to one machine > running Xenix on a 286 which had the editor and the assembler. I'd then > floppy it over to a DOS machine that had the EPROM burner. I then would > take the eprom and stick it into the controller. The president of the > company had two jobs. He was to follow behind me and refill my coffee cup > and scarf up the used EPROMS and dump them into the eraser so we wouldn't > run out of ones to program. > > For years, we were a six person company of which only me and the president > drank coffee. When the one pot we made in the morning was gone, that was > it for coffee. As the company got larger and there were more coffee > drinkers, people would just make a new pot. This coincided with me having > my office moved adjacent to the coffee maker. Every time I had a long > compile or something I'd look down and see my cup was empty and I'd pop > outside and get a new cup. Not surprisingly, I started to get heart > palpitations. The doctor asks how much coffee I drank, and I tell her > something like thirty cups a day. She tells me I may want to cut back on > that. > > My best job was working for a friend whose company operates out of his home. > He'd make espresso for me and we'd drink that (and eat his wife's excellent > leftover food) until about six and then being another wine judge, we'd > switch to wine. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Bradshaw [mailto:tfb at tfeb.org] > Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:51 AM > To: Ron Natalie > Cc: Dave Horsfall; The Eunuchs Hysterical Society > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? > > I don't know about other people, but I think the whole dope thing is why > computer people tend *not* to be hippies in the 'dope smoking' sense. I > need to be *really awake* to write reasonably good code (if ever I do write > reasonably good code) in the same way I need to be really awake to do maths > or physics. So I live on a diet of coffee and sugar and walk around > twitching as a result (this is an exaggeration, but you get the idea). I > have the strength of will to not use stronger stimulants (coffee is mostly > self-limiting, speed not so much). > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cym224 at gmail.com Thu Mar 23 03:03:24 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:03:24 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Coffee In-Reply-To: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> References: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On 22 March 2017 at 12:26, Ron Natalie wrote (in part): > Not surprisingly, I started to get heart > palpitations. The doctor asks how much coffee I drank, and I tell her > something like thirty cups a day. She tells me I may want to cut back on > that. About 20y or so ago, the local craze was chocolate-covered coffee beans. Every male engineer had a bowl on his desk. We all munched on them throughout the day, drinking them down with coffee. As time went on and the frenzy level increased, we eventually caught on and the contents were replaced. N. From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 23 03:36:58 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:36:58 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Coffee In-Reply-To: References: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <01f501d2a332$e8660ca0$b93225e0$@ronnatalie.com> We used to have a Frank and Ernest comic strip taped to the coffee maker. It says something like "I was a successful businessman, two houses, and even being considerd for the Senate...then I switched to decaf." From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Mar 23 03:49:21 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:49:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170322174921.4DC6518C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Tim Bradshaw > I don't know about other people, but I think the whole dope thing is why > computer people tend *not* to be hippies in the 'dope smoking' sense. I > need to be *really awake* to write reasonably good code ... our drugs > of choice are stimulants not depressants. Speak for yourself! :-) (Then again, I have wierd neuro-chemistry - I have modes where I have a large over-sppply of natural stimulant... :-) My group (which included Prof. Jerry Salzter, who's about as straight an arrow as they make) was remarkably tolerant of my, ah, quirks... I recall at one point having a giant tank of nitrous under the desk in my office - which they boggled at, but didn't say anything about! ;-) Noel From dave at horsfall.org Thu Mar 23 07:32:58 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 08:32:58 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Coffee In-Reply-To: <01f501d2a332$e8660ca0$b93225e0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <01c901d2a329$0f403b20$2dc0b160$@ronnatalie.com> <01f501d2a332$e8660ca0$b93225e0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > We used to have a Frank and Ernest comic strip taped to the coffee > maker. It says something like "I was a successful businessman, two > houses, and even being considerd for the Senate...then I switched to > decaf." I remember one of his strips, showing two tramps eating their lunch whilst gazing at a trouser-striped businessman, with one of them saying "I used to be a successful businessman too, until I lost my list." -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From downing.nick at gmail.com Thu Mar 23 08:35:45 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:35:45 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170322174921.4DC6518C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170322174921.4DC6518C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Programming is actually an addiction. What makes it addictive to a certain type of personality is that little rush of satisfaction when you try your code and it *works*... and while this is still true to an extent of batch systems from the 50s and 60s it was the interactive systems of the 70s onwards that really spurred the development of the hacker subculture. It was not just the convenience and productivity improvements but that the 'hit' was coming harder and faster. This theory is well known to those who design slot machines and other forms of gambling, it is called the theory of occasional rewards. With this in mind, frequent long debugging sessions do not make the process any less addictive, indeed MORE addictive since the occasional rewards are less predictable etc. With this in mind it is unsurprising that programmers tend to have other fixes too such as coffee, harder drugs or even gambling. Some personalities seem to be quite susceptible to occasional-rewards things. Nick On Mar 23, 2017 4:49 AM, "Noel Chiappa" wrote: > > From: Tim Bradshaw > > > I don't know about other people, but I think the whole dope thing is > why > > computer people tend *not* to be hippies in the 'dope smoking' > sense. I > > need to be *really awake* to write reasonably good code ... our drugs > > of choice are stimulants not depressants. > > Speak for yourself! :-) > > (Then again, I have wierd neuro-chemistry - I have modes where I have a > large > over-sppply of natural stimulant... :-) > > My group (which included Prof. Jerry Salzter, who's about as straight an > arrow > as they make) was remarkably tolerant of my, ah, quirks... I recall at one > point having a giant tank of nitrous under the desk in my office - which > they > boggled at, but didn't say anything about! ;-) > > Noel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Thu Mar 23 11:26:16 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 21:26:16 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] DEC Wars Message-ID: <001d01d2a374$77e02dc0$67a08940$@ronnatalie.com> I was thinking about Star Wars this morning and various parodies of it (like Ernie Foss's Hardware Wars) and I rememberd the old DEC WARS. Alas when I tried to post it, it was too big for the listserv. So here's a link for your nostalgic purposes. I had to find one that was still in its fixed-pitch glory complete with the ASCII-art title. http://www.inwap.com/pdp10/decwars.txt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Thu Mar 23 16:31:06 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 00:31:06 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] more on CSTRs Message-ID: <201703230631.v2N6V6Wk003681@freefriends.org> Some pointers. Warren, worth grabbing these IMHO. I will ask him if he's willing to donate whatever troff he has. Arnold > Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 16:47:42 -0400 (EDT) > From: Brian Kernighan > To: arnold at skeeve.com > Subject: Re: CSTRs? > > There are a few things here: > http://www.netlib.org/cgi-bin/search.pl > but it seems to be mostly the numerical analysis ones. > > But Google reveals this one: > http://www.theobi.com/Bell.Labs/cstr/ > which seems to be all postscript. > > I have some odds and ends, like the troff manual and tutorial, > but otherwise only PDF. > > Sorry -- not much help. > > Brian > > On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, arnold at skeeve.com wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > Do you by chance happen to have copies of the CSTRs that used to be > > available at the Bell Labs web site? > > > > And/or troff source for any? The TUHS people would like to archive > > at least the Unix-related ones... > > > > Thanks, > > > > Arnold From ag4ve.us at gmail.com Thu Mar 23 18:56:27 2017 From: ag4ve.us at gmail.com (shawn wilson) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 04:56:27 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170322174921.4DC6518C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Didn't xkcd do a graph of alcohol consumption vs code output? Alcohol isn't really my thing wrt drugs (I like the taste but don't prefer the effects) so it doesn't much work for me, but talking with friends, it seems to be a popular enough thing to do that there must be at least a little basis in fact (obviously anecdotal too). I know I used to better at thinking about the best way to approach something under some influence - but that's not when you want to try to debug stuff (friends who drink and code agree with that too). Wrt the thrill of making something work - I dig that. OTOH, if I didn't have to write code to see stuff get done, I probably wouldn't (or might switch to something that is just for fun like smalltalk or make joke projects like cobol on cogs - which is actually kinda cool). On Mar 22, 2017 18:44, "Nick Downing" wrote: Programming is actually an addiction. What makes it addictive to a certain type of personality is that little rush of satisfaction when you try your code and it *works*... and while this is still true to an extent of batch systems from the 50s and 60s it was the interactive systems of the 70s onwards that really spurred the development of the hacker subculture. It was not just the convenience and productivity improvements but that the 'hit' was coming harder and faster. This theory is well known to those who design slot machines and other forms of gambling, it is called the theory of occasional rewards. With this in mind, frequent long debugging sessions do not make the process any less addictive, indeed MORE addictive since the occasional rewards are less predictable etc. With this in mind it is unsurprising that programmers tend to have other fixes too such as coffee, harder drugs or even gambling. Some personalities seem to be quite susceptible to occasional-rewards things. Nick On Mar 23, 2017 4:49 AM, "Noel Chiappa" wrote: > > From: Tim Bradshaw > > > I don't know about other people, but I think the whole dope thing is > why > > computer people tend *not* to be hippies in the 'dope smoking' > sense. I > > need to be *really awake* to write reasonably good code ... our drugs > > of choice are stimulants not depressants. > > Speak for yourself! :-) > > (Then again, I have wierd neuro-chemistry - I have modes where I have a > large > over-sppply of natural stimulant... :-) > > My group (which included Prof. Jerry Salzter, who's about as straight an > arrow > as they make) was remarkably tolerant of my, ah, quirks... I recall at one > point having a giant tank of nitrous under the desk in my office - which > they > boggled at, but didn't say anything about! ;-) > > Noel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steffen at sdaoden.eu Thu Mar 23 20:13:58 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:13:58 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <60725137-6AEB-4C3D-A705-FD66A4AA0C59@superglobalmegacorp.com> References: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <60725137-6AEB-4C3D-A705-FD66A4AA0C59@superglobalmegacorp.com> Message-ID: <20170323101358.e6ivV%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Jason Stevens wrote: |Speaking of Licklider, here is an amazingly prophetic video from 1972 | |[1]https://youtu.be/GjZ7ktIlSM0[/1] Many thanks for this link, very interesting, i soaked it all in! --steffen From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Thu Mar 23 22:08:47 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:08:47 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170323101358.e6ivV%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <20170320221759.0581C18C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <60725137-6AEB-4C3D-A705-FD66A4AA0C59@superglobalmegacorp.com> <20170323101358.e6ivV%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: There is some IMP stuff on SIMH, but I'll be damned if any of it makes sense. Apparently it "runs", although it really makes no sense.... There is a test script to push a packet, so I suppose one could feed the imp via debug, although it's not quite right On March 23, 2017 6:13:58 PM GMT+08:00, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: >Jason Stevens wrote: > |Speaking of Licklider, here is an amazingly prophetic video from 1972 > | > |[1]https://youtu.be/GjZ7ktIlSM0[/1] > >Many thanks for this link, very interesting, i soaked it all in! > >--steffen -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From david at kdbarto.org Thu Mar 23 22:42:20 2017 From: david at kdbarto.org (David) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 05:42:20 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] DEC Wars In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "Two Bacco, here, my Bookie.” Awesome. David > Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 21:26:16 -0400 > From: "Ron Natalie" > To: > Subject: [TUHS] DEC Wars > Message-ID: <001d01d2a374$77e02dc0$67a08940$@ronnatalie.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I was thinking about Star Wars this morning and various parodies of it (like > Ernie Foss's Hardware Wars) and I rememberd the old DEC WARS. Alas when I > tried to post it, it was too big for the listserv. So here's a link for > your nostalgic purposes. I had to find one that was still in its > fixed-pitch glory complete with the ASCII-art title. > > > > http://www.inwap.com/pdp10/decwars.txt > From chet.ramey at case.edu Thu Mar 23 23:13:08 2017 From: chet.ramey at case.edu (Chet Ramey) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:13:08 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170322174921.4DC6518C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <19fe4537-6a4b-6ded-b670-b7717c47e93d@case.edu> On 3/23/17 4:56 AM, shawn wilson wrote: > I know I used to better at thinking about the best way to approach > something under some influence - but that's not when you want to try to > debug stuff (friends who drink and code agree with that too). Introducing tomorrow's bugs today! -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet at case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/ From tfb at tfeb.org Fri Mar 24 00:00:10 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:00:10 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170322174921.4DC6518C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 22 Mar 2017, at 22:35, Nick Downing wrote: > > It was not just the convenience and productivity improvements but that the 'hit' was coming harder and faster. I think this is completely right, and is the reason that really interactive / resident environments can be so catastrophically addictive. Even on a fairly slow machine it doesn't take more than a second or so to compile a single function, and the whole edit/save/compile/link/debug cycle becomes compressed to edit/compile-one-function/debug, with cycle times of a few seconds. I have quite seriously lost a year of my life this way, although I am reasonably sure that part of the problem is that the Xerox d-machines were actually made by the Fair Folk and using them for any length of time results in the standard issues associated with dealing with artifacts of the Fay. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 24 02:22:52 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:22:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170323162252.273B818C096@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Nick Downing > Programming is actually an addiction. _Can be_ an addition. A lot of people are immune... :-) > What makes it addictive to a certain type of personality is that little > rush of satisfaction when you try your code and it *works*... ... It was > not just the convenience and productivity improvements but that the > 'hit' was coming harder and faster. Joe Weizenbaum wrote about the addiction of programming in his famous book "Computer Power and Human Reason" (Chapter 4, "Science and the Compulsive Programmer"). He attributes it to the sense of power one gets, working in a 'world' where things do exactly what you tell them. There might be something to that, but I suspect your supposition is more likely. > This theory is well known to those who design slot machines and other > forms of gambling Oddly enough, he also analogizes to gamblers! Noel From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 24 03:53:49 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:53:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] DEC Wars Message-ID: <20170323175349.C3C0218C098@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: "Ron Natalie" > I was thinking about Star Wars this morning and various parodies of it > (like Ernie Foss's Hardware Wars) The best one ever, I thought, was Mark Crispin's "Software Wars". (I have an actual original HAKMEM!) > I rememberd the old DEC WARS. I seem to vaguely recall a multi-page samizdat comic book of this name? Or am I mis-remembering its name? Does this ring any bells for anyone? Noel From mparson at bl.org Fri Mar 24 05:16:00 2017 From: mparson at bl.org (Michael Parson) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:16:00 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [TUHS] X, Suntools, and the like In-Reply-To: <1595e98a-045b-4332-ae4b-4c3b9009e513@SG2APC01FT013.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> References: <4227EA32-12C2-46D1-B683-88812D1E5168@tfeb.org> <3B3776C9-1B22-4143-A4F5-0BEA13C79505@tfeb.org> <20170315164006.GC26286@wopr> <20170316230455.GA21805@naleco.com> <20170317001331.GO5720@mcvoy.com> <1595e98a-045b-4332-ae4b-4c3b9009e513@SG2APC01FT013.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> Message-ID: >On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: >> I'd be stoked if X11 had an RDP extension or something. I have no idea if >> that makes sense but RDP is the shit. On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com wrote: > Well there is xrdp > http://www.xrdp.org/ I'm a fan of this project. > I’ve used this to ‘terminal server-ize’ our Oracle on Linux > installs, as our DBA’s were used to Oracle on Windows (I know, I > know, they also used to run it on Netware....) So the upshot is that > on Windows you just fire up the rdp client, and connect into the Linux > machine, and it’ll greet you with a login screen, login, and you > have your desktop. On the backend it’s the virtual X framebuffer, > and xrdp does some vnc/mstsc type translation in the middle. I'd describe xrdp as a VNC client that you connect to via RDP. > It’s great for sharing out desktops, or if you have those old > ‘windows terminals’ that can at least talk to a MS Terminal > server. It’s incompatible with the citrix stuff, but it’s pretty > cool. For whole-desktop sharing, yes, it's very nice. Occasionally I try and come up with ways to share a single app with it, to avoid the issue where a network hiccup kills the app and you lose work. Copious spare time and all that... -- Michael Parson Pflugerville, TX KF5LGQ From mparson at bl.org Fri Mar 24 06:18:27 2017 From: mparson at bl.org (Michael Parson) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:18:27 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:40 +0100 > From: Josh Good > To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? > > On 2017 Mar 20, 23:05, ron minnich wrote: >> At the time I got into Unix in 1976, E. F. Schumacher's "Small is >> Beautiful" book was fairly popular > >> (...) Those days are long gone of course; I noticed the other day that >> on Linux there are 16 commands that start with ls, that do roughly >> the same function, and nobody seems to think this is a bad thing. The >> only place the original 'small is beautiful' Unix ideas continue on >> that I know of is Plan 9. > > In RedHat Enterprise Linux 5.11 (without X-Window) I get: > > $ ls > ls lsattr lsb_release lshal lspgpot > > Whereas in Ubuntu 14.04 (full desktop install) I get: > > $ ls > ls lsblk lscpu lsdvd lsinitramfs lsof lspcmcia lss16toppm > lsattr lsb_release lsdiff lshw lsmod lspci lspgpot lsusb > > But then, in UnixWare 2.1 I get: > > $ bash > bash-2.01$ ls > (...no output...) > > So yeah, it's getting more bloated by the day. > > Anyone can contribute how is it on a recent OpenBSD without X-Window? How about NetBSD 6.1.4: $ ls ls lsb lsextattr lsof lspci lsx lsz Though only 'ls' and 'lsextattr' are part of the base install, the others are owned by various things installed out of pkgsrc, ls[bxz] are all from the same package. -- Michael Parson Pflugerville, TX KF5LGQ From rminnich at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 06:51:06 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:51:06 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: My belief is that if a kernel requires something like lspci to enumerate pci resources then it's forgotten an important lesson of Unix. On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:19 PM Michael Parson wrote: > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Josh Good wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:40 +0100 > > From: Josh Good > > To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org > > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? > > > > On 2017 Mar 20, 23:05, ron minnich wrote: > >> At the time I got into Unix in 1976, E. F. Schumacher's "Small is > >> Beautiful" book was fairly popular > > > >> (...) Those days are long gone of course; I noticed the other day that > >> on Linux there are 16 commands that start with ls, that do roughly > >> the same function, and nobody seems to think this is a bad thing. The > >> only place the original 'small is beautiful' Unix ideas continue on > >> that I know of is Plan 9. > > > > In RedHat Enterprise Linux 5.11 (without X-Window) I get: > > > > $ ls > > ls lsattr lsb_release lshal lspgpot > > > > Whereas in Ubuntu 14.04 (full desktop install) I get: > > > > $ ls > > ls lsblk lscpu lsdvd lsinitramfs lsof > lspcmcia lss16toppm > > lsattr lsb_release lsdiff lshw lsmod lspci > lspgpot lsusb > > > > But then, in UnixWare 2.1 I get: > > > > $ bash > > bash-2.01$ ls > > (...no output...) > > > > So yeah, it's getting more bloated by the day. > > > > Anyone can contribute how is it on a recent OpenBSD without X-Window? > > How about NetBSD 6.1.4: > > $ ls > ls lsb lsextattr lsof lspci lsx lsz > > Though only 'ls' and 'lsextattr' are part of the base install, the > others are owned by various things installed out of pkgsrc, ls[bxz] are > all from the same package. > > -- > Michael Parson > Pflugerville, TX > KF5LGQ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul.winalski at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 07:38:56 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:38:56 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] DEC Wars In-Reply-To: <20170323175349.C3C0218C098@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170323175349.C3C0218C098@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 3/23/17, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > I rememberd the old DEC WARS. > > I seem to vaguely recall a multi-page samizdat comic book of this name? Or > am > I mis-remembering its name? Does this ring any bells for anyone? Is that the one that involved an invasion of DEC's Maynard Mill headquarters by IBM marketing commandos? It featured a super-smart canine named Digital Dog. It was written and drawn by one of DEC's tech writers, if I recall correctly. -Paul W. From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Fri Mar 24 09:40:08 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:40:08 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170323162252.273B818C096@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170323162252.273B818C096@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1490312408.58d45cd848981@www.paradise.net.nz> I put a certain amount of time last decade at a community centre's cybercaf in Christchurch, NZ, into teaching elderly people who have not previously had much experience with computers, how to use them. You do get a buzz when someone who's previously been full of questions, suddenly "gets it" and their eyes light up and no more questions, let's get things done! It's not dissimilar to the buzz you get when you enter some code and it does what you think it should, not something else. Just my 0.02c Wesley Parish Quoting Noel Chiappa : > > From: Nick Downing > > > Programming is actually an addiction. > > _Can be_ an addition. A lot of people are immune... :-) > > > What makes it addictive to a certain type of personality is that > little > > rush of satisfaction when you try your code and it *works*... ... It > was > > not just the convenience and productivity improvements but that the > > 'hit' was coming harder and faster. > > Joe Weizenbaum wrote about the addiction of programming in his famous > book > "Computer Power and Human Reason" (Chapter 4, "Science and the > Compulsive > Programmer"). He attributes it to the sense of power one gets, working > in a > 'world' where things do exactly what you tell them. There might be > something > to that, but I suspect your supposition is more likely. > > > This theory is well known to those who design slot machines and > other > > forms of gambling > > Oddly enough, he also analogizes to gamblers! > > Noel > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From pepe at naleco.com Fri Mar 24 10:18:35 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 01:18:35 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 23, 20:51, ron minnich wrote: > My belief is that if a kernel requires something like lspci to enumerate > pci resources then it's forgotten an important lesson of Unix. Could you elaborate? I think the kernel does not need lspci to enumerate PCI resources, instead that command makes the kernel output to the console its internal enumeration of the PCI resources. -- Josh Good From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Mar 24 10:27:54 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:27:54 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 01:18:35AM +0100, Josh Good wrote: > On 2017 Mar 23, 20:51, ron minnich wrote: > > My belief is that if a kernel requires something like lspci to enumerate > > pci resources then it's forgotten an important lesson of Unix. > > Could you elaborate? > > I think the kernel does not need lspci to enumerate PCI resources, > instead that command makes the kernel output to the console its internal > enumeration of the PCI resources. I think Ron is just in Grumpy Old Man mode (he's a friend, we go way back, so I get to say that :) Personally, I sort of get the ls model. ls is how you list things, is how you say what you want to list. Is it Unix like? Hmm, perhaps not. Is it useful? Like a lot of stuff that Linux did, hell yes it's useful. I've written perl scripts to paw through /proc and /sys to do the same thing and each time I've found a ls that does what I want I have gleefully tossed my script. Linux is weird. It's not elegant like the early unix systems, it's not as well put together if you look at it through unix glasses (and don't get me started on plan 9 glasses). But it is *useful*. They favored useful over elegant. I don't think they disliked elegant, I suspect that many of us would say they didn't have the good taste to do elegant, whatever. It's useful. I'll take that. And it's really not that bad. Unless you are grumpy and want a perfect world. From rminnich at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 11:03:03 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 01:03:03 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:28 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > > > I think Ron is just in Grumpy Old Man mode (he's a friend, we go way back, > so I get to say that :) > > Personally, I sort of get the ls model. ls is how you list > things, is how you say what you want to list. Is it Unix > like? Hmm, perhaps not. > like larry said. I'm a grumpy old man. And lspci is not Unix. And neither is anything we use nowadays that begins with ls and has more than 2 letters. In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, organized into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and write. it's a pretty simple and consistent model. And it works just fine with, e.g., the the Plan 9 pnp device. From my point of view, if a user needs lspci to enumerate PCI resources, it's because the kernel has fallen down on the job by failing to support the Unix model. I can argue this point all day, but I'll let it go at that :-) thanks ron p.s. It's not you, it's me. "You, sir, are a curmudgeon" -- Rob Pike, to me, on 9fans. As a result of this note, while I was at Los Alamos I was assigned curmudgeon at lanl.gov. Made my day. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Mar 24 11:05:17 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 18:05:17 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170324010517.GY23802@mcvoy.com> This reminds me of Rodger Faulkner. Ron and Rodger would have gotten on very well. On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 01:03:03AM +0000, ron minnich wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 5:28 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > > > > > > > I think Ron is just in Grumpy Old Man mode (he's a friend, we go way back, > > so I get to say that :) > > > > Personally, I sort of get the ls model. ls is how you list > > things, is how you say what you want to list. Is it Unix > > like? Hmm, perhaps not. > > > > like larry said. I'm a grumpy old man. And lspci is not Unix. And neither > is anything we use nowadays that begins with ls and has more than 2 letters. > > In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, organized > into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a > directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their > contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and > write. > > it's a pretty simple and consistent model. And it works just fine with, > e.g., the the Plan 9 pnp device. From my point of view, if a user needs > lspci to enumerate PCI resources, it's because the kernel has fallen down > on the job by failing to support the Unix model. > > I can argue this point all day, but I'll let it go at that :-) > > thanks > > ron > p.s. It's not you, it's me. "You, sir, are a curmudgeon" -- Rob Pike, to > me, on 9fans. As a result of this note, while I was at Los Alamos I was > assigned curmudgeon at lanl.gov. Made my day. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From andreww591 at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 12:33:10 2017 From: andreww591 at gmail.com (Andrew Warkentin) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:33:10 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On 3/23/17, ron minnich wrote: > like larry said. I'm a grumpy old man. And lspci is not Unix. And neither > is anything we use nowadays that begins with ls and has more than 2 > letters. > > In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, organized > into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a > directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their > contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and > write. > > it's a pretty simple and consistent model. And it works just fine with, > e.g., the the Plan 9 pnp device. From my point of view, if a user needs > lspci to enumerate PCI resources, it's because the kernel has fallen down > on the job by failing to support the Unix model. > While I agree 100% that all resources, including things like PCI devices, should be exposed through special files, I still think there's a place for commands like lspci, as long as they're implemented as shell scripts that format information from the special files. That's what I'm going to do in the OS I'm going to write (which will look sort of like a cross between Plan 9 and QNX, and will be even more filesystem-oriented than Plan 9). A lot of commands that are binaries on other modern Unices will be shell scripts on my OS (Plan 9 does this to some extent as well). Personally I'd say Unix started to lose its way architecturally with the introduction of sockets in 4.2BSD. I think it's time for a new Unix-like OS that both follows the Unix philosophy consistently and remains compatible with conventional Unices. I'd say several of Plan 9's design decisions have held it back as a Unix successor without providing any real advantage over a conventional Unix. From crossd at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 12:33:56 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 22:33:56 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > [snip] > I think Ron is just in Grumpy Old Man mode (he's a friend, we go way back, > so I get to say that :) Ya gotta be careful around Ron: you step on his lawn and he'll come after you with a wooder hose while eating a cheesesteak from Gino's.... - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Fri Mar 24 13:53:43 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:53:43 -1000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > Linux is weird. It's not elegant like the early unix systems, it's > not as well put together if you look at it through unix glasses (and > don't get me started on plan 9 glasses). But it is *useful*. They > favored useful over elegant. I don't think they disliked elegant, > I suspect that many of us would say they didn't have the good taste > to do elegant, whatever. It's useful. I'll take that. And it's > really not that bad. Unless you are grumpy and want a perfect world. > ​I'll accept that and may be add - it's practical and get the job done. Not pretty, but damned good for what you get. That said, I do agree with Ron, it lacks elegance and some of the the "cool" (like monokernel *vs* ukernel which has always pained me a little)​. But useful and practical is hard to argue -- darned glad to have it around. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Fri Mar 24 15:14:49 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 01:14:49 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017, at 21:03, ron minnich wrote: > In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, > organized > into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a > directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their > contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and > write. And if each resource has a directory (possibly organized in a multiple-level hierarchy) containing several files that describe attributes of that resource, what are you to do when you want to print a report listing a summary of some information about those resources, one per line? And of course the information in these files is numeric - surely you don't expect the database of descriptions to be compiled into the kernel. So the tool has to go and fetch those too. From random832 at fastmail.com Fri Mar 24 15:17:02 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 01:17:02 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1490332622.2836632.921838880.5AF137F3@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017, at 22:33, Andrew Warkentin wrote: > While I agree 100% that all resources, including things like PCI > devices, should be exposed through special files, I still think > there's a place for commands like lspci, as long as they're > implemented as shell scripts that format information from the special > files. I posted my earlier post before seeing this one - I do have to wonder, why exactly do shell scripts (or interpreted languages generally, if it could be an awk script or a perl script) have a special place in this philosophy? From fair-tuhs at netbsd.org Fri Mar 24 15:37:17 2017 From: fair-tuhs at netbsd.org (Erik E. Fair) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 22:37:17 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2595.1490333837@cesium.clock.org> Andrew, I'm a fan of Plan 9's elegance and clean design, but beware of the limitations of the abstractions you choose. One place that files and connections don't work cleanly is in actual datagram networking. You can do TCP easily, but UDP and especially broadcast/multicast make a hash of the abstraction. That's how you end up with sendto(2), sendmsg(2), recvfrom(2), recvmsg(2). One could also point to the seemingly endless number of ioctl(2) commands as a failure of the file abstraction to encompass all the necessary service elements - hence that escape mechanism. This is the wonder and the problem of Turing machines: they can do almost anything - so what functions and services do you expose, and what do you hide? What is most useful to a large enough group of software developers and users that your model will be accepted, used, supported by contribution, and perhaps lauded? Whenever we want total control, we can always revert to assembly and/or machine language. Or beach sand. Erik Fair From rminnich at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 16:06:31 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 06:06:31 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: So, first, I'm not here to argue about the merits or lack thereof of the Unix model as I described it. I am just trying to explain my view of what the Unix model was. Since this is the TUHS, I'm trying hard to avoid things related to LUHS, or 9UHS :-) So, nope, I'm not responding to the comments that I see as out of scope of TUHS. Lack of response does not indicate agreement :-) But it got me to thinking: what aspects of the Unix model did not age well? It's certainly aged remarkably well for 50 years. But what would we do differently? I'm glad that at least one subsequent effort -- by the guys who invented these things as it happens -- fixed most of the list that follows. Without further ado, and based on the v6 system call set, which is where I came in (I'm biased) ... Device special files. These gave us the situation we have today with major and minor numbers. I deal with it daily. I wish I did not have to. And we don't need them. ptrace -- there's much better ways to do what ptrace does. Open which combines walk and open. Linux at some point added O_PATH, which is very nice, as it lets you get an fd for a file but not actually open it, and 9p has walk and open, but sadly plan 9 never exposed them; it just has open which does both. There's two kernels I'm involved in which will be breaking open out into walk and open. But who knew 50 years ago you'd want two ops, not one? ioctl. unidirectional pipes. Bidirectional pipes are so much nicer. errno. Once you get used to getting an error string from the kernel, with detailed information, errno just drives you crazy. integer user ids. Totally reasonable approach pre-networking on 16-bit machines, but think of the amount of trouble that integer user ids give us. There was a time when a file name was just an integer, and we'd never accept that now; why do we still accept an integer for a user name? root user. and the big one .... fork.The amount of abuse I've seen heaped on fork over the years is pretty amazing. I always found it convenient, but at the same time, how much effort have we expended as we move from processes with 16 or 128 4k pages to processes with, in some cases, millions of fds and pages? How many gray hairs has fork caused you over the years? Would you pick something else? What do you see that you think could be done differently, given 50 years to look back? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ag4ve.us at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 17:15:13 2017 From: ag4ve.us at gmail.com (shawn wilson) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:15:13 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 23, 2017, 20:28 Larry McVoy wrote: > > > Personally, I sort of get the ls model. ls is how you list > things, is how you say what you want to list. Is it Unix > like? Hmm, perhaps not. Is it useful? Like a lot of stuff that Linux > did, hell yes it's useful. I've written perl scripts to paw through > /proc and /sys to do the same thing and each time I've found a ls > that does what I want I have gleefully tossed my script. > > Linux is weird. It's not elegant like the early unix systems, it's > not as well put together if you look at it through unix glasses (and > don't get me started on plan 9 glasses). But it is *useful*. They > favored useful over elegant. I don't think they disliked elegant, > I suspect that many of us would say they didn't have the good taste > to do elegant, whatever. It's useful. I'll take that. And it's > really not that bad. Unless you are grumpy and want a perfect world. > (From a mainly Linux background - I'm curious where the rust stains are) Everything is still a file. I've got some arguments about the Linux kernel build process (having to bootstrap your config system seems wrong to me - or creating a totally new format for the config - kconfig) and don't really appreciate their stance on security and don't really appreciate a thousand files in etc vs using /usr/local/etc for most things. I guess one could argue that sysfs is a bit much, and I've obviously seen the arguments over systemd (and I admit that could've been handled better both politically and technically) but all in all, I think that both are decent systems. But the system itself (and distros) seem to be pretty Unix like to me. Of course, this is from someone who uses the hell out of the shell autocomplete (many zsh compdef and the like) and opens new files in vim using the servername of an existing vim instance and loves scripts/libraries that go outside of UTF to display cool things (namely progress bars and select bubbles) and abuses bash extglob and sits in a split tmux (sometimes with a split vim), so... Maybe the old school Unix mentality is lost on me. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ag4ve.us at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 17:23:40 2017 From: ag4ve.us at gmail.com (shawn wilson) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 07:23:40 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017, 01:15 Random832 wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017, at 21:03, ron minnich wrote: > > In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, > > organized > > into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a > > directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their > > contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and > > write. > > And if each resource has a directory (possibly organized in a > multiple-level hierarchy) containing several files that describe > attributes of that resource, what are you to do when you want to print a > report listing a summary of some information about those resources, one > per line? > In bash - which read -a foo; do echo <(cmd ${foo[0]}); done #...? :) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From khm at sciops.net Fri Mar 24 17:37:48 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 00:37:48 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:15:13AM +0000, shawn wilson wrote: > > Everything is still a file. Except for your network, of course -- that might have a file interface available... provided by your shell. Because of course /dev/tcp should be a shell feature. Why would anyone put that in the kernel? Linux (and the wider later-unixlike world) is full of these bizarre little quirks -- due to the earlier-mentioned practicality. At first it was people scratching their own itches, then it switched over to people scratching corporate itches. Does it work? Sure. But one of the things that makes a system well-loved is consistent application of design principles. That's why those weirdos mourned their LispMs (and why their emacs descendants tend to live inside their text editor). It's why the plan 9 people won't shut up about plan 9. And there are lots of examples of people singing the praise of "everything's a file" -- and even that "open, read, write, close" specifically was enough to get things done. Linux has around 400 system calls, and still supports just about ever (userspace-exposed) syscall it has ever had. This is why it needs a thousand little binary shims to get stuff done, and the push for systemd was the pendulum swinging back the other direction. Since open/read/write/close isn't enough, we'll build a layer to handle all the weirdness, and now all you need is dbus... But it sure boots fast! khm From ag4ve.us at gmail.com Fri Mar 24 18:06:29 2017 From: ag4ve.us at gmail.com (shawn wilson) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 04:06:29 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:37 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:15:13AM +0000, shawn wilson wrote: >> >> Everything is still a file. > > Except for your network, of course -- that might have a file interface > available... provided by your shell. Because of course /dev/tcp should > be a shell feature. Why would anyone put that in the kernel? > I actually have strong opinions about this (read: disagreements). Your shell shouldn't know about connect() - I guess allowing writing to /dev/eth0 would work for me. But in bash, IIRC that damn ghost file thing is like half of the files in source and it helps nothing. Maybe if the point was to allow some remote shell (like X does) I could see it (but than I'd scream about the security implications about something like that). And I'll say again - why? You want a socket - nc, ncat, socat - pick one - don't abuse your shell. > Linux (and the wider later-unixlike world) is full of these bizarre > little > quirks -- due to the earlier-mentioned practicality. At first it was > people scratching their own itches, then it switched over to people > scratching corporate itches. > I've got mixed feelings about this - while I like being able to install a Fedora or Debian on a box and it generally just work (except for things like raid controllers, IPMI, and the like) and remember the days of Slackware where it took a week just to get to a point where you were ~happy with an install. I do kinda see how this went a bit sideways and wish someone had put some thought into where things went (memory/calls and files). > Linux has around 400 system calls, and still supports just about ever > (userspace-exposed) syscall it has ever had. This is why it needs a > thousand little binary shims to get stuff done, and the push for systemd > was the pendulum swinging back the other direction. Since > open/read/write/close isn't enough, we'll build a layer to handle all > the weirdness, and now all you need is dbus... > No one wants to see their pet project die :) No one cares when it's userspace, but it adds up in kernel space. From tfb at tfeb.org Fri Mar 24 20:21:33 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 10:21:33 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <75699103-DFF1-485E-A1C0-63D62F11A62C@tfeb.org> On 24 Mar 2017, at 01:03, ron minnich wrote: > > In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, organized into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and write. And if, for instance, I have a regular need to enumerate various properties of the avatars of the PCI devices in the filesystem, I might decide to write a program which does that, rather than patching together some arcane mass of cat | sed |awk each time (if even the contents of the avatars isn't some awful binary blob, which I think it should not be but whether that's a Unixism or not I am not sure). I might call that command 'lspci'. Or in other words, the existence of commanda like 'lspci', and the existence of PCI device avatars in the file system is not at all mutually exclusive, unless you think people should not write utilities beyond those handed down of old. Indeed I've frequently written commands just like this which look through files in /proc for useful things. (None of this is meant to imply that systems which have such commands have got this right -- I completely agree that they should present things in the filesystem -- just that they could have got it right and the command might still exist.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Fri Mar 24 23:33:02 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:33:02 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <2595.1490333837@cesium.clock.org> References: <2595.1490333837@cesium.clock.org> Message-ID: <1490362382.1722733.922188992.774B4678@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017, at 01:37, Erik E. Fair wrote: > Andrew, > I'm a fan of Plan 9's elegance and clean design, but beware of the limitations of the abstractions you choose. One place that files and connections don't work cleanly is in actual datagram networking. You can do TCP easily, but UDP and especially broadcast/multicast make a hash of the abstraction. That's how you end up with sendto(2), sendmsg(2), recvfrom(2), recvmsg(2). Why? For UDP, just have the data returned from read() include the length and source address. You could do the same for write, or require a separate socket for each destination. You could even force-fit the read side into the connection model; have a "listening" socket that you have to "accept" each new source address from; but you'd still need a solution for message lengths. I'm not familiar with the issues with broadcast/multicast/*msg functions, but "a stream consisting of a serialized sequence of all of whatever information would have been supplied to/by the calls to the special function" seems like a universal solution at the high level. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Mar 24 23:41:14 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:41:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170324134114.F2CC618C09A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Random832 > "a stream consisting of a serialized sequence of all of whatever > information would have been supplied to/by the calls to the special > function" seems like a universal solution at the high level. Yes, and when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything look like a nail. Noel From random832 at fastmail.com Fri Mar 24 23:55:23 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:55:23 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <75699103-DFF1-485E-A1C0-63D62F11A62C@tfeb.org> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <75699103-DFF1-485E-A1C0-63D62F11A62C@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <1490363723.1727942.922198848.7E13EB12@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017, at 06:21, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > And if, for instance, I have a regular need to enumerate various > properties of the avatars of the PCI devices in the filesystem, I might > decide to write a program which does that, rather than patching together > some arcane mass of cat | sed |awk each time (if even the contents of the > avatars isn't some awful binary blob, which I think it should not be but > whether that's a Unixism or not I am not sure). If you think parsing a binary blob can't be done in a shell script, you're not trying hard enough. Relevant tools include dd [with the seek and skip], od, head and tail [in byte count mode of course]. For creating binary data, printf is sufficient. If you think that parsing a binary blob *shouldn't* be done in a shell script, and the suggestion is absolutely horrifying, you're of course correct. > (None of this is meant to imply that systems which have such commands > have got this right -- I completely agree that they should present things > in the filesystem -- just that they could have got it right and the > command might still exist.) List of files opened by lspci: /sys/bus/pci/devices /sys/bus/pci/devices/{each subdirectory}/{resource,irq,vendor,device,class} /sys/bus/pci/devices/{each subdirectory}/{config,label} /sys/bus/pci/slots /usr/share/misc/pci.ids{.gz,} /etc/passwd and various other files that libc's "nsswitch" getpw* is to blame for, to locate the home directory for the following ~/.pciids-cache /etc/udev/udev.conf {various directories}/hwdb.bin Honestly I'm not sure how anyone can be aware of how extensive Linux's /proc and /sys filesystems are and assume that tools like lspci etc are doing anything but collating data found in them. The content of all of those files [well, all the /proc ones that are actually device avatars - i suspect hwdb.bin is not] is textual (often a single hexadecimal constant), and it's therefore probably possible to write it in sh and awk if you had to. But what's wrong with C? From tfb at tfeb.org Sat Mar 25 00:53:43 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:53:43 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <1490363723.1727942.922198848.7E13EB12@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <75699103-DFF1-485E-A1C0-63D62F11A62C@tfeb.org> <1490363723.1727942.922198848.7E13EB12@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <406353D2-6E93-4199-902C-186926FC8E96@tfeb.org> On 24 Mar 2017, at 13:55, Random832 wrote: > > If you think that parsing a binary blob *shouldn't* be done in a shell > script, and the suggestion is absolutely horrifying, you're of course > correct. Well, I don't think the information should be presented as binary unless that is absolutely necessary was what I meant to say. > Honestly I'm not sure how anyone can be aware of how extensive Linux's > /proc and /sys filesystems are and assume that tools like lspci etc are > doing anything but collating data found in them. My guess is that that's what it was doing, yes: having spent a bunch of time grovelling around /proc and /sys on Linux systems there is a lot there to be found. Arguing that lspci (or lots of other commands) should not exist because the information should be presented in the filesystem is like saying that text editors should not exist because your text should live in the filesystem. From crossd at gmail.com Sat Mar 25 01:22:42 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:22:42 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:06 AM, shawn wilson wrote: > I actually have strong opinions about this (read: disagreements). Your > shell shouldn't know about connect() - I guess allowing writing to > /dev/eth0 would work for me. But in bash, IIRC that damn ghost file > thing is like half of the files in source and it helps nothing. Maybe > if the point was to allow some remote shell (like X does) I could see > it (but than I'd scream about the security implications about > something like that). And I'll say again - why? You want a socket - > nc, ncat, socat - pick one - don't abuse your shell. > You're right; your shell should not know about connect(). But the argument isn't that it should; the argument is that connect() itself is superfluous. Perhaps a way to focus the discussion would be to explain how networking works in the Plan 9 world (which is where at least Ron is coming from...unless he corrects me). In Unix everything is a file, but the limitations of that model become apparent pretty quickly: -For things that require some sort of control plane, one ends up with ioctl() or something like it. -Traditionally Unix required that these files exist in the directory structure resident on the disk filesystem, hence major/minor device numbers and file types. -Sockets didn't fit exactly into that model so they got a whole slew of special-purpose system calls. -That seemed to open the flood gates to a number of other, similar special-purpose interfaces (POSIX termios? To be fair, these [and sockets!] were predated by s/gtty etc). All of these are non-orthogonal: they cannot be easily combined or reused. Little binary data structures shared between the kernel and the rest of the world, accessed by special system calls and interpreted by arcane user-space programs, are the order of the day; one had better hope that the structure definitions are synchronized between building the kernel and the tools or hilarity ensues. Since it's all binary, one has to deal with byte ordering issues and type widths and so forth if one wants to share these things over a network. The interface between the kernel and userspace is very wide. However, this has been "normal" since at least the 1980s so no one really thinks twice about it. By contrast in Plan 9, everything is sort of a small *filesystem* and there exist (unprivileged) primitives for mapping these filesystems into a process's view of the file namespace and manipulating them into various configurations. Often, these files are synthesized on demand by a device driver or user-space process; there is no disk-resident copy of the names. For networking, there is no /dev/eth0 file, but there are /net/ether0 and /net/tcp *directories*. If I want, say, to make a TCP connection I open a file (/net/tcp/clone) and read from it. These operations cause a new directory representing that connection to spring into existence; that directory contains two files: /net/tcp/$n$/ctl and /net/tcp/$n$/data (actually, the file descriptor returned by opening /net/tcp/clone corresponds to /net/tcp/$n$/ctl, but that's a detail). I write a string describing the port and address I wish to connect to into the ctl file and attempt to open the data file; when that returns successfully, I have an established connection and I read/write the corresponding file descriptor to exchange data with the remote system. I can further control the connection via writes of special messages into the ctl file. Of course, the details of connection establishment are abstracted away into a convenient library interface so I don't really think about it for work-a-day programming, but I can also do this little dance with e.g. cat and echo, so I can do the same from the shell if I like. Why bother with nc, netcat, socat, etc when just plain cat will do? Since all of the details of actually manipulating network connections and so forth are hidden behind this nice filesystem-based interface, neither the shell nor the tools have to know or care that they're dealing with a network. The control plane is handled via this `ctl` thing, which is far superior to ioctl() in that the messages accepted by the ctl file are text, not little binary integers and pointers. Since everything is text based, I can share these filesystems over a network and manipulate them from remote machines (e.g., I can import the TCP/IP stack from another machine and use it to make connections: all with no programming whatsoever). The kernel interface is elegant, simple, relatively narrow and highly orthogonal. Of course, it has its downsides: sometimes it certainly DOES feel like the "if all you have is a hammer..." thing and one finds tiny parsers for the DSLs implemented by various ctl files and things all over the place and for connectionless protocols like UDP one has to (wait for it...) prepend or parse a binary header at the beginning of the data when writing/reading a packet. For UDP this is simple enough, but clearly it shows a general weakness in the model. It's also hard to do scatter/gather I/O. Because things are based on open/read|write/close, lots of things are stateful that don't have to be on e.g. Unix. Plan 9 relies heavily on convention (e.g., all the tools expect the network to be mounted at /net, but there's no one with a golden hammer standing over you forcing you to put it there. You could mount it on /foobar if you wanted...but then nothing would work); the implementation is buggy and many would argue quirky; it's slow; most importantly, it's incompatible with the rest of the world and requires you to dump your old toolset and adopt the Plan 9 Way to be productive. Like Lisp, it's great for stretching your mind but perhaps not so much for solving real-life problems. However, I often feel that when one tries to explain it to folks who haven't seen it, the explanations fall flat because folks look at them with too many of their preconceptions based on how Unix and Linux work. It's a very different model and a lot of folks with experience on the research systems would argue that it is philosophically more Unix-like than Unix (including Linux) these days. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From chet.ramey at case.edu Sat Mar 25 01:30:42 2017 From: chet.ramey at case.edu (Chet Ramey) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 08:30:42 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> Message-ID: On 3/24/17 12:37 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:15:13AM +0000, shawn wilson wrote: >> >> Everything is still a file. > > Except for your network, of course -- that might have a file interface > available... provided by your shell. Because of course /dev/tcp should > be a shell feature. Why would anyone put that in the kernel? Who knows? At the time I put that into bash (around 20 years ago, and Korn before me), nobody had it in the kernel, and there weren't any signs of anyone doing so. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet at case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/ From chet.ramey at case.edu Sat Mar 25 01:34:12 2017 From: chet.ramey at case.edu (Chet Ramey) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 08:34:12 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> Message-ID: <932daf73-bf9f-2916-abe2-d55315ea1bcd@case.edu> On 3/24/17 1:06 AM, shawn wilson wrote: > I actually have strong opinions about this (read: disagreements). Your > shell shouldn't know about connect() - I guess allowing writing to > /dev/eth0 would work for me. Yeah, but nobody wants to do that. > But in bash, IIRC that damn ghost file > thing is like half of the files in source and it helps nothing. What does this mean? > Maybe > if the point was to allow some remote shell (like X does) I could see > it (but than I'd scream about the security implications about > something like that). And I'll say again - why? You want a socket - > nc, ncat, socat - pick one - don't abuse your shell. You always have the option of not compiling it into the shell. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet at case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/ From tfb at tfeb.org Sat Mar 25 01:42:02 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:42:02 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history Message-ID: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> Lots of tools now seem to use this strategy: there's some kind of wrapper which has its own set of commands (which in turn might have further subcommands). So for instance git remote add ... is a two layer thing. Without getting into an argument about whether that's a reasonable or ideologically-correct approach, I was wondering what the early examples of this kind of wrapper-command approach were. I think the first time I noticed it was CVS, which made you say `cvs co ...` where RCS & SCCS had a bunch of individual commands (actually: did SCCS?). But I think it's possible to argue that ifconfig was an earlier example of the same thing. I was thinking about dd as well, but I don't think that's the same: they're really options not commands I think. Relatedly, does this style originate on some other OS? --tim (I realise that in the case of many of these things, particularly git, the wrapper is just dispatching to other tools that do the werk: it's the command style I'm interested in not how it's implemented.) From lm at mcvoy.com Sat Mar 25 01:44:01 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 08:44:01 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history In-Reply-To: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> References: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <20170324154401.GG23802@mcvoy.com> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 03:42:02PM +0000, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > Lots of tools now seem to use this strategy: there's some kind of wrapper which has its own set of commands (which in turn might have further subcommands). So for instance > > git remote add ... > > is a two layer thing. > > Without getting into an argument about whether that's a reasonable or ideologically-correct approach, I was wondering what the early examples of this kind of wrapper-command approach were. I think the first time I noticed it was CVS, which made you say `cvs co ...` where RCS & SCCS had a bunch of individual commands (actually: did SCCS?). But I think it's possible to argue that ifconfig was an earlier example of the same thing. I was thinking about dd as well, but I don't think that's the same: they're really options not commands I think. BSD's sccs wrapper worked this way, I believe thats where I saw it first. From khm at sciops.net Sat Mar 25 03:09:31 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 10:09:31 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> Message-ID: <20170324170931.GB39889@wopr> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 08:30:42AM -0700, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 3/24/17 12:37 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:15:13AM +0000, shawn wilson wrote: > >> > >> Everything is still a file. > > > > Except for your network, of course -- that might have a file interface > > available... provided by your shell. Because of course /dev/tcp should > > be a shell feature. Why would anyone put that in the kernel? > > Who knows? At the time I put that into bash (around 20 years ago, and Korn > before me), nobody had it in the kernel, and there weren't any signs of > anyone doing so. That's my point. It landed in the shell because it was a desired feature which was inexplicably never implemented where it "belongs." Practicality landed it, not systems design. khm From krewat at kilonet.net Sat Mar 25 07:46:34 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:46:34 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history In-Reply-To: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> References: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> Message-ID: The current SCCS certainly takes subcommands, but I have no idea if it started out that way. ifconfig is more a set of flags than subcommands. And don't get me started about dd - who wrote that anyway? Must have been an IBM guy :) dd breaks all the norms for using shell wildcard expansions. You can't do: dd if=*.tar of=/dev/rmt/0cbn bs=128k Assuming, of course, you only had one tar file you wanted to write to tape. On 3/24/2017 11:42 AM, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > Lots of tools now seem to use this strategy: there's some kind of wrapper which has its own set of commands (which in turn might have further subcommands). So for instance > > git remote add ... > > is a two layer thing. > > Without getting into an argument about whether that's a reasonable or ideologically-correct approach, I was wondering what the early examples of this kind of wrapper-command approach were. I think the first time I noticed it was CVS, which made you say `cvs co ...` where RCS & SCCS had a bunch of individual commands (actually: did SCCS?). But I think it's possible to argue that ifconfig was an earlier example of the same thing. I was thinking about dd as well, but I don't think that's the same: they're really options not commands I think. > > Relatedly, does this style originate on some other OS? > > --tim > > (I realise that in the case of many of these things, particularly git, the wrapper is just dispatching to other tools that do the werk: it's the command style I'm interested in not how it's implemented.) > From paul.winalski at gmail.com Sat Mar 25 07:55:14 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:55:14 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history In-Reply-To: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> References: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> Message-ID: On 3/24/17, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > Lots of tools now seem to use this strategy: there's some kind of wrapper > which has its own set of commands (which in turn might have further > subcommands). So for instance > > git remote add ... [snip] > > Relatedly, does this style originate on some other OS? > > --tim This command style was the standard and encouraged approach on many of DEC's operating systems. Digital Command Language (DCL), the command language for TOPS-20 and VMS, implemented most of the common system commands this way: A lot of packages or subsystems, such as mail, source code control (Code Management System--CMS), and whatnot were implemented using this design. The command verb was usually the package name, and the subcommands implemented functions in that package. Very often you could just give the command name and that entered the package in interactive mode--it would prompt for subcommands until you exited the subsystem. I'm pretty sure this command design style was used in VM/CMS and CDC PLATO, too. -Paul W. From crossd at gmail.com Sat Mar 25 08:09:52 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 18:09:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324073748.GA39889@wopr> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Andy Kosela wrote: > > [snip] > Dan, that was an excellent post. > Thanks! I thought it was rather too long/wordy, but I lacked the time to make it shorter. I always admired the elegance and simplicity of Plan 9 model which indeed > seem to be more UNIX like than todays BSDs and Linux world. > > The question though remains -- why it has not been more successfull? The > adoption of Plan 9 in the real world is practically zero nowadays and even > its creators like Rob Pike moved on to concentrate on other things, like > the golang. > I think two big reasons and one little one. 1. It wasn't backwards compatible with the rest of the world and forced you to jump headlong into embracing a new toolset. That is, there was no particularly elegant way to move gradually to Plan 9: you had to adopt it all from day one or not at all. That was a bridge too far for most. (Yeah, there were some shims, but it was all rather hacky.) 2. Relatedly, it wasn't enough of an improvement over its predecessor to pull people into its orbit. Are acme or sam really all that much better than vi or emacs? Wait, don't answer that...but the reality is that people didn't care enough whether they were or not. The "everything is a file(system)" idea is pretty cool, but we've already had tools that worked then and work now. Ultimately, few people care how elegant the abstractions are or how well the kernel is implemented. And the minor issue: The implementation. Plan 9 was amazing for when it was written, but now? Not so much. I work on two related kernels: one that is directly descended from Plan 9 (Harvey, for those interested) and one that's borrowed a lot of the code (Akaros) and in both we've found major, sometimes decades old bugs. There are no tests, and there are subtle race conditions or rarely tickled bugs lurking in odd places. Since the system is used so little, these don't really get shaken out the way they do in Linux (or to a lesser extent the BSDs or commercial Unixes). In short, some code is better than other code and while I'd argue that the median quality of the implementation is probably higher than that of Linux or *BSD in terms of elegance and understandability, it's not much higher and it's certainly buggier. And the big implementation issue is lack of hardware support. I stood up two plan 9 networks at work for Akaros development and we ran into major driver issues with the ethernets that took a week or two to sort out. On the other hand, Linux just worked. Eventually, one of those networks got replaced with Linux and the other is probably headed that way. In fairness, this has to do with the fact that no one besides Ron and I was interested in using them or learning how they work: people *want* Linux and the idea that there's this neat system out there for them to explore and learn about the cool concepts it introduced just isn't a draw. I gave a presentation on Plan 9 concepts to the Akaros team a year and a half or so ago and a well-known figure in the Linux community who working with us at the time had only to say that, "the user interface looks like it's from 1991." None of the rest didn't interest him at all: the CPU command usually kind of blows people's minds, but after I went through the innards of it the response was, "why not just use SSH?" I've had engineers ask me why Plan 9 used venti and didn't "just use git" (git hadn't been invented yet). It's somewhat lamentable, but it's also reality. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 25 08:14:42 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 08:14:42 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] hostname limit in (4.3BSD) uucp? Message-ID: <20170324221442.GA16891@minnie.tuhs.org> All, I'm setting up a uucp site 'tektronix'. When I send e-mail, I'm seeing this error: ASSERT ERROR (uux) pid: 235 (3/24-00:09) CAN'T OPEN D.tektronX00D0 (0) Something seems to be trimming the hostname to seven chars. If I do: # hostname tektronix Thanks, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Sat Mar 25 08:36:11 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 08:36:11 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] hostname limit in (4.3BSD) uucp? In-Reply-To: <20170324221442.GA16891@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170324221442.GA16891@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170324223611.GA20051@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 08:14:42AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > Something seems to be trimming the hostname to seven chars. Answer: 4.3BSD uucp allows hostnames of 14 chars, but trims down to 7 for the dirnames in /usr/spool/uucp, presumably for HDB compatibility. But uux, mail, news work with hostnames > 7 chars. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pepe at naleco.com Sat Mar 25 09:55:58 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 00:55:58 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <20170324235556.GA29323@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 24, 07:23, shawn wilson wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017, 01:15 Random832 wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017, at 21:03, ron minnich wrote: > > > In Unix, resources have names. They are visible in a name space, > > > organized > > > into directories. The names can be enumerated by opening and reading a > > > directory. Information about them can be determined with stat. Their > > > contents can be read by open and read. They can be changed with open and > > > write. > > > > And if each resource has a directory (possibly organized in a > > multiple-level hierarchy) containing several files that describe > > attributes of that resource, what are you to do when you want to print a > > report listing a summary of some information about those resources, one > > per line? > > > > In bash - > which read -a foo; do echo <(cmd ${foo[0]}); > done #...? :) Yeah, because "lspci" was not hard enough to type. Also, in Unix resources have a name when the kernel has a driver to be able to know about those resources. But "lspci" can list also hardware for which the kernel knows no driver (not a typical need in "pure UNIX" running on a PDP-11 or PDP-8, I guess). "lspci" is akin to "fdisk -l", for when you need to know what is laying under the running kernel, at a level lower than the kernel abstractions for the hardware which it knows about (i.e, hardware for which it has a driver). Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? -- Josh Good From dave at horsfall.org Sat Mar 25 10:02:55 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 11:02:55 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Mar 2017, ron minnich wrote: > What do you see that you think could be done differently, given 50 years > to look back? I'd spell "creat" with an "e". -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From andreww591 at gmail.com Sat Mar 25 10:41:12 2017 From: andreww591 at gmail.com (Andrew Warkentin) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 18:41:12 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324034915.GA23802@mcvoy.com> References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324034915.GA23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On 3/23/17, Larry McVoy wrote: > > I only know a tiny amount about Plan 9, never dove into deeply. QNX, > on the other hand, I knew quite well. I was pretty good friends with > one of the 3 or 4 people who were allowed to work on the microkernel, Dan > Hildebrandt. He died in 1998, but before then he and I used to call each > other pretty often to talk about kernel stuff, how stuff ought to be done. > The calls weren't jerk off sessions, they were pretty deep conversations, > we challenged each other. I was very skeptical about microkernels, > I'd seen Mach and found it lacking, seen Minix and found it lacking > (though that's a little unfair to Minix compared to Mach). Dan brought > me around to believing in the microkernel but only if the kernel was > actually a kernel. Their kernel didn't use up a 4K instruction cache, > it left room for the apps and the processes that did the rest. That's > why only a few people were allowed to work on the kernel, they counted > every single instruction cache footprint. > > So tell me more about your OS, I'm interested. Where do I start? I've got much of the design planned out. I've thought about the design for many years now and changed my plans on some things quite a few times. Currently the only code I have is a bootloader that I've been working on somewhat intermittently for a while now, as well as a completely untested patch for seL4 to add support for QNX-ish single image boot. I am planning to borrow Linux and BSD code where it makes sense, so I have less work to do. It will be called UX/RT (for Universally eXtensible Real Time operating system, although it's also a kind of a nod to QNX originally standing for Quick uNiX), and it will be primarily intended as a workstation and embedded OS (although it would be also be good for servers where security is more important than I/O throughput, and also for HPC). It will be a microkernel-based multi-server OS. Like I said before, it will superficially resemble QNX in its general architecture (for example, much like QNX, the lowest-level user-mode component will be a single root server called "proc", which will handle process management and filesystem namespace management), although the specifics of the IPC model will be somewhat different. I will be using seL4 and/or Rux as the microkernel (so unlike that of QNX, UX/RT's process server will be a completely separate program). proc and most other first-party components will be mostly written in Rust rather than C, although there will still be a lot of third-party C code. The network stack, disk filesystems, and graphics drivers will be based on the NetBSD rump kernel and/or LKL (which is a "librarified" version of the Linux kernel; I'll probably provide both Linux and NetBSD implementations and allow switching between them and possibly combining them) with Rust glue layers on top. For performance, the disk drivers and disk filesystems will run within the same server (although there will be one disk server per host adapter), and the network stack will also be a single server, much like in QNX (like QNX, UX/RT will mostly avoid intermediary servers and will usually follow a process-per-subsystem architecture rather than a process-per-component one like a lot of other multi-sever OSes, since intermediary servers can hurt performance). As I said before, UX/RT will take file-oriented architecture even further than Plan 9 does. fork() and some thread-related APIs will be pretty much the only APIs implemented as non-file-based primitives. Pretty much the entire POSIX/Linux API will be implemented although most non-file-based system calls will have file-based implementations underneath (for example, getpid() will do a readlink() of /proc/self to get the PID). Even process memory like the process heap and stack will be implemented as files in a per-process memory filesystem (a bit like in Multics) rather than being anonymous like on most other OSes. ioctl() will be a pure library function for compatibility purposes, and will be implemented in terms of read() and write() on a secondary file. Unlike other microkernel-based OSes, UX/RT won't provide any way to use message passing outside of the file-based API. read() and write() will use kernel calls to communicate directly with the process on the other end (unlike some microkernel Unices in which they go through an intermediary server). There will be APIs that expose the underlying transport (message registers for short messages and a shared per-FD buffer for long ones), although they will still operate on file descriptors, and read()/write() and the low-level messaging APIs will all use the same header format so that processes don't have to care which API the process on the other end uses (unlike on QNX where there are a few different incompatible messaging APIs). There will be a new "message special" file type that will preserve message boundaries, similar to SEQPACKET Unix-domain sockets or SCTP (these will be ideal for RPC-type APIs). File descriptors will be implemented as sets of kernel capabilities, meaning that servers won't have to check permissions like they do on QNX. The API for servers will be somewhat socket-like. Each server will listen on a "port" file in a special filesystem internal to the process server, sort of like /mnt on Plan 9 (although it will be possible for servers to export ports within their own filesystems as well). Reads from the port will produce control messages which may transfer file descriptors. Each client file descriptor will have a corresponding file descriptor on the server side, and servers will use a superset of the regular file API to transfer data. Device numbers as such will not exist (the device number field in the stat structure will be a port ID that isn't split into major and minor numbers), and device files will normally be exported directly by their server, rather than residing on a filesystem exported by one driver but being serviced by another as in conventional Unix. However, there will be a sort of similar mechanism, allowing a server to export "firm links" that are like cross-filesystem hard links (similar to in QNX). Per-process namespaces like in Plan 9 will be supported. Unlike in Plan 9, it will be possible for processes with sufficient privileges to mount filesystems in the namespaces of other processes (to allow more flexible scoping of mount points). Multiple mounts on one directory will produce a union like in both QNX and Plan 9. Binding directories as in Plan 9 will also be supported. In addition to the per-process root on / there will also be a global root directory on // into which filesystems are mounted. The per-process name spaces will be constructed by binding directories from // into the / of the process (neither direct mounts under / nor bindings in // will be supported, but bindings between parts of / will of course be supported). The security model will be based on a per-process default-deny ACL (which will be purely in memory; persisting process ACLs will be implemented with an external daemon). It will be possible for ACL entries to explicitly specify permissions, or to use the permissions from the filesystem with (basically) normal Unix semantics. It will also be possible for an entry to be a wildcard allowing access to all files in a directory. Unlike in conventional Unix, there will be no root-only system calls (anything security-sensitive will have a separate device file to which access can be controlled through process ACLs), and running as root will not automatically grant a process full privileges. The suid and sgid bits will have no effect on executables (the ACL management daemon will handle privilege escalation instead). The native API will be mostly compatible with that of Linux, and a purely library-based Linux compatibility layer will be available. The only major thing the Linux compatibility layer specifically won't support will be stuff dealing with logging users in (since it won't be possible to revert to traditional Unix security, and utmp/wtmp won't exist). The package manager will be based on dpkg and apt with hooks to make them work in a functional way somewhat like Nix but using per-process bindings, allowing for multiple environments or universes consisting of different sets of packages (environments will be able to be either native UX/RT or Linux compatibility environments, and it will be possible to create Linux environments that aren't managed by the UX/RT package manager to allow compatibility environments for non-dpkg Linux distributions). The init system will have some features in common with SMF and systemd, but unlike those two, it will be modular, flexible, and lightweight. System initialization such as checking/mounting filesystems and bringing up network interfaces will be script-driven like in traditional init systems, whereas starting daemons will be done with declarative unit files that will be able to call (mostly package-independent) hook scripts to set up the environment for the daemon. Initially I will use X11 as the window system, but I will replace it with a lightweight compositing window server that will export directories providing a low-level DRI-like interface per window. Unlike a lot of other compositing window systems, UX/RT's window system will use X11-style central client-side window management. I was thinking of using a default desktop environment based on GNUstep originally but I'm not completely sure if I'll still do that (a long time ago I had wanted to put together a Mac OS X-like or NeXTStep-like Linux distribution using a GNUstep-based desktop, a DPS-based window server, and something like a fork of mkLinux with a stable module ABI for a kernel, but soon decided I wanted to write a QNX-like OS instead). > > Sockets are awesome but I have to agree with you, they don't "fit". > Seems like they could have been plumbed into the file system somehow. > Yeah, the almost-but-not-quite-file-based nature of the socket API is my biggest complaint about it. UX/RT will support the socket API but it will be implemented on top of the normal file system. > Can't speak to your plan 9 comments other than to say that the fact > that you are looking for provided value gives me hope that you'll get > somewhere. No disrespect to plan 9 intended, but I never saw why it > was important that I moved to plan 9. If you do something and there > is a reason to move there, you could be worse but still go farther. I'd say a major problem with Plan 9 is the way it changes things in incompatible ways that provide little advantage over the traditional Unix way of doing things (for example, instead of errno, libc functions set a pointer to an error string instead, which I don't think provides enough of a benefit to break compatibility). Another problem is that some facilities Plan 9 provides aren't general enough (e.g. the heavy focus on SSI clustering, which never really was widely adopted, or the rather 80s every-window-is-a-terminal window system). UX/RT will try to be compatible with conventional Unices and especially Linux wherever it is reasonable, since lack of applications would significantly hold it back. It will also try to be as general as possible without overcomplicating things. From toby at telegraphics.com.au Sat Mar 25 10:42:47 2017 From: toby at telegraphics.com.au (Toby Thain) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 20:42:47 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170320214858.TIJoR%steffen@sdaoden.eu> <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <73147027-72f9-10d2-5996-4e566b526dcb@telegraphics.com.au> On 2017-03-24 8:02 PM, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Fri, 24 Mar 2017, ron minnich wrote: > >> What do you see that you think could be done differently, given 50 years >> to look back? > > I'd spell "creat" with an "e". > SNERK! From rminnich at gmail.com Sat Mar 25 13:55:34 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 03:55:34 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170324235556.GA29323@naleco.com> References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170324235556.GA29323@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:56 PM Josh Good wrote: > > > Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet > network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a > BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? > > See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc681, section 4j: FILEDES = OPEN( "/DEV/NET/HARV",2 ); People were thinking about it. There was no shortage of people at the time who were struggling to find a way to make the Unix model work for networking (not me, I had no clue; I was just an interested observer). It didn't quite work out and as a result we were left with the non-unix-like socket interface we have today, and a feeling among many of us that we'd missed an opportunity. It's really hard to get this stuff right, and the approach outlined in the RFC is not really what you want. Rob had a nice talk 20+ years ago about the right and wrong way to do this; I can't find it and he can't find it, and I keep hoping it'll appear. It's a shame that Unix did not get a Unix-like model for networking, but maybe it was just too soon. ron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scj at yaccman.com Sat Mar 25 14:52:26 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 21:52:26 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I wasn't very keyed into the networking world at Bell Labs, but I do know there was a lot of suspicion about Ethernet in the Unix group.  The key problem from BTL's point of view, and this problem is still with us today, is that you could not guarantee a minimum bandwidth of connectivity.  At the speeds things were running at that time, this would have made Ethernet impossible for voice, not to mention video. Sandy Fraser's Datakit, which was a time division switch I think, would give you a reliable end-to-end connection (although when you got to the other end, it could still bog down in the other computer).  It was an extremely reliable and easy-to-use system.   Exactly who did what is murky to me, but I seem to recall that Peter Weinberger did something much akin to NFS (I think it eventually morphed into RFS).  I remember Bill Joy visiting the Unix group and seeing it and being very excited.  Story is that he went back to Sun/(Stanford?) and implemented NFS and got it to market at least two years before than.  Also, I think Greg Chesson implemented something like ssh so you could run processes on remote machines. A lot of this work happened for (or was influenced by) the Blit terminal, where you could download a 68000 program from the PDP-11 and run it on the terminal with communications between the terminal and the application on the PDP-11.  There were some very neat demos, and a few real tools, but it was hard to program and debug.   If I have a regret about Unix, I'm sorry that this particular line wasn't pushed harder, since it's now the world we live in (in spades!) and I would have liked to see what those minds came up with to make this easier... Steve On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:56 PM Josh Good wrote: Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? Links: ------ [1] mailto:pepe at naleco.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From random832 at fastmail.com Sat Mar 25 15:01:51 2017 From: random832 at fastmail.com (Random832) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 01:01:51 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324034915.GA23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1490418111.873845.922914640.6B33341A@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017, at 20:41, Andrew Warkentin wrote: > As I said before, UX/RT will take file-oriented architecture even > further than Plan 9 does. fork() and some thread-related APIs will be > pretty much the only APIs implemented as non-file-based primitives. > Pretty much the entire POSIX/Linux API will be implemented although > most non-file-based system calls will have file-based implementations > underneath (for example, getpid() will do a readlink() of /proc/self > to get the PID). Does readlink need to exist as a system call? Maybe it should be possible to open and read a symbolic link - using a flag passed to open, like AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW. From andreww591 at gmail.com Sat Mar 25 22:48:12 2017 From: andreww591 at gmail.com (Andrew Warkentin) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 06:48:12 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <1490418111.873845.922914640.6B33341A@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <20170324034915.GA23802@mcvoy.com> <1490418111.873845.922914640.6B33341A@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: On 3/24/17, Random832 wrote: > > Does readlink need to exist as a system call? Maybe it should be > possible to open and read a symbolic link - using a flag passed to open, > like AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW. > You have a point there. UX/RT will still obviously need to retain the readlink() function (since compatibility with conventional Unix will be a major feature, and it's also convenient to have a single function to get the target of a link), although it could be implemented with a normal read underneath. Same with opendir(), readdir(), and the like, which I was definitely planning on implementing with normal reads (under BSD they seem to already be implemented that way). From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Sat Mar 25 23:48:50 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:48:50 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8DC2E9A1-1AFE-48FE-ACE1-A3BD4A545B68@superglobalmegacorp.com> Ethernet wasn't really usable until switching... And getting off of the thicknet. That said, AT&T had their starlan thing that I've had the misfortune of using. At least the PC had NDIS2 drivers that Windows 95 could use. And of course there was FDDI that was going to take over the LAN, and ATM over the high speed WAN, replacing all the old leased lines T1/E1/J1's. The big thing is that Ethernet doesn't require royalties, and as I mentioned switching greatly reduced the issues with collisions making them point to point on a switch, along with full duplex operation. As soon as Ethernet hit 10gig for a fraction of the cost of OC-128 it was over for ATM. Now we just do mpls and qinq. Can't say I'll miss v35 connectors. On March 25, 2017 12:52:26 PM GMT+08:00, Steve Johnson wrote: > >I wasn't very keyed into the networking world at Bell Labs, but I do >know there was a lot of suspicion about Ethernet in the Unix group. >The >key problem from BTL's point of view, and this problem is still with us >today, is that you could not guarantee a minimum bandwidth of >connectivity. At the speeds things were running at that time, this >would have made Ethernet impossible for voice, not to mention video. > >Sandy Fraser's Datakit, which was a time division switch I think, would >give you a reliable end-to-end connection (although when you got to the >other end, it could still bog down in the other computer). It was an >extremely reliable and easy-to-use system. Exactly who did what is >murky to me, but I seem to recall that Peter Weinberger did something >much akin to NFS (I think it eventually morphed into RFS). I remember >Bill Joy visiting the Unix group and seeing it and being very excited. >Story is that he went back to Sun/(Stanford?) and implemented NFS and >got it to market at least two years before than. Also, I think Greg >Chesson implemented something like ssh so you could run processes on >remote machines. > >A lot of this work happened for (or was influenced by) the Blit >terminal, where you could download a 68000 program from the PDP-11 and >run it on the terminal with communications between the terminal and the >application on the PDP-11. There were some very neat demos, and a few >real tools, but it was hard to program and debug. If I have a regret >about Unix, I'm sorry that this particular line wasn't pushed harder, >since it's now the world we live in (in spades!) and I would have liked >to see what those minds came up with to make this easier... > >Steve > > > > >On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:56 PM Josh Good < pepe at naleco.com > > wrote: > > > > >Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet >network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" >a >BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Sun Mar 26 04:51:22 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 08:51:22 -1000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <009301d2a1c9$cb604c70$6220e550$@ronnatalie.com> <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170324235556.GA29323@naleco.com> Message-ID: I'm traveling so can not offer a good answer at the moment. But pre-BSD networking was the the MIT-Chaosnet code which Ron is alluding. Putting devices names in the UNIX space was done. Why Joy decided to abandon it will never know without asking him. Maybe it was because RIG and Accent (Mach's predecessors) had not and Bill was definitely trying to add features that those systems had. Anyway, when I get back I can try to answer some questions about it. I think it was recently recovered. Side note to Dan - I just quick looked at you post -- it seems excellent, I want some time to digest. Clem On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 5:55 PM, ron minnich wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:56 PM Josh Good wrote: > >> >> >> Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet >> network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a >> BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? >> >> > > See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc681, section 4j: > FILEDES = OPEN( "/DEV/NET/HARV",2 ); > > People were thinking about it. There was no shortage of people at the time > who were struggling to find a way to make the Unix model work for > networking (not me, I had no clue; I was just an interested observer). It > didn't quite work out and as a result we were left with the non-unix-like > socket interface we have today, and a feeling among many of us that we'd > missed an opportunity. > > It's really hard to get this stuff right, and the approach outlined in the > RFC is not really what you want. Rob had a nice talk 20+ years ago about > the right and wrong way to do this; I can't find it and he can't find it, > and I keep hoping it'll appear. > > It's a shame that Unix did not get a Unix-like model for networking, but > maybe it was just too soon. > > ron > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pepe at naleco.com Sun Mar 26 08:26:32 2017 From: pepe at naleco.com (Josh Good) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 23:26:32 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170324235556.GA29323@naleco.com> Message-ID: <20170325222629.GA27153@naleco.com> On 2017 Mar 25, 03:55, ron minnich wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:56 PM Josh Good wrote: > > > Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet > > network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" > > a BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? > > See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc681, section 4j: > FILEDES = OPEN( "/DEV/NET/HARV",2 ); > > People were thinking about it. There was no shortage of people at > the time who were struggling to find a way to make the Unix model > work for networking (not me, I had no clue; I was just an interested > observer). It didn't quite work out and as a result we were left with > the non-unix-like socket interface we have today, and a feeling among > many of us that we'd missed an opportunity. > It's really hard to get this stuff right, and the approach outlined > in the RFC is not really what you want. Rob had a nice talk 20+ years > ago about the right and wrong way to do this; I can't find it and he > can't find it, and I keep hoping it'll appear. > It's a shame that Unix did not get a Unix-like model for networking, > but maybe it was just too soon. Thank you Ron for your very informative answer. I too would like to read that Rob's paper if it ever resurfaces. By the way, that RFC-681 you point to, has these two very interesting paragraphs: RELIABILITY AS OF THIS WRITING, NETWORK UNIX HAS BEEN RUNNING ON A FULL TIME BASIS FOR ABOUT FOUR WEEKS. DURING THAT PERIOD, THERE WERE BETWEEN THREE AND FOUR CRASHES A DAY. THIS IS NOT A VALID INDICATOR BECAUSE MANY OF THE FAILURES WERE DUE TO HARDWARE COMPLICATIONS. MORE RECENTLY THE HARDWARE HAS BEEN RE-CONFIGURED TO IMPROVE RELIABILITY AND THE CRASH RATE HAS BEEN REDUCED TO ONE A DAY WITH A DOWN TIME OF 2-3 MINS. THIS IS EXPECTED TO CONTINUE, BUT THE SAMPLING PERIOD HASNT BEEN LONG ENOUGH FOR ANY DEPENDABLE ANALYSIS. AVAILABILITY ALTHOUGH THE UNIX NETWORK SOFTWARE WAS DEVELOPED WITHOUT ARPA SUPPORT, THE CENTER FOR ADVANCED COMPUTATION IS WILLING TO PROVIDE IT GRATIS TO THE PEOPLE OF THE ARPA COMMUNITY. HOWEVER BELL LABORATORIES MUST BE CONTACTED FOR A LISCENSE TO THE BASE SYSTEM ITSELF. BELL'S POLICY IN THE PAST HAS BEEN TO LISCENSE THE SYSTEM TO UNIVERSITIES FOR A NOMINAL FEE, $150.00, AND UNFORTUNATELY FOR A COST OF $20,000.00 TO "NONUNIVERSITY" INSTITUTIONS. Those are truly delicious historical tidbits about UNIX: how the beginnings were on humble/unreliable hardware (like Linux was on PC hardware in the early '90s), and how as early as 1975 the licensing from big AT&T much differed from the customs in the nascent Arpa/Internet community. The "licenses war" was latent in UNIX from the very beginning. And as a side note: that RFC-681 shows case sensitivity was not a particular cause of concern back in the day. Why then was UNIX, born in those days, so particularly case-sensitive? -- Josh Good From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Mar 26 11:16:16 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:16:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170326011616.560DA18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Random832 > Does readlink need to exist as a system call? Maybe it should be > possible to open and read a symbolic link - using a flag passed to open What difference does it make? The semantics are the same, only the details of the syntax are different. Noel From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Mar 26 11:35:20 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:35:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Ron Minnich > There was no shortage of people at the time who were struggling to find > a way to make the Unix model work for networking ... It didn't quite > work out For good reason. It's only useful to have a file-name _name_ for a thing if... the thing acts like a file - i.e. you can plug that file-name into other places you might use a file-name (e.g. '> {foo}' or 'ed ', etc, etc). There is very little in the world of networking that acts like a file. Yes, you can go all hammer-nail, and use read() and write() to get data back and forth, and think that makes it a file - but it's not. For instance, files, as far as I know, generally don't have timeout semantics. Can the average application that deals with a file, deal reasonably with the fact that sometimes one gets half-way through the 'file' - and things stop working? And that's a _simple_ one. How does a file abstraction match to a multi-cast lossy (i.e. packets may be lost) datagram group? For another major point (and the list goes on, I just can't be bothered to go through it all), there's usually all sorts of other higher-level protocol in there, so only specialized applications can make use of it anyway. Look at HTTP: there's specialized syntax one has to spit out to say what file you want, and the HTML files you get back from that can generally only be usefully used in a browser. Etc, etc. Noel From khm at sciops.net Sun Mar 26 11:45:44 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 18:45:44 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170326014544.GA66751@wopr> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 09:35:20PM -0400, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > For instance, files, as far as I know, generally don't have timeout > semantics. Can the average application that deals with a file, deal reasonably > with the fact that sometimes one gets half-way through the 'file' - and things > stop working? And that's a _simple_ one. The unwillingness to even attempt to solve problems like these in a generalized and consistent manner is a source of constant annoyance to me. Of course it's easier to pretend that never happens on a "real" file, since disks never, ever break. Of course, there are parts of the world that don't make these assumptions, and that's where I've put my career, but the wider IT industry still likes to pretend that storage and networking are unrelated concepts. I've never understood why. khm From rminnich at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 12:49:22 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:49:22 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 6:35 PM Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > > There is very little in the world of networking that acts like a file. Yes, > you can go all hammer-nail, and use read() and write() to get data back and > forth, and think that makes it a file - but it's not. > > The plan 9 networking stack, in use for over 25 years now, begs to disagree with you. The model works wonderfully well in practice and even in theory. To take one part of your note, can file reads time out? Well, yeah. We live in a networked world and anything we can do with anything can time out. But even in a pre-network world, assuming that "file I/O doesn't time out" wasn't even true when -- and especially -- in the days of RK05 disk drives. ron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Sun Mar 26 12:52:07 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 16:52:07 -1000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170325222629.GA27153@naleco.com> References: <20170321202839.GG21805@naleco.com> <20170324001832.GA13511@naleco.com> <20170324002754.GW23802@mcvoy.com> <1490332489.2836059.921835720.2069930C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20170324235556.GA29323@naleco.com> <20170325222629.GA27153@naleco.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Josh Good wrote: > born in > those days, so particularly case-sensitive? > ​About to get on a lane, will try to reply next week but I've always said case-insensitivity is a classic example of bug becoming a feature.​ Most of my friends that worked on development of the DEC OS's agree. It was side effect that was turned into a (bad IMO) feature - but that is a matter of taste. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andreww591 at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 13:01:22 2017 From: andreww591 at gmail.com (Andrew Warkentin) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:01:22 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 3/25/17, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Ron Minnich > > > There was no shortage of people at the time who were struggling to > find > > a way to make the Unix model work for networking ... It didn't quite > > work out > > For good reason. > > It's only useful to have a file-name _name_ for a thing if... the thing > acts > like a file - i.e. you can plug that file-name into other places you might > use > a file-name (e.g. '> {foo}' or 'ed ', etc, etc). > > There is very little in the world of networking that acts like a file. Yes, > you can go all hammer-nail, and use read() and write() to get data back and > forth, and think that makes it a file - but it's not. > > For instance, files, as far as I know, generally don't have timeout > semantics. Can the average application that deals with a file, deal > reasonably > with the fact that sometimes one gets half-way through the 'file' - and > things > stop working? And that's a _simple_ one. How does a file abstraction > match > to a multi-cast lossy (i.e. packets may be lost) datagram group? > > For another major point (and the list goes on, I just can't be bothered to > go > through it all), there's usually all sorts of other higher-level protocol > in > there, so only specialized applications can make use of it anyway. Look at > HTTP: there's specialized syntax one has to spit out to say what file you > want, and the HTML files you get back from that can generally only be > usefully > used in a browser. > Just because an OS provides unstructured files as its primary or only IPC primitive doesn't mean that you can't run a structured protocol over them (after all, the IP protocol suite provides only unstructured transports - byte streams or unconnected datagrams - to the application layer). That's what I'm planning to do in UX/RT. Services that don't fit into an unstructured file model will run a structured protocol over the file transport (UX/RT will provide a message-boundary-preserving special file type specifically because it's easier to implement RPC-like and other structured protocols over such a transport). And just because such services will be harder to use with tools like ed, cat, and the like doesn't mean there aren't other advantages to having them in the filesystem. In UX/RT, the main advantages of the file-oriented architecture for services using structured protocols will be the unified security model and the ease of overriding such services with filter servers (e.g. UX/RT's fakeroot will be a pure server rather than an unreliable LD_PRELOAD hack, and in a similar vein, jails in UX/RT will be able to virtualize as much or as little as desired rather than being pretty much all-or-nothing like in a lot of other OSes). From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Mar 26 13:11:22 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 23:11:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> I can't wait to see how you all fit remote procedure calls into a file paradigm. Noel From andreww591 at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 13:17:50 2017 From: andreww591 at gmail.com (Andrew Warkentin) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:17:50 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 3/25/17, Noel Chiappa wrote: > I can't wait to see how you all fit remote procedure calls into a file > paradigm. > > Noel > There are lots of RPC protocols that run over TCP which is for the most part an unstructured byte stream, so there's no reason why RPC couldn't be run over a local file transport in a similar way (especially with one that preserves message boundaries, unlike TCP, which requires application-layer protocols to implement their own framing). From khm at sciops.net Sun Mar 26 13:21:34 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 20:21:34 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20170326032134.GB66751@wopr> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:11:22PM -0400, Noel Chiappa wrote: > I can't wait to see how you all fit remote procedure calls into a file > paradigm. By making the file endpoints available to the remote side and doing a regular procedure call. I'm still fuzzy on why "read" and "write" are somehow too specialized for you, but this is rapidly getting off-topic for TUHS, so if you want some pointers on where to read more about this stuff I guess you can email me off-list. khm From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Sun Mar 26 13:32:59 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 23:32:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Andrew Warkentin > especially with one that preserves message boundaries Records in the file-system! How very Unix-like! Noel From crossd at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 13:49:43 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 23:49:43 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:11 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > I can't wait to see how you all fit remote procedure calls into a file > paradigm. > I don't mean to sound flippant, but isn't that exactly what every RPC protocol implemented on top of sockets has done for the last 30 or so years? I feel like saying otherwise conflates two tangentially related things: namespaces to name IPC endpoints in a "file" like manner, and an API to deal with file-like objects as a byte stream on which one uses operations like read and write. Certainly there is no REASON that sendto() et al can't be implemented in terms of write(), but arguably the plethora of such as *system calls* stems from the inability to name them in a way accessible to open(). The plan9 model is imperfect but serves as the existence proof that it *can* be done. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 13:51:04 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 23:51:04 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Andrew Warkentin > > > especially with one that preserves message boundaries > > Records in the file-system! How very Unix-like! > No. Records implemented at a layer above that of the bare system calls (or, in the case of datagram-oriented protocols, coordinated between two layers sandwiching read()/write()). That seems very Unix-like to me: consider ndbm, Berkeley DB, etc. The point is that the interface as exposed by the kernel doesn't care. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rminnich at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 13:55:05 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 03:55:05 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 8:11 PM Noel Chiappa wrote: > I can't wait to see how you all fit remote procedure calls into a file > paradigm. > > https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/sec02/cox/cox.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From imp at bsdimp.com Sun Mar 26 14:31:57 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2017 22:31:57 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Andrew Warkentin > > > especially with one that preserves message boundaries > > Records in the file-system! How very Unix-like! Multiple levels of protocols layered on top simpler primitives. Unheard of in Unix. Warner From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Mar 26 14:45:48 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:45:48 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] And ... back to Unix Heritage, please Message-ID: <20170326044548.GA8887@minnie.tuhs.org> Hi all, I don't mind a bit of topic drift but getting into generic OS design is a bit too far off-topic for a list based on Unix Heritage. So, back on topic please! Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From downing.nick at gmail.com Sun Mar 26 14:46:40 2017 From: downing.nick at gmail.com (Nick Downing) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:46:40 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170326013520.86B8E18C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20170326014544.GA66751@wopr> Message-ID: I think Noel put it very well, when I saw the read()/write() vs recvfrom()/sendto() stuff mentioned earlier I was going to say that part of the contract of read()/write() is that they are stream oriented thus things like short reads and writes should behave in a predictable way and have the expected recovery semantics. So having it be boundary preserving or having a header on the data would in my view make it not read()/write() even if the new call can be overlaid on read()/write() at the ABI level. I think the contract of a syscall is an important part of its semantics even if it may be an "unwritten rule". However, Noel said it better: If it's not file-like then a file-like interface may not be appropriate. Having said that, Kurt raises an equally valid point which is that the "every file is on a fast locally attached harddisk" traditional unix approach has serious problems. Not that I mind the simplicity: contemporary systems had seriously arcane file abstractions that made file I/O useless to all but the most experienced developer. I come from a microcomputer background and I am thinking of Apple II DOS 3.3, CP/M 2.2 and its FCB based interface and MSDOS 1.x (same). When MSDOS 2.x came along with its Xenix-subset file API it was seriously a revelation to me and others. Microcomputers aside, my understanding is IBM 360/370 and contemporary DEC OS's were also complicated to use, with record based I/O etc. So it's hard to criticize unix's model, but on the other hand the lack of any nonblocking file I/O and the contract against short reads/writes (but only for actual files) and the lack of proper error reporting or recovery due to the ASSUMPTION of a write back cache, whether or not one is actually used in practice... makes the system seriously unscaleable, in particular as Kurt points out, the system is forced to try to hide the network socket-like characteristics of files that are either on slow DMA or PIO/interrupt based devices (think about a harddisk attached by serial port, something that I actually encountered on a certain cash register model and had to develop for back in the day), or an NFS based file, or maybe a file on a SAN accessed by iSCSI, etc. Luckily I think there is an easy fix, have the OS export a more socket-like interface to files and provide a userspace compatibility library to do things like detecting short reads/writes and retrying them, and/or blocking while a slow read or write executes. It woukd be slightly tricky getting the EINTR semantics correct if the second or subsequent call of a multipart read or write was interrupted, but I think possible. On the other hand I would not want to change the sockets API one bit, it is perfect. (Controversial I know, I discussed this in detail in a recent post). Nick On Mar 26, 2017 12:46 PM, "Kurt H Maier" wrote: On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 09:35:20PM -0400, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > For instance, files, as far as I know, generally don't have timeout > semantics. Can the average application that deals with a file, deal reasonably > with the fact that sometimes one gets half-way through the 'file' - and things > stop working? And that's a _simple_ one. The unwillingness to even attempt to solve problems like these in a generalized and consistent manner is a source of constant annoyance to me. Of course it's easier to pretend that never happens on a "real" file, since disks never, ever break. Of course, there are parts of the world that don't make these assumptions, and that's where I've put my career, but the wider IT industry still likes to pretend that storage and networking are unrelated concepts. I've never understood why. khm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ron at ronnatalie.com Sun Mar 26 21:31:30 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 07:31:30 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: References: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <001601d2a624$8479bd50$8d6d37f0$@ronnatalie.com> Maintaining records iwas far from unheard of at the time networking showed up in UNIX. Think about how the UNIX tape driver works. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lyndon at orthanc.ca Mon Mar 27 02:26:00 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 09:26:00 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <072F8CE1-5E54-46E5-BFAC-65952330B863@orthanc.ca> > On Mar 25, 2017, at 8:11 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > I can't wait to see how you all fit remote procedure calls into a file > paradigm. For a simple example, see http://plan9.bell-labs.com/magic/man2html/4/ftpfs . This uses the usual filesystem interface to the network stack to manage the underlying TCP connections. The FTP protocol is implemented inside the ftpfs fileserver process which itself exports a directory into the filesystem namespace. Fileservers are the natural representation of RPC protocols in plan9, and they work quite well. Of course, not everything will naturally map to a filesystem namespace. But a surprisingly large number of things will, given some thought to the problem. http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/names.pdf is a must-read to appreciate the nuances of how this works. --lyndon P.S. A fun example of the simplicity of the plan9 network API is this implementation of rlogin: http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/contrib/rsc/rlogin From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 27 02:40:30 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 09:40:30 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <072F8CE1-5E54-46E5-BFAC-65952330B863@orthanc.ca> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <072F8CE1-5E54-46E5-BFAC-65952330B863@orthanc.ca> Message-ID: <20170326164030.GF20717@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 09:26:00AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > P.S. A fun example of the simplicity of the > plan9 network API is this implementation of rlogin: > http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/contrib/rsc/rlogin So while that is really neat, I personally think that's part of why Plan 9 didn't take off. It's too clever, at least for me. I know the rlogin code pretty well and if you showed me that code and asked me what it was, without the comments, I don't think I would have put it together. On the other hand, show me the C code and I'd be able to figure it out. It's perhaps because I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I really like how blindingly obvious a lot of the original Unix code was. Not saying it was all that way, but a ton of it was sort of what you would imagine it to be before you saw it. Which means I understood it and could bugfix it. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From steve at quintile.net Mon Mar 27 04:35:34 2017 From: steve at quintile.net (Steve Simon) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 19:35:34 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326164030.GF20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <072F8CE1-5E54-46E5-BFAC-65952330B863@orthanc.ca> <20170326164030.GF20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <18FF4A0F-64AA-45D2-A0F3-3919C472B967@quintile.net> > On 26 Mar 2017, at 17:40, Larry McVoy wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 09:26:00AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >> P.S. A fun example of the simplicity of the >> plan9 network API is this implementation of rlogin: >> http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/contrib/rsc/rlogin > > So while that is really neat, I personally think that's part of why Plan 9 > didn't take off. It's too clever, at least for me. I know the rlogin > code pretty well and if you showed me that code and asked me what it was, > without the comments, I don't think I would have put it together. On > the other hand, show me the C code and I'd be able to figure it out. > > It's perhaps because I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I really > like how blindingly obvious a lot of the original Unix code was. Not saying > it was all that way, but a ton of it was sort of what you would imagine it > to be before you saw it. Which means I understood it and could bugfix it. > -- > --- > Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm perhaps that was a rather extreme example, you can write rlogin in shell script, but con(1) is more typical - in C. http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/plan9/sys/src/cmd/con/con.c perhaps this is closer to what you would expect. The network stuff is all wrapped up in the dial(2) library func, but note rawon and rawoff are pretty neat. -Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 27 05:49:30 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:49:30 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <01db01d2a32a$1eae0280$5c0a0780$@ronnatalie.com> References: <01db01d2a32a$1eae0280$5c0a0780$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > Ah yes, the machine with only 8 instructions (of course not counting all > the multiplexing of OPR). > > I was always fond of TAD. Not particularly reentrant version of > subroutine linkage. Yep, it could add, but not subtract. Dammit, but I'm trying to think of the CADET acronym; it went something like "Can't Add, Didn't Even Try". And as for subroutine calls on the -8, let's not go there... As I dimly recall, it planted the return address into the first word of the called routine and jumped to the second instruction; to return, you did an indirect jump to the first word. Recursion? What was that? Somewhere out there (tm), is a huge list of computer acronyms (and yes, I know about "Instant Befuddled Mind", and "I've Been Misled" etc). -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From akosela at andykosela.com Mon Mar 27 06:05:43 2017 From: akosela at andykosela.com (Andy Kosela) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:05:43 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326164030.GF20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170326031122.E18D418C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <072F8CE1-5E54-46E5-BFAC-65952330B863@orthanc.ca> <20170326164030.GF20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Sunday, March 26, 2017, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 09:26:00AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > P.S. A fun example of the simplicity of the > > plan9 network API is this implementation of rlogin: > > http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/contrib/rsc/rlogin > > So while that is really neat, I personally think that's part of why Plan 9 > didn't take off. It's too clever, at least for me. I know the rlogin > code pretty well and if you showed me that code and asked me what it was, > without the comments, I don't think I would have put it together. On > the other hand, show me the C code and I'd be able to figure it out. > > It's perhaps because I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I really > like how blindingly obvious a lot of the original Unix code was. Not > saying > it was all that way, but a ton of it was sort of what you would imagine it > to be before you saw it. Which means I understood it and could bugfix it. > > A lot of original UNIX code was simple, but we ended up with 272 lines of bloat in echo.c[1]. That bloat started to creep in already in the beginning when Rob Pike formulated his famous presentation on cat(1)[2]. I also think that sockets implementation was the turning point. Plan 9 was probably the last truly dedicated effort to keep it simple using the UNIX way of doing things. I much prefer reading its code than GNU or FreeBSD. I think the world really needs a Unix operating system which is as simple and elegant as Plan 9. [1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/tree/src/echo.c [2] http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/unix_prog_design.pdf --Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paul.winalski at gmail.com Mon Mar 27 06:11:30 2017 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 16:11:30 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: <01db01d2a32a$1eae0280$5c0a0780$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On 3/26/17, Dave Horsfall wrote [regarding the PDP-8]: > Yep, it could add, but not subtract. Dammit, but I'm trying to think of > the CADET acronym; it went something like "Can't Add, Didn't Even Try". > CADET was the official IBM internal development code name for the 1620, designed to be a low cost computer for the scientific marketplace. Part of the reduced cost was attained by abandoning the traditional ALU circuitry. Instead the 1620 did arithmetic by table lookup. The joke was made that CADET stood for "Can't Add, Doesn't Even Try", and that interpretation stuck and became popular with the machine's user community. -Paul W. From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 27 08:06:37 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:06:37 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <001601d2a624$8479bd50$8d6d37f0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <001601d2a624$8479bd50$8d6d37f0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <20170326220637.GA9482@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 07:31:30AM -0400, Ron Natalie wrote: > Maintaining records iwas far from unheard of at the time networking showed up in UNIX. Think about how the UNIX tape driver works. I think that unix "records" are just a struct in binary in the file. That's a little different (a lot different?) than what most operating systems mean by records. Unless I'm mistaken. From grog at lemis.com Mon Mar 27 08:20:56 2017 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:20:56 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: <01db01d2a32a$1eae0280$5c0a0780$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <20170326222056.GD81001@eureka.lemis.com> On Sunday, 26 March 2017 at 16:11:30 -0400, Paul Winalski wrote: > On 3/26/17, Dave Horsfall wrote [regarding the PDP-8]: >> Yep, it could add, but not subtract. Dammit, but I'm trying to think of >> the CADET acronym; it went something like "Can't Add, Didn't Even Try". >> > CADET was the official IBM internal development code name for the > 1620, designed to be a low cost computer for the scientific > marketplace. Part of the reduced cost was attained by abandoning the > traditional ALU circuitry. Instead the 1620 did arithmetic by table > lookup. The joke was made that CADET stood for "Can't Add, Doesn't > Even Try", and that interpretation stuck and became popular with the > machine's user community. I didn't know it was an official name of a project, and I thought it referred to the 1401, the predecessor of the 1620. To be fair, they did arithmetic one byte at a time, so a table lookup made sense. Greg -- Sent from my desktop computer. Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key. See complete headers for address and phone numbers. This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 163 bytes Desc: not available URL: From grog at lemis.com Mon Mar 27 08:25:38 2017 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:25:38 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: <01db01d2a32a$1eae0280$5c0a0780$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: <20170326222538.GE81001@eureka.lemis.com> On Monday, 27 March 2017 at 6:49:30 +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: > > And as for subroutine calls on the -8, let's not go there... As I dimly > recall, it planted the return address into the first word of the called > routine and jumped to the second instruction; to return, you did an > indirect jump to the first word. Recursion? What was that? This was fairly typical of the day. I've used other machines (UNIVAC, Control Data) that did the same. Later models added a second call method that stored the return address in a register instead, only marginally easier for recursion. At Uni I was given a relatively simple task to do in PDP-8 assembler: a triple precision routine (36 bits!) to clip a value to ensure it stayed between two limits. Simple, eh? Not on the PDP-8. Three parameters, each three words long. only one register, no index registers. I didn't finish it. Revisiting now, I still don't know how to do it elegantly. How *did* the PDP-8 pass parameters? Greg -- Sent from my desktop computer. Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key. See complete headers for address and phone numbers. This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 163 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Mon Mar 27 09:29:37 2017 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:29:37 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <20170326220637.GA9482@mcvoy.com> References: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <001601d2a624$8479bd50$8d6d37f0$@ronnatalie.com> <20170326220637.GA9482@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1490570977.58d84ee184836@www.paradise.net.nz> To give an example of what one other operating system means by records, I point you in the direction of: http://www.conceptsolutionsbc.com/mvs-articles/197-mvs-file-system "Windows and *NIX file systems are based on hierarchical directory structure. Basically, you have one root directory and you can create directories (sometimes called folders) or files under that root directory. Mainframe disk files are very different to this hierarchical approach." "MVS datasets always have record lengths. MVS access methods read and write records in physical blocks. A block is made up of one or more logical record. This diagram shows the block sizes and difference between fixed block and variable block data sets. The access method is responsible for splitting the block into logical records and passing the record to the program. Although a program can handle breaking the blocks into logical records, this task is normally done by the access method. A record length can be fixed or variable." If you're familiar with the Network and Hierarchical Database systems from practical experience or from working through non-relational dbms books, this all looks very familiar. Essentially such file systems are hierarchical dbmses. As should be expected from MVS's derivation from batch systems. I don't know anything about the DEC VAX VMS file system. I was meaning to learn a few years ago, but other things happened ... FWVLIW Wesley Parish Quoting Larry McVoy : > On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 07:31:30AM -0400, Ron Natalie wrote: > > Maintaining records iwas far from unheard of at the time networking > showed up in UNIX. Think about how the UNIX tape driver works. > > I think that unix "records" are just a struct in binary in the file. > That's a > little different (a lot different?) than what most operating systems > mean by > records. Unless I'm mistaken. > "I have supposed that he who buys a Method means to learn it." - Ferdinand Sor, Method for Guitar "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on." -- Samuel Goldwyn From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 27 10:31:05 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 20:31:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! Message-ID: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Dave Horsfall > And as for subroutine calls on the -8, let's not go there... As I dimly > recall, it planted the return address into the first word of the called > routine and jumped to the second instruction; to return, you did an > indirect jump to the first word. That do be correct. That style of subroutine call goes back a _long_ way. IIRC, Whirlwind used that kind of linkage (alas, I've misplaced my copy of the Whirlwind instruction manual, sigh - a real tresure). ISTVR there was something about the way Whirlwind did it that made it clear how it came to be the way it was - IIRC, the last instruction in the subroutine was normally a 'jump to literal' (i.e. a constant, in the instruction), and the Whirlwind 'jump to subroutine' stored the return address in a register; there was a special instruction (normally the first one in any subroutine) that stored the low-order N bits of that register in the literal field of the last instruction: i.e. self-modifying code. The PDP-6 (of which the PDP-10 was a clone) was on the border of that period; it had both types of subroutine linkage (store the return in the destination, and jump to dest+1; and also push the return on the stack). Noel From krewat at kilonet.net Mon Mar 27 10:37:35 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 20:37:35 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Um. More like a natural progression. Like 8086->80186->80286->80386->80486->... On 3/26/2017 8:31 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > The PDP-6 (of which the PDP-10 was a clone) From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 27 11:24:40 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:24:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! Message-ID: <20170327012440.B11AC18C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Arthur Krewat >> The PDP-6 (of which the PDP-10 was a clone) > Um. More like a natural progression. > Like 8086->80186->80286->80386->80486->... No, the PDP-6 and PDP-10 have identical instruction sets, and in general, a program that will run on one, will run on the other. See "decsystem10 System Reference Manual" (DEC-10-XSRMA-A=D", pg. 2-72., which provides a 7-instruction code fragment which allows a program to work out if it's running on a PDP-6, a KA10, or a KI10. The KA10 is a re-implementation (using mostly B-series Flip Chips) of the PDP-6 (which was built out of System Modules - the predecessor to Flip Chips). Noel From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Mon Mar 27 11:44:53 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:44:53 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] > I really Message-ID: <201703270144.v2R1irxm015559@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > like how blindingly obvious a lot of the original Unix code was > ... sort of what you would imagine it to be before you saw it. That's a facet of Thompson's genius--code so clean and right that, having seen it, one cannot imagine it otherwise. Odds are, though, that the same program from another hand would not have the same aura of inevitability. As Erdos would say of a particularly elegant proof, "It comes from the Book," i.e. had divine inspiration. Doug From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Mar 27 12:47:17 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 19:47:17 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] > I really In-Reply-To: <201703270144.v2R1irxm015559@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703270144.v2R1irxm015559@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170327024717.GP20717@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 09:44:53PM -0400, Doug McIlroy wrote: > > like how blindingly obvious a lot of the original Unix code was > > ... sort of what you would imagine it to be before you saw it. > > That's a facet of Thompson's genius--code so clean and right that, > having seen it, one cannot imagine it otherwise. Odds are, though, > that the same program from another hand would not have the same > aura of inevitability. As Erdos would say of a particularly elegant > proof, "It comes from the Book," i.e. had divine inspiration. So Doug, It's one of the great joys of my life that I even get to have this coversation with you. I believe that my initial respect for you came from reading release notes you had written, that may or may not be correct, my memory is not what it once was. I know that I ran into your work in the mid 1980's when I was an undergrad just learning Unix. You guys were the people I looked up to, wanted to emulate, if I had been younger I would have fought my way into Bell Labs to be with you. If I could, not at all clear that I was good enough. I may not have been good enough to be with you guys, but I'm definitely good enough to see that code, see how clean it is. And in my career, when I was in charge, I pushed for code equally as clear. I'll not waste more of your time, just wanted to say how incredibly great it is to be able to have this exchange of thoughts. --lm From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Mon Mar 27 13:36:42 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 23:36:42 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? Message-ID: <201703270336.v2R3ag6S016369@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Nudging the thread back twoard Unix history: > I really > like how blindingly obvious a lot of the original Unix code was. Not saying > it was all that way, but a ton of it was sort of what you would imagine it > to be before you saw it. Which means I understood it and could bugfix it. That's an important aspect of Thompson's genius--code so clean and right that, having seen it, one cannot imagine it otherwise. But the odds are that the same program from another hand would not have the same ring of inevitability. As Erdos was wont to say of an elegant proof, "It comes From dave at horsfall.org Mon Mar 27 14:20:14 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:20:14 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Were all of you.. Hippies? In-Reply-To: <001601d2a624$8479bd50$8d6d37f0$@ronnatalie.com> References: <20170326033259.E473018C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <001601d2a624$8479bd50$8d6d37f0$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Ron Natalie wrote: > Think about how the UNIX tape driver works. I'd rather not, if you don't mind... That thing was *ugly* (and we had two TU-10s on our TM-11), but if you wanted to read a 7-track tape then you had to courier it to Sydney University. I don't remember how many times I rewrote that driver. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From tfb at tfeb.org Mon Mar 27 22:05:02 2017 From: tfb at tfeb.org (Tim Bradshaw) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:05:02 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <7218A080-D70A-4569-862B-DE23FDFE5857@tfeb.org> On 27 Mar 2017, at 01:31, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > That style of subroutine call goes back a _long_ way. IIRC, Whirlwind used > that kind of linkage (alas, I've misplaced my copy of the Whirlwind > instruction manual, sigh - a real tresure). This is how subroutines worked on EDSAC. It might go back further than this, but it can't go back much further. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Mar 27 22:41:47 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:41:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] > I really Message-ID: <20170327124147.7225318C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Doug McIlroy > As Erdos would say of a particularly elegant proof, "It comes from the > Book," i.e. had divine inspiration. Just to clarify, Erdos felt that a deity (whom he referred to as the 'Supreme Facist') was unlikly to exist; his use of such concepts was just a figure of speech. 'The Book' was sort of a Platonic Ideal. Nice concept, though! Noel From dot at dotat.at Mon Mar 27 23:35:09 2017 From: dot at dotat.at (Tony Finch) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:35:09 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <7218A080-D70A-4569-862B-DE23FDFE5857@tfeb.org> References: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <7218A080-D70A-4569-862B-DE23FDFE5857@tfeb.org> Message-ID: Tim Bradshaw wrote: > > This is how subroutines worked on EDSAC. It might go back further than > this, but it can't go back much further. I found this rather good survey of early subroutine linkage: https://people.cs.clemson.edu/~mark/subroutines.html Turing designed a stack-based linkage for the ACE, a few years before Wheeler invented the EDSAC subroutine linkage. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode Irish Sea: East, veering south later, 4 or 5. Smooth or slight, occasionally moderate later in south. Showers later. Good. From toby at telegraphics.com.au Mon Mar 27 23:45:37 2017 From: toby at telegraphics.com.au (Toby Thain) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:45:37 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Subroutine calling conventions - was Re: Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 2017-03-26 8:31 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Dave Horsfall > > > And as for subroutine calls on the -8, let's not go there... As I dimly > > recall, it planted the return address into the first word of the called > > routine and jumped to the second instruction; to return, you did an > > indirect jump to the first word. > > That do be correct. > > That style of subroutine call goes back a _long_ way. IIRC, Whirlwind used > that kind of linkage (alas, I've misplaced my copy of the Whirlwind > instruction manual, sigh - a real tresure). This link arrived in my twitter feed this morning. https://people.cs.clemson.edu/~mark/subroutines.html --T > > ISTVR there was something about the way Whirlwind did it that made it clear > how it came to be the way it was - IIRC, the last instruction in the > subroutine was normally a 'jump to literal' (i.e. a constant, in the > instruction), and the Whirlwind 'jump to subroutine' stored the return address > in a register; there was a special instruction (normally the first one in any > subroutine) that stored the low-order N bits of that register in the literal > field of the last instruction: i.e. self-modifying code. > > The PDP-6 (of which the PDP-10 was a clone) was on the border of that period; > it had both types of subroutine linkage (store the return in the destination, > and jump to dest+1; and also push the return on the stack). > > Noel > From krewat at kilonet.net Tue Mar 28 00:07:50 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:07:50 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <20170327012440.B11AC18C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170327012440.B11AC18C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <604a8a43-876d-20d7-e1df-41c7c5dd9c22@kilonet.net> And how is that different than the Intel line of CPU's? Backward compatibility, while adding features as it progressed. The KA10, KI10, KL10, KS10 all added something to the mix that their predecessors did not have. To call something a "clone" infers a second party making as close of a copy as possible to the original. The KA10 was not a "clone" of a PDP-6. http://www.ultimate.com/phil/pdp10/pdp6-vs-ka10 On 3/26/2017 9:24 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Arthur Krewat > > >> The PDP-6 (of which the PDP-10 was a clone) > > > Um. More like a natural progression. > > Like 8086->80186->80286->80386->80486->... > > No, the PDP-6 and PDP-10 have identical instruction sets, and in general, a > program that will run on one, will run on the other. See "decsystem10 System > Reference Manual" (DEC-10-XSRMA-A=D", pg. 2-72., which provides a 7-instruction > code fragment which allows a program to work out if it's running on a PDP-6, a > KA10, or a KI10. > > The KA10 is a re-implementation (using mostly B-series Flip Chips) of the > PDP-6 (which was built out of System Modules - the predecessor to Flip Chips). > > Noel > From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 28 06:24:58 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:24:58 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix Message-ID: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (“ALU-USA”), on behalf of itself and Nokia Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that it will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative works of Research Unix®1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not (i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property rights (including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, (iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any rights for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories will furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, and make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not limited to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. Cheers, Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 28 06:28:53 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:28:53 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Wonderful news... Thank you extended to all involved. Clem On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, > Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at > https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/ > 20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf > > Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 > Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (“ALU-USA”), on behalf of itself and Nokia > Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that it > will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial > copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative > works of Research Unix®1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not > (i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property rights > (including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their > affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, > or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, > (iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any rights > for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories will > furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, and > make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not limited > to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and > 10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or that > Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. > > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. > > Cheers, Warren > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 28 06:43:54 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:43:54 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:24:58AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. They are now in four subdirectories at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/ Here is an (incomplete, I'm sure) list of people who have been involved with the lobbying for the release of these editions of Unix: Dennis Ritchie Ken Thompson Doug McIlroy Brian Kernighan Rob Pike Russ Cox Norman Wilson Peter Salus Martin Carroll Martin in particular, through his persistance, finally got the legal bods at Alcatel-Lucent to agree to not assert their copyright rights. Cheers, Warren P.S All I did was nag people and set up a mailing list for them :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From imp at bsdimp.com Tue Mar 28 07:07:15 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:07:15 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, > Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at > https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf > > Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 > Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (“ALU-USA”), on behalf of itself and Nokia > Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that it > will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial > copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative > works of Research Unix®1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not > (i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property rights > (including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their > affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, > or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, > (iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any rights > for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories will > furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, and > make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not limited > to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and > 10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or that > Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. > > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. Excellent news. While short of fully open-sourcing (since some open source code winds up in commercial applications), it will be available for reference at least. Warner From imp at bsdimp.com Tue Mar 28 07:11:54 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:11:54 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Warren Toomey wrote: > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. Can you characterize what the 3rd-party material might be? Warner From tersmi1 at gmail.com Tue Mar 28 07:37:39 2017 From: tersmi1 at gmail.com (Terry Smith) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:37:39 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <7218A080-D70A-4569-862B-DE23FDFE5857@tfeb.org> References: <20170327003105.B535018C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <7218A080-D70A-4569-862B-DE23FDFE5857@tfeb.org> Message-ID: <6781485c-dd44-8ee9-2b89-c260d7ec4a88@gmail.com> We had a PDP 8E and an 8I at Humber College back in the day. I used to play chess against Chekmo2 on it on paper tape. On 2017-03-27 08:05 AM, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > On 27 Mar 2017, at 01:31, Noel Chiappa wrote: >> >> That style of subroutine call goes back a _long_ way. IIRC, Whirlwind used >> that kind of linkage (alas, I've misplaced my copy of the Whirlwind >> instruction manual, sigh - a real tresure). > This is how subroutines worked on EDSAC. It might go back further than this, but it can't go back much further.. > From cym224 at gmail.com Tue Mar 28 07:45:12 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:45:12 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On 27 March 2017 at 16:24, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, > Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at > https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf Could you please place a ocpy of this wonderful statement in the archives (for local future reference)? N. From cym224 at gmail.com Tue Mar 28 07:50:40 2017 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:50:40 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] > I really In-Reply-To: <20170327124147.7225318C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170327124147.7225318C085@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 27 March 2017 at 08:41, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Doug McIlroy > > > As Erdos would say of a particularly elegant proof, "It comes from the > > Book," i.e. had divine inspiration. > > Just to clarify, Erdos felt that a deity (whom he referred to as the 'Supreme > Facist') was unlikly to exist; his use of such concepts was just a figure of > speech. 'The Book' was sort of a Platonic Ideal. Nice concept, though! http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783662442043 N. From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Mar 28 07:51:47 2017 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:51:47 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170327215147.GB27599@minnie.tuhs.org> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 03:11:54PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. > > Can you characterize what the 3rd-party material might be? Me personally, no. But there are others on the list who can help do this. Hopefully they will chime in! Warren -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: From khm at sciops.net Tue Mar 28 08:18:12 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:18:12 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170327221812.GA36337@wopr> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:43:54AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > Dennis Ritchie > Ken Thompson > Doug McIlroy > Brian Kernighan > Rob Pike > Russ Cox > Norman Wilson > Peter Salus > Martin Carroll Thank you all for doing this. khm From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Tue Mar 28 08:22:18 2017 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:22:18 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <6ff02b9e-11a2-da7d-8075-9570e21ec9ab@tnetconsulting.net> On 03/27/2017 03:45 PM, Nemo wrote: > Could you please place a ocpy of this wonderful statement in the > archives (for local future reference)? I think it would be neat to leverage Apache's mod_autoindex HeaderName directive to include the text in the top header of the /Archive/Distributions/Research page. I.e. copy the contents of the PDF into a text (or HTML) file and have it above the directory listing. You can do similar with the ReadmeName for the footer below the directory listing. -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3717 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 28 01:43:05 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, > Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at > https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf > > Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 > Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (?ALU-USA?), on behalf of itself and Nokia > Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that it > will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial > copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative > works of Research Unix?1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not > (i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property rights > (including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their > affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, > or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, > (iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any rights > for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories will > furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, and > make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not limited > to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and > 10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or that > Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. > > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. > > Cheers, Warren > Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From bqt at update.uu.se Tue Mar 28 09:30:06 2017 From: bqt at update.uu.se (Johnny Billquist) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 01:30:06 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0df17a82-af22-69b3-912e-88f3a4d51169@update.uu.se> On 2017-03-27 04:00, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Monday, 27 March 2017 at 6:49:30 +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >> And as for subroutine calls on the -8, let's not go there... As I dimly >> recall, it planted the return address into the first word of the called >> routine and jumped to the second instruction; to return, you did an >> indirect jump to the first word. Recursion? What was that? > This was fairly typical of the day. I've used other machines (UNIVAC, > Control Data) that did the same. Later models added a second call > method that stored the return address in a register instead, only > marginally easier for recursion. > > At Uni I was given a relatively simple task to do in PDP-8 assembler: > a triple precision routine (36 bits!) to clip a value to ensure it > stayed between two limits. Simple, eh? Not on the PDP-8. Three > parameters, each three words long. only one register, no index > registers. I didn't finish it. Revisiting now, I still don't know > how to do it elegantly. How *did* the PDP-8 pass parameters? This is probably extremely off-topic, so I'll keep it short. This is actually very simple and straight forward on a PDP-8, but it might seem strange to people used to todays computers. Essentially, you pass parameters in memory, as a part of the code stream. Also, the PDP-8 certainly do have index registers. The first thing one must do is stop thinking of the AC as a register. The accumulator is the accumulator. Memory is registers. Some memory locations autoincrement when used indirectly, they are called index registers. That said, then. A simple example of a routine passing two parameters (well, three): First the calling: CLA TAD (42 / Setup AC with the value 42. JMS COUNT BUFPTR BUFSIZ . / Next instruction executed, with AC holding number of matching words in buffer. . Now, this routine is expected to count the number of occurances of a specific word in a memory buffer with a specific size. At calling, AC will contain the word to search for, while the address following the JMS holds the address, and the following address holds the size. The routine: COUNT, 0 CIA DCA CHR / Save the negative of the word to search for. CMA TAD I COUNT DCA PTR / Setup pointer to the address before the buffer. ISZ COUNT / Point to next argument. TAD I COUNT CIA DCA CNT / Save negative value of size. DCA RESULT / Clear out result counter. LOOP, TAD I PTR / Get next word in buffer. TAD CHR / Compare to searched for word. SNA / Skip if they are not equal. ISZ RESULT / Equal. Increment result counter. ISZ CNT / Increment loop counter. JMP LOOP / Repeat unless end of buffer. CLA / All done. Get result. TAD RESULT JMP I COUNT / Done. PTR=10 CNT=20 CHR=21 RESULT=22 Addresses 10-17 are the index registers, so the TAD I PTR instruction will autoincrement the pointer everytime, and the increment happens before the defer, which is why the initial value should be one less than the buffer pointer. Hopefully this gives enough of an idea, but unless you know the PDP-8 well, you might be a little confused by the mnemonics. As you can see, the return address at the start is used for more than just doing a return. It's also your argument pointer. Johnny From usotsuki at buric.co Tue Mar 28 09:33:35 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:33:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: <0df17a82-af22-69b3-912e-88f3a4d51169@update.uu.se> References: <0df17a82-af22-69b3-912e-88f3a4d51169@update.uu.se> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Johnny Billquist wrote: > Essentially, you pass parameters in memory, as a part of the code stream. > Also, the PDP-8 certainly do have index registers. > > The first thing one must do is stop thinking of the AC as a register. The > accumulator is the accumulator. Memory is registers. > > Some memory locations autoincrement when used indirectly, they are called > index registers. > > That said, then. A simple example of a routine passing two parameters (well, > three): > > First the calling: > > CLA > TAD (42 / Setup AC with the value 42. > JMS COUNT > BUFPTR > BUFSIZ > . / Next instruction executed, with AC holding number > of matching words in buffer. > . > > Now, this routine is expected to count the number of occurances of a specific > word in a memory buffer with a specific size. > At calling, AC will contain the word to search for, while the address > following the JMS holds the address, and the following address holds the > size. > > The routine: > > COUNT, 0 > CIA > DCA CHR / Save the negative of the word to search for. > CMA > TAD I COUNT > DCA PTR / Setup pointer to the address before the buffer. > ISZ COUNT / Point to next argument. > TAD I COUNT > CIA > DCA CNT / Save negative value of size. > DCA RESULT / Clear out result counter. > LOOP, TAD I PTR / Get next word in buffer. > TAD CHR / Compare to searched for word. > SNA / Skip if they are not equal. > ISZ RESULT / Equal. Increment result counter. > ISZ CNT / Increment loop counter. > JMP LOOP / Repeat unless end of buffer. > CLA / All done. Get result. > TAD RESULT > JMP I COUNT / Done. > > PTR=10 > CNT=20 > CHR=21 > RESULT=22 > > > Addresses 10-17 are the index registers, so the TAD I PTR instruction will > autoincrement the pointer everytime, and the increment happens before the > defer, which is why the initial value should be one less than the buffer > pointer. > > Hopefully this gives enough of an idea, but unless you know the PDP-8 well, > you might be a little confused by the mnemonics. > > As you can see, the return address at the start is used for more than just > doing a return. It's also your argument pointer. > > Johnny > > Actually, that reminds me of ProDOS-8 on the Apple ][, which uses a similar mechanism to pass parameters. -uso. From bqt at update.uu.se Tue Mar 28 09:49:22 2017 From: bqt at update.uu.se (Johnny Billquist) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 01:49:22 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: <0df17a82-af22-69b3-912e-88f3a4d51169@update.uu.se> Message-ID: <21464af8-6a47-e49d-9e07-ef7e7b007e95@update.uu.se> And, as usual I have to correct myself a little, but I'll also tie in a bit with (almost) Unix in doing so. :-) On 2017-03-28 01:33, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Johnny Billquist wrote: > [...] >> The routine: >> >> COUNT, 0 >> CIA >> DCA CHR / Save the negative of the word to search for. >> CMA >> TAD I COUNT >> DCA PTR / Setup pointer to the address before the >> buffer. >> ISZ COUNT / Point to next argument. >> TAD I COUNT >> CIA >> DCA CNT / Save negative value of size. >> DCA RESULT / Clear out result counter. >> LOOP, TAD I PTR / Get next word in buffer. >> TAD CHR / Compare to searched for word. >> SNA / Skip if they are not equal. I knew I felt that something wasn't right, but it wasn't until I looked at your reply, Steve, that I found what it was. This SNA should have been SNA CLA... >> ISZ RESULT / Equal. Increment result counter. >> ISZ CNT / Increment loop counter. >> JMP LOOP / Repeat unless end of buffer. >> CLA / All done. Get result. and CLA should not have been there. >> TAD RESULT >> JMP I COUNT / Done. >> >> PTR=10 >> CNT=20 >> CHR=21 >> RESULT=22 >> >> >> Addresses 10-17 are the index registers, so the TAD I PTR instruction >> will autoincrement the pointer everytime, and the increment happens >> before the defer, which is why the initial value should be one less >> than the buffer pointer. >> >> Hopefully this gives enough of an idea, but unless you know the PDP-8 >> well, you might be a little confused by the mnemonics. >> >> As you can see, the return address at the start is used for more than >> just doing a return. It's also your argument pointer. >> >> Johnny >> >> > > Actually, that reminds me of ProDOS-8 on the Apple ][, which uses a > similar mechanism to pass parameters. Interesting. Since the Apple ][ used the 6502, I would have assumed it used the stack, but I've never used the 6502 much, so I don't know if it possibly can make sense to write code this way on that processor. Speaking of which, when the PDP-11 was introduced, it wasn't obvious that this style of coding wasn't sometimes appropriate, so the PDP-11 have the means of doing this as well. If anyone ever wondered about the strangeness of the JSR instruction of the PDP-11, it is precisely because of this. What it does is that it pushes the argument register on the stack, loads the PC into the argument register, and then sets the new PC. So, if you use some other register than R7 as the argument to JSR, that register then points to the word following the JSR, where you can have your arguments. And you fetch them with indirect autoincrement, and at the end you do an RTS with that same register, which at that point points beyond the arguments you had. And the register used for the argument pointer is restored by the RTS. I've used it once or twice on a PDP-11, but this whole scheme only works if I-space and D-space are the same, so there are limitations. I doubt Unix ever used this, but maybe someone know of some obscure inner kernel code that do. :-) Johnny From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 28 03:39:50 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:39:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Eigth Edition UNIX Status Message-ID: Closer... : hp(0,0)nunix 136484+52868+370724 start 0xf48 Unix 8th Edition Fri Mar 26 17:47:30 GMT 1976 real mem = 8322048 nbuf = 254 nswbuf = 126 avail mem = 6350848 mcr0 at tr1 mcr1 at tr2 uba0 at tr3 dz0 at uba0 csr 160100 vec 0300 ipl x15 dz1 at uba0 csr 160110 vec 0310 ipl x15 dz2 at uba0 csr 160120 vec 0320 ipl x15 dz3 at uba0 csr 160130 vec 0330 ipl x15 mba0 at tr8 hp0 at mba0 drive 0 hp1 at mba0 drive 1 mba1 at tr9 ht0 at mba1 drive 0 tu0 at ht0 slave 0 It's booted...;) -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 28 04:00:04 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:00:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Eigth Edition UNIX Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, Cory Smelosky wrote: > > It's booted...;) > > Success! /dev/mtpr: No such file or directory /tmp/dump: No such file or directory /etc/rc: /usr/lib/ex3.7preserve: not found /etc/rc: /usr/adm/lastboot: cannot create gmount(2, "/proc", 0) returned -1, errno = 2 gmount: No such file or directory v8generi login: root Welcome to Eighth Edition Unix. You may be sure that it is suitably protected by ironclad licences, contractual agreements, living wills, and trade secret laws of every sort. A trolley car is certain to grow in your stomach if you violate the conditions under which you got this tape. Consult your lawyer in case of any doubt. If doubt persists, consult our lawyers. Please commit this message to memory. If this is a hardcopy terminal, tear off the paper and affix it to your machine. Otherwise take a photo of your screen. Then delete /etc/motd. Thank you for choosing Eighth Edition Unix. Have a nice day. A little bit left to tweak... -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From clemc at ccc.com Tue Mar 28 11:08:27 2017 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:08:27 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history In-Reply-To: <20170324154401.GG23802@mcvoy.com> References: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org> <20170324154401.GG23802@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: SCCS started out as single commands, and many of us learned to use that way (I still do - for simple things I still find it easy to use - including as the front end to all my troff). Anyway, a couple of the SCCS macro commands tended to be used together or in sequence and that is the key step. When Eric started to use SCCS for development of Ingres in the late 1970s, as Larry pointed out, Eric wrote the BSD sccs command wrapper.*** That said, I'm not sure Eric's sccs command was the first time I had seen tool wrapper, although it may have been the first "tool" wrapper as a C program in that sense. I have some memories of a couple of others that were shell scripts, but I can't remember any specifics, other than the C compiler itself (cc was originally a shell script) and the original man command. I do remember looking at what Eric did when I first came across it, as I recall I had to mess with it -- may it did not run on the 40 class systems without some hacking - I really don't remember why. I think the key is that shell scripts were becoming more and more things we wrote with every day and more and more tools became scripts. But on the PDP-11, the shell was limited and took resources, so converting from a shell script to C program was not unusual for speed. The next step was things like Eric's sccs command. Clem *** As an aside, it is an interesting question is how the SCCS commands and CPIO sources originally made it to UCB. Those tools were part of PWB 1.0 and 2.0 - which was not released to Universities - although Mashey had published at least one paper about it and was an ACM National Lecturer at the time. Hence, many people knew about SCCS (I had heard him talk about it 1979 at conference in Oregon). Anyway, other than those tools, I do not see much other evidence of PWB's specifics in the UCB archives. I've always guessed it was an unnamed "OYOC" student that left them there or it may also have come from the Joy/Kowaski - uMich connection. I don't think it was Ken because Ken wrote tar so he is unlikely to have left cpio. But Ted was always fan of cpio (and may have had a hand in its creation). We'll probably never know ;-) I certainly had become familiar with the PWB tools a few years earlier at CMU, via the same type of path "OYOC" (either Phil or Ted) - which is also why so many of us knew about lots of the work at AT&T - it was pretty well written about and published. On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 03:42:02PM +0000, Tim Bradshaw wrote: > > Lots of tools now seem to use this strategy: there's some kind of > wrapper which has its own set of commands (which in turn might have further > subcommands). So for instance > > > > git remote add ... > > > > is a two layer thing. > > > > Without getting into an argument about whether that's a reasonable or > ideologically-correct approach, I was wondering what the early examples of > this kind of wrapper-command approach were. I think the first time I > noticed it was CVS, which made you say `cvs co ...` where RCS & SCCS had a > bunch of individual commands (actually: did SCCS?). But I think it's > possible to argue that ifconfig was an earlier example of the same thing. > I was thinking about dd as well, but I don't think that's the same: they're > really options not commands I think. > > BSD's sccs wrapper worked this way, I believe thats where I saw it first. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Mar 28 12:13:42 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:13:42 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> > Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. > > Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 28 12:14:45 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:14:45 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: I know what I have is a 3-slot Sun-3...so let's hope it's enough ;) Also it seems there aren't actually any binaries there...this will be fun ;) Sent from my iPhone On Mar 27, 2017, at 19:13, Larry McVoy wrote: >> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >> >> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) > > Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 28 12:17:22 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:17:22 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: also - thank you for all of this, everyone! Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 27, 2017, at 13:24, Warren Toomey wrote: > > All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, > Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at > https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf > > Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 > Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (“ALU-USA”), on behalf of itself and Nokia > Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that it > will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial > copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative > works of Research Unix®1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not > (i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property rights > (including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their > affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, > or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, > (iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any rights > for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories will > furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, and > make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not limited > to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and > 10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or that > Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. > > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. > > Cheers, Warren From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Mar 28 12:38:51 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 22:38:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! Message-ID: <20170328023851.16D9818C08B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Johnny Billquist > the PDP-11 have the means of doing this as well.... If anyone ever > wondered about the strangeness of the JSR instruction of the PDP-11, it > is precisely because of this. > ... > I doubt Unix ever used this, but maybe someone know of some obscure > inner kernel code that do. :-) Actually Unix does use JSR with a non-PC register to hold the return address very extensively; but it also uses the 'saved PC points to the argument' technique; although only in a limited way. (Well, there may have been some user-mode commands that were not in C that used it, I don't know about that.) First, the 'PC points to arguments': the device interrrupts use that. All device interrupt vectors point to code that looks like: jsr r0, _call _iservice where iservice() is the interrupt service routine. call: is a common assembler-language routine that calls iservice(); the return from there goes to later down in call:, which does the return from interrupt. Use of a non-PC return address register is used in every C routine; to save space, there is only one copy of the linkage code that sets up the stack frame; PDP-11 C, by convention, uses R5 for the frame pointer. So that common code (csv) is called with a: jsr r5, csv which saves the old FP on the stack; CSV does the rest of the work, and jumps back to the calling routine, at the address in R5 when csv: is entered. (There's a similar routine, cret:, to discard the frame, but it's 'called' with a plain jmp.) Noel From arnold at skeeve.com Tue Mar 28 12:41:40 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:41:40 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> Warren Toomey wrote: > P.S All I did was nag people and set up a mailing list for them :) Well, I'll take credit for pushing Norman yet again. :-) A huge T H A N K Y O U to everyone who helped with this. This is absolutely amazing and wonderful. Arnold From arnold at skeeve.com Tue Mar 28 15:42:34 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:42:34 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> Message-ID: <201703280542.v2S5gYSO000748@freefriends.org> arnold at skeeve.com wrote: > Well, I'll take credit for pushing Norman yet again. :-) ARGGH. That should have been Well, I'll take credit for pushing Warren ... ^^^^^^ Sorry. Arnold P.S. Write on the blackboard 100 times: I will not post before coffee, I will not post before coffee ... :-) From spedraja at gmail.com Tue Mar 28 17:07:48 2017 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:07:48 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> Message-ID: > A huge T H A N K Y O U to everyone who helped with this. This is > absolutely amazing and wonderful. > > Arnold Awesome. I share Arnold's words of thanks. Gracias | Regards - Saludos | Greetings | Freundliche Grüße | Salutations -- Sergio Pedraja ----- No crea todo lo que ve, ni crea que está viéndolo todo From spedraja at gmail.com Tue Mar 28 17:07:48 2017 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:07:48 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> <201703280241.v2S2fe0t016903@freefriends.org> Message-ID: > A huge T H A N K Y O U to everyone who helped with this. This is > absolutely amazing and wonderful. > > Arnold Awesome. I share Arnold's words of thanks. Gracias | Regards - Saludos | Greetings | Freundliche Grüße | Salutations -- Sergio Pedraja ----- No crea todo lo que ve, ni crea que está viéndolo todo From hellwig.geisse at mni.thm.de Tue Mar 28 17:30:18 2017 From: hellwig.geisse at mni.thm.de (Hellwig Geisse) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:30:18 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <1490686218.3833.21.camel@mni.thm.de> On Di, 2017-03-28 at 06:43 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:    > They are now in four subdirectories at > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/ >   Fantastic. A big "thank you" to all. Hellwig From 0intro at gmail.com Tue Mar 28 17:43:14 2017 From: 0intro at gmail.com (David du Colombier) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:43:14 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Fantastic news. Thank to everyone involved! -- David du Colombier From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Tue Mar 28 17:52:54 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:52:54 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Eigth Edition UNIX Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ugh while I was sleeping.. Glad this won't sit for years like 4.2/4.2 On March 28, 2017 1:39:50 AM GMT+08:00, Cory Smelosky wrote: >Closer... > >: hp(0,0)nunix >136484+52868+370724 start 0xf48 >Unix 8th Edition Fri Mar 26 17:47:30 GMT 1976 >real mem = 8322048 nbuf = 254 nswbuf = 126 >avail mem = 6350848 >mcr0 at tr1 >mcr1 at tr2 >uba0 at tr3 >dz0 at uba0 csr 160100 vec 0300 ipl x15 >dz1 at uba0 csr 160110 vec 0310 ipl x15 >dz2 at uba0 csr 160120 vec 0320 ipl x15 >dz3 at uba0 csr 160130 vec 0330 ipl x15 >mba0 at tr8 >hp0 at mba0 drive 0 >hp1 at mba0 drive 1 >mba1 at tr9 >ht0 at mba1 drive 0 >tu0 at ht0 slave 0 > >It's booted...;) > >-- >Cory Smelosky >http://gewt.net Personal stuff >http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Tue Mar 28 18:03:03 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:03:03 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: There is an emulator.. I was actually playing with it earlier this week trying to get SunOS 2 to boot, on a SUN-2 .. Anyway it's called TME http://people.csail.mit.edu/fredette/tme/ And updates here: http://www.heeltoe.com/index.php?n=Retro.Sun2 I think my machine may be too fast. It's very touchy to build and I think the slj threadding is really interesting but may also introduce complications... On March 28, 2017 10:13:42 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: >> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >> >> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) > >Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Tue Mar 28 18:03:03 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:03:03 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: There is an emulator.. I was actually playing with it earlier this week trying to get SunOS 2 to boot, on a SUN-2 .. Anyway it's called TME http://people.csail.mit.edu/fredette/tme/ And updates here: http://www.heeltoe.com/index.php?n=Retro.Sun2 I think my machine may be too fast. It's very touchy to build and I think the slj threadding is really interesting but may also introduce complications... On March 28, 2017 10:13:42 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: >> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >> >> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) > >Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Tue Mar 28 18:04:13 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:04:13 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <9C1B76D3-5BCE-44E1-8298-099495D639E4@superglobalmegacorp.com> This is fantastic!!! Thanks for this hard work, now we can finally see some of the "hidden" UNIX! On March 28, 2017 4:24:58 AM GMT+08:00, Warren Toomey wrote: >All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many >years, >Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at >https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/20170327_1602/stateme >nt%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf > >Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 >Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (“ALU-USA”), on behalf of itself and Nokia >Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that >it >will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial >copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative >works of Research Unix®1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not >(i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property >rights >(including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their >affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, >or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, >(iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any >rights >for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories >will >furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, >and >make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not >limited >to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and >10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or >that >Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. > >There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in >8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and >make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. > >Cheers, Warren -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org Tue Mar 28 21:38:49 2017 From: dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org (Derek Fawcus) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:38:49 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170328113849.GA81949@cowbell.employees.org> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:43:54AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > They are now in four subdirectories at > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/ Thank you. Very interesting. Now if only I could find the unix source for Tom Duff's rc shell in there. Or maybe I'm overlooking it? DF From brad at anduin.eldar.org Tue Mar 28 22:26:12 2017 From: brad at anduin.eldar.org (Brad Spencer) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:26:12 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> (message from Larry McVoy on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:13:42 -0700) Message-ID: Larry McVoy writes: >> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >> >> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) > > Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. I have a bunch of 32bit Sun stuff that I have been wanted to get rid of for some time. It is free to anyone who pays to have it shipped to them, or if you are close enough to my location, hand delivered. I know I have two Sun 3/50 systems, one of them has a third party memory expansion board. Both booted NetBSD but probably not for something like 10+ years. I have hard drives, enclosures and cables for nearly all of it. The entire collection is crudely displayed at: http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/ I can provide detailed descriptions of anything you see. Items 7A and 7B are the Sun 3/50 systems. Contact me off list if there is any interest. -- Brad Spencer - brad at anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS http://anduin.eldar.org - & - http://anduin.ipv6.eldar.org [IPv6 only] From elbingmiss at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 00:38:03 2017 From: elbingmiss at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Jurado?=) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:38:03 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: Thanks to everyone involved. Álvaro El 28 mar. 2017 14:26, "Brad Spencer" escribió: > Larry McVoy writes: > > >> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. > >> > >> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) > > > > Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. > > > I have a bunch of 32bit Sun stuff that I have been wanted to get rid of > for some time. It is free to anyone who pays to have it shipped to > them, or if you are close enough to my location, hand delivered. > > I know I have two Sun 3/50 systems, one of them has a third party memory > expansion board. Both booted NetBSD but probably not for something like > 10+ years. I have hard drives, enclosures and cables for nearly all of > it. > > The entire collection is crudely displayed at: > > http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/ > > > I can provide detailed descriptions of anything you see. Items 7A and > 7B are the Sun 3/50 systems. Contact me off list if there is any > interest. > > > > > > -- > Brad Spencer - brad at anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS > http://anduin.eldar.org - & - http://anduin.ipv6.eldar.org [IPv6 only] > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 29 01:23:49 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:23:49 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: Glad I kept my 3/280 It was in a VME 12-slot (I think) ComputerVision workstation. But I also found a Sun 4/440 that had been upgraded from a 3/280 - so I have a real Sun backplane with the 3/280 in it - gotta see if it'll fire up again. I could shoot myself for not saving some of the Sun-2 machines I found. All were units at Loral Fairchild in Syosset, NY. The Sun-4 I administered until it was deprecated, but when I snooped around one of their mothballed buildings, I found a slew of Sun-2's and that Sun-3. They did a lot of CAD stuff on those CV machines. Is the 3/50 that much different than a 3/280? On 3/27/2017 10:13 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: >> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >> >> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) > Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. > From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 29 01:27:58 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:27:58 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:23:49AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > Is the 3/50 that much different than a 3/280? Different bus structure as I recall. The 3/50 were workstations, the 3/280 was big rack mounted VME (?) based system, mostly used as file servers. From b4 at gewt.net Tue Mar 28 18:21:25 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 01:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Jason Stevens wrote: > There is an emulator.. I was actually playing with it earlier this week trying to get SunOS 2 to boot, on a SUN-2 .. > > Anyway it's called TME > > http://people.csail.mit.edu/fredette/tme/ > > And updates here: > > http://www.heeltoe.com/index.php?n=Retro.Sun2 > Oh hey - thanks. Maybe I can finally build stuff without segfaults. > I think my machine may be too fast. It's very touchy to build and I think the slj threadding is really interesting but may also introduce complications... > > On March 28, 2017 10:13:42 AM GMT+08:00, Larry McVoy wrote: >>> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >>> >>> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) >> >> Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. > > -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects From chneukirchen at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 01:36:55 2017 From: chneukirchen at gmail.com (Christian Neukirchen) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:36:55 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328113849.GA81949@cowbell.employees.org> (Derek Fawcus's message of "Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:38:49 +0100") References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328113849.GA81949@cowbell.employees.org> Message-ID: <87o9wl5s6g.fsf@gmail.com> Derek Fawcus writes: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:43:54AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >> They are now in four subdirectories at >> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/ > > Thank you. Very interesting. > > Now if only I could find the unix source for Tom Duff's rc shell in there. > Or maybe I'm overlooking it? I didn't find it so far, the manpage is there though. Other fun things I saw on a quick tour are in v10blit: src/jim in v10src: cmd/movie cmd/cyntax cmd/monk cmd/dag (precedessor of dot?) cmd/cfront/cfront2.00 -- Christian Neukirchen http://chneukirchen.org From crossd at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 01:38:48 2017 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:38:48 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: I *think* the 3/50 had a VME bus. As I recall, it was basically a single VME board mounted inside of a pizzabox case. On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:23:49AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > Is the 3/50 that much different than a 3/280? > > Different bus structure as I recall. The 3/50 were workstations, > the 3/280 was big rack mounted VME (?) based system, mostly used > as file servers. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 29 01:41:49 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:41:49 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170328154149.GX20717@mcvoy.com> Could be, I just remember the 3/280 as a monster with lots of I/O. On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:38:48AM -0400, Dan Cross wrote: > I *think* the 3/50 had a VME bus. As I recall, it was basically a single > VME board mounted inside of a pizzabox case. > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:23:49AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > > Is the 3/50 that much different than a 3/280? > > > > Different bus structure as I recall. The 3/50 were workstations, > > the 3/280 was big rack mounted VME (?) based system, mostly used > > as file servers. > > -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From krewat at kilonet.net Wed Mar 29 01:46:34 2017 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:46:34 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> Not according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-3 The 3/50 was indeed a "pizza box" according to this, but Brad Spencer's images 7A and 7B he purports these are 3/50 boards: http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/ - and those are definitely VME form-factor. Although, it's possible it uses only that "custom/private" third connector on the VME backplane? On 3/28/2017 11:38 AM, Dan Cross wrote: > I *think* the 3/50 had a VME bus. As I recall, it was basically a > single VME board mounted inside of a pizzabox case. > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Larry McVoy > wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:23:49AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > Is the 3/50 that much different than a 3/280? > > Different bus structure as I recall. The 3/50 were workstations, > the 3/280 was big rack mounted VME (?) based system, mostly used > as file servers. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rminnich at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 02:18:22 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:18:22 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> Message-ID: This is pretty nice summary: http://sunstuff.org/hardware/systems/sun3/sun3/3-50/ and http://sunstuff.org/hardware/systems/sun3/sun3/3-280/ I'm always amazed at what's out there. On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:47 AM Arthur Krewat wrote: > Not according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-3 > > The 3/50 was indeed a "pizza box" according to this, but Brad Spencer's > images 7A and 7B he purports these are 3/50 boards: > http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/ - and those are definitely VME > form-factor. Although, it's possible it uses only that "custom/private" > third connector on the VME backplane? > > > > > > On 3/28/2017 11:38 AM, Dan Cross wrote: > > I *think* the 3/50 had a VME bus. As I recall, it was basically a single > VME board mounted inside of a pizzabox case. > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:23:49AM -0400, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > Is the 3/50 that much different than a 3/280? > > Different bus structure as I recall. The 3/50 were workstations, > the 3/280 was big rack mounted VME (?) based system, mostly used > as file servers. > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brad at anduin.eldar.org Wed Mar 29 03:00:41 2017 From: brad at anduin.eldar.org (Brad Spencer) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:00:41 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> (message from Arthur Krewat on Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:46:34 -0400) Message-ID: Arthur Krewat writes: > Not according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-3 > > The 3/50 was indeed a "pizza box" according to this, but Brad Spencer's > images 7A and 7B he purports these are 3/50 boards: > http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/ - and those are definitely VME > form-factor. Although, it's possible it uses only that "custom/private" > third connector on the VME backplane? > On 3/28/2017 11:38 AM, Dan Cross wrote: >> I *think* the 3/50 had a VME bus. As I recall, it was basically a >> single VME board mounted inside of a pizzabox case. My understanding is that the 3/50 is indeed some sort of VME system, as is the 4/110, with some address related oddities. But it has been a very long time since I booted a 3/50 up... The 3/50 I have are in their cases, I just opened them up for the pictures. What is not a VME system was the 3/80, which I also have. -- Brad Spencer - brad at anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS http://anduin.eldar.org - & - http://anduin.ipv6.eldar.org [IPv6 only] From steve at quintile.net Wed Mar 29 03:28:09 2017 From: steve at quintile.net (Steve Simon) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 18:28:09 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <87o9wl5s6g.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328113849.GA81949@cowbell.employees.org> <87o9wl5s6g.fsf@gmail.com> Message-ID: <07D7BCCD-A618-4447-80FC-F5F7B4E229B2@quintile.net> if cfront is of interest v3.0 and i think v3.1 are available here: http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/c_plus_plus i did manage to get the final version to run on plan9 but it supports no modern constructs and so was little real use. -Steve > On 28 Mar 2017, at 16:36, Christian Neukirchen wrote: > > Derek Fawcus writes: > >>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:43:54AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: >>> They are now in four subdirectories at >>> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/Research/ >> >> Thank you. Very interesting. >> >> Now if only I could find the unix source for Tom Duff's rc shell in there. >> Or maybe I'm overlooking it? > > I didn't find it so far, the manpage is there though. > > Other fun things I saw on a quick tour are in v10blit: > src/jim > > in v10src: > cmd/movie > cmd/cyntax > cmd/monk > cmd/dag (precedessor of dot?) > cmd/cfront/cfront2.00 > > -- > Christian Neukirchen http://chneukirchen.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lyndon at orthanc.ca Wed Mar 29 03:30:21 2017 From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:30:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328154149.GX20717@mcvoy.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328154149.GX20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: > Could be, I just remember the 3/280 as a monster with lots of I/O. One difference, if memory still serves, is the 3/50 has a 68010 CPU, whereas the 3/280 has a 68020. From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 29 03:36:57 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:36:57 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328152758.GV20717@mcvoy.com> <20170328154149.GX20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170328173657.GY20717@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:30:21AM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > >Could be, I just remember the 3/280 as a monster with lots of I/O. > > One difference, if memory still serves, is the 3/50 has a 68010 CPU, whereas > the 3/280 has a 68020. Nope, both had 68020s. http://sunstuff.org/hardware/systems/sun3/ -- --- Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 29 03:42:54 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:42:54 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> Message-ID: <20170328174254.GZ20717@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 01:00:41PM -0400, Brad Spencer wrote: > Arthur Krewat writes: > > > Not according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun-3 > > > > The 3/50 was indeed a "pizza box" according to this, but Brad Spencer's > > images 7A and 7B he purports these are 3/50 boards: > > http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/ - and those are definitely VME > > form-factor. Although, it's possible it uses only that "custom/private" > > third connector on the VME backplane? > > > On 3/28/2017 11:38 AM, Dan Cross wrote: > >> I *think* the 3/50 had a VME bus. As I recall, it was basically a > >> single VME board mounted inside of a pizzabox case. > > My understanding is that the 3/50 is indeed some sort of VME system, as > is the 4/110, with some address related oddities. But it has been a > very long time since I booted a 3/50 up... The 3/50 I have are in their > cases, I just opened them up for the pictures. Hmm, so the 4/110 being VME is for sure correct, I had one of those when I was at Sun. The 3/50, I just don't think it was VME. I believe they made a version that was a single VME board but so far as I know that was a different beast. I could be wrong, I googled a bit and couldn't figure it out. What I know for sure is, unlike a 4/110, you couldn't open up the case and shove more VME stuff in there. If the 3/50 was a VME board I'm not sure what the point was other than, perhaps, to reuse the same part in a small case. I can't see Andy doing that, he was super cost sensitive. From brad at anduin.eldar.org Wed Mar 29 04:02:06 2017 From: brad at anduin.eldar.org (Brad Spencer) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:02:06 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328174254.GZ20717@mcvoy.com> (message from Larry McVoy on Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:42:54 -0700) Message-ID: Larry McVoy writes: >> My understanding is that the 3/50 is indeed some sort of VME system, as >> is the 4/110, with some address related oddities. But it has been a >> very long time since I booted a 3/50 up... The 3/50 I have are in their >> cases, I just opened them up for the pictures. > > Hmm, so the 4/110 being VME is for sure correct, I had one of those when > I was at Sun. The 3/50, I just don't think it was VME. I believe they > made a version that was a single VME board but so far as I know that was > a different beast. I could be wrong, I googled a bit and couldn't figure > it out. > > What I know for sure is, unlike a 4/110, you couldn't open up the case > and shove more VME stuff in there. If the 3/50 was a VME board I'm not > sure what the point was other than, perhaps, to reuse the same part in > a small case. I can't see Andy doing that, he was super cost sensitive. I think that the 3/50 was a "single board" VME system... and as you say you really couldn't add anything to it. I will pull one out and get some close up shots of the connectors and perhaps the answer can be determined by physical inspection. I also looked at the config file for NetBSD for the sun3 and it very much mentions vme all over the place, but that may not have applied to the 3/50. Is it possible that just VME connector was used for power and the like... but nothing else?? -- Brad Spencer - brad at anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS http://anduin.eldar.org - & - http://anduin.ipv6.eldar.org [IPv6 only] From tim.newsham at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 04:07:45 2017 From: tim.newsham at gmail.com (Tim Newsham) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:07:45 -1000 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: Amazing! Thank you!!!! Anyone have plans to bring Jerq to life in emulation? On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, today after some heroic efforts by numerous people over many years, > Nokia-Alcatel has issued this statement at > https://media-bell-labs-com.s3.amazonaws.com/pages/ > 20170327_1602/statement%20regarding%20Unix%203-7-17.pdf > > Statement Regarding Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 > Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (“ALU-USA”), on behalf of itself and Nokia > Bell Laboratories agrees, to the extent of its ability to do so, that it > will not assert its copyright rights with respect to any non-commercial > copying, distribution, performance, display or creation of derivative > works of Research Unix®1 Editions 8, 9, and 10. The foregoing does not > (i) transfer ownership of, or relinquish any, intellectual property rights > (including patent rights) of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA or any of their > affiliates, (ii) grant a license to any patent, patent application, > or trademark of Nokia Corporation, ALU-USA. or any of their affiliates, > (iii) grant any third-party rights or licenses, or (iv) grant any rights > for commercial purposes. Neither ALU-USA. nor Nokia Bell Laboratories will > furnish or provided support for Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10, and > make no warranties or representations hereunder, including but not limited > to any warranty or representation that Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and > 10 does not infringe any third party intellectual property rights or that > Research Unix Editions 8, 9, and 10 is fit for any particular purpose. > > There are some issues around the copyright of third party material in > 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix, but I'm going to bite the bullet and > make them available in the Unix Archive. I'll post details later today. > > Cheers, Warren > -- Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Wed Mar 29 04:19:15 2017 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:19:15 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170328174254.GZ20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170328181915.GC20717@mcvoy.com> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:02:06PM -0400, Brad Spencer wrote: > Larry McVoy writes: > > >> My understanding is that the 3/50 is indeed some sort of VME system, as > >> is the 4/110, with some address related oddities. But it has been a > >> very long time since I booted a 3/50 up... The 3/50 I have are in their > >> cases, I just opened them up for the pictures. > > > > Hmm, so the 4/110 being VME is for sure correct, I had one of those when > > I was at Sun. The 3/50, I just don't think it was VME. I believe they > > made a version that was a single VME board but so far as I know that was > > a different beast. I could be wrong, I googled a bit and couldn't figure > > it out. > > > > What I know for sure is, unlike a 4/110, you couldn't open up the case > > and shove more VME stuff in there. If the 3/50 was a VME board I'm not > > sure what the point was other than, perhaps, to reuse the same part in > > a small case. I can't see Andy doing that, he was super cost sensitive. > > > I think that the 3/50 was a "single board" VME system... and as you say > you really couldn't add anything to it. I will pull one out and get > some close up shots of the connectors and perhaps the answer can be > determined by physical inspection. I also looked at the config file for > NetBSD for the sun3 and it very much mentions vme all over the place, > but that may not have applied to the 3/50. Is it possible that just VME > connector was used for power and the like... but nothing else?? That actually rings a bell, could be. I think it was 3/110 that had the same case/bus as the 4/110. Less sure about that, I'm not sure I've ever used a 3/110. Got a lot of miles on a 4/110, did a ton of UFS work on that machine. From arnold at skeeve.com Wed Mar 29 04:19:12 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:19:12 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <87o9wl5s6g.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170327204354.GA19683@minnie.tuhs.org> <20170328113849.GA81949@cowbell.employees.org> <87o9wl5s6g.fsf@gmail.com> Message-ID: <201703281819.v2SIJCAA017808@freefriends.org> Christian Neukirchen wrote: > Other fun things I saw on a quick tour are in v10blit: > src/jim There's a great opportunity here for someone with too much time on their hands to set up jerq emulation on a raspberry pi .... :-) Arnold From 0intro at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 04:58:23 2017 From: 0intro at gmail.com (David du Colombier) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:58:23 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH Message-ID: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. Fell free to use, improve and share. -- David du Colombier From b4 at gewt.net Wed Mar 29 05:32:32 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:32:32 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: <1490729552.1690817.926503184.31BF8506@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017, at 11:58, David du Colombier wrote: > Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. > > http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 > > These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be > sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. > > Fell free to use, improve and share. > > -- > David du Colombier Don't forget creating /tmp and /usr/tmp in the v8 environment - `man` complains otherwise. -- Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net From khm at sciops.net Wed Mar 29 05:54:29 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:54:29 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170327202458.GA16318@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20170328195429.GD5873@wopr> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 08:07:45AM -1000, Tim Newsham wrote: > Amazing! Thank you!!!! > > Anyone have plans to bring Jerq to life in emulation? > There is one in 9front: http://code.9front.org/hg/plan9front/file/3595611ca650/sys/src/games/blit Should work with plan9port. khm From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Wed Mar 29 05:55:55 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:55:55 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history Message-ID: <201703281955.v2SJttFg004453@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> In some sense the "command subcommand" syntax dates from ar in v1, though option flags were catenated with the mandatory subcommand. The revolutionary notion that flags/subcommands might be denoted by more than one letter originated at PWB (in "find", IIRC). Doug From brad at anduin.eldar.org Wed Mar 29 06:51:02 2017 From: brad at anduin.eldar.org (Brad Spencer) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:51:02 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328181915.GC20717@mcvoy.com> (message from Larry McVoy on Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:19:15 -0700) Message-ID: Larry McVoy writes: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 02:02:06PM -0400, Brad Spencer wrote: >> Larry McVoy writes: >> >> >> My understanding is that the 3/50 is indeed some sort of VME system, as >> >> is the 4/110, with some address related oddities. But it has been a >> >> very long time since I booted a 3/50 up... The 3/50 I have are in their >> >> cases, I just opened them up for the pictures. >> > >> > Hmm, so the 4/110 being VME is for sure correct, I had one of those when >> > I was at Sun. The 3/50, I just don't think it was VME. I believe they >> > made a version that was a single VME board but so far as I know that was >> > a different beast. I could be wrong, I googled a bit and couldn't figure >> > it out. >> > >> > What I know for sure is, unlike a 4/110, you couldn't open up the case >> > and shove more VME stuff in there. If the 3/50 was a VME board I'm not >> > sure what the point was other than, perhaps, to reuse the same part in >> > a small case. I can't see Andy doing that, he was super cost sensitive. >> >> >> I think that the 3/50 was a "single board" VME system... and as you say >> you really couldn't add anything to it. I will pull one out and get >> some close up shots of the connectors and perhaps the answer can be >> determined by physical inspection. I also looked at the config file for >> NetBSD for the sun3 and it very much mentions vme all over the place, >> but that may not have applied to the 3/50. Is it possible that just VME >> connector was used for power and the like... but nothing else?? > > That actually rings a bell, could be. > > I think it was 3/110 that had the same case/bus as the 4/110. Less sure > about that, I'm not sure I've ever used a 3/110. Got a lot of miles on > a 4/110, did a ton of UFS work on that machine. I took some more pictures. The connector on the 3/50 is certainly VME. http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/Item_7B_board_connector.jpg - the 3/50 without the memory expansion board, close up of the board connector. http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/Item_7B_case_connector.jpg - a very bad shot of the case that the 3/50 board goes into http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/Item_8_board_closeup.jpg - a closer picture of the 4/110. Note the three connectors. http://anduin.eldar.org/~brad/sunstuff/Item_8_case_connectors.jpg - the inside of the 4/110 case -- Brad Spencer - brad at anduin.eldar.org - KC8VKS http://anduin.eldar.org - & - http://anduin.ipv6.eldar.org [IPv6 only] From schily at schily.net Wed Mar 29 03:51:21 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 19:51:21 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <58daa299.K+gs/WncSI6tQ834%schily@schily.net> Brad Spencer wrote: > My understanding is that the 3/50 is indeed some sort of VME system, as > is the 4/110, with some address related oddities. But it has been a > very long time since I booted a 3/50 up... The 3/50 I have are in their > cases, I just opened them up for the pictures. The 3/50 and 3/60 used a VME-type socket, but only the power pins are connected. > What is not a VME system was the 3/80, which I also have. The 3/80 was a SS-1 form factor board. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From bqt at update.uu.se Wed Mar 29 08:10:26 2017 From: bqt at update.uu.se (Johnny Billquist) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:10:26 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, PDP-8! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4dd54b02-7f1a-b594-0e25-009bc650c1c9@update.uu.se> On 2017-03-28 09:37, jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) wrote: > > > From: Johnny Billquist > > > the PDP-11 have the means of doing this as well.... If anyone ever > > wondered about the strangeness of the JSR instruction of the PDP-11, it > > is precisely because of this. > > ... > > I doubt Unix ever used this, but maybe someone know of some obscure > > inner kernel code that do. :-) > > Actually Unix does use JSR with a non-PC register to hold the return address > very extensively; but it also uses the 'saved PC points to the argument' > technique; although only in a limited way. (Well, there may have been some > user-mode commands that were not in C that used it, I don't know about that.) > > First, the 'PC points to arguments': the device interrrupts use that. All > device interrupt vectors point to code that looks like: > > jsr r0, _call > _iservice > > where iservice() is the interrupt service routine. call: is a common > assembler-language routine that calls iservice(); the return from there goes > to later down in call:, which does the return from interrupt. Ah. Thanks for that. I hadn't dug into those parts, but that's the kind of place where I might have suspected it might have been, if anywhere. > Use of a non-PC return address register is used in every C routine; to save > space, there is only one copy of the linkage code that sets up the stack > frame; PDP-11 C, by convention, uses R5 for the frame pointer. So that common > code (csv) is called with a: > > jsr r5, csv > > which saves the old FP on the stack; CSV does the rest of the work, and jumps > back to the calling routine, at the address in R5 when csv: is entered. (There's > a similar routine, cret:, to discard the frame, but it's 'called' with a plain > jmp.) Hah! Thinking about it, I actually knew that calling style, but didn't reflect on it, as you're not passing any arguments in the instruction stream in that situation. But it's indeed not using the PC as the register in the call, so I guess it should count in some way. :-) Johnny From tim.newsham at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 09:50:07 2017 From: tim.newsham at gmail.com (Tim Newsham) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:50:07 -1000 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: Would be great if someone scripted it up to make it dog-simple. Here's how I did it for v6: http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/myv6/README (I should do this, but I'm not sure I'll have time in the near future). On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:58 AM, David du Colombier <0intro at gmail.com> wrote: > Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. > > http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 > > These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be > sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. > > Fell free to use, improve and share. > > -- > David du Colombier > -- Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Mar 29 10:49:14 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:49:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH Message-ID: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Tim Newsham > Would be great if someone scripted it up to make it dog-simple. But if people just have to press a button (basically), they won't learn anything. I guess I'm not understanding the point of the exercise? To say they have V6 running? So what? All they did was press a button. If it's to experience a retro-computing environment, well, a person who's never used one of these older systems is going to be kind of lost - what are they going to do, type 'ls -ls' and look at the output? Not very illuminating. (On V6, without learning 'ed', they can't even type in a small C program, and compile and run it.) Sorry, I don't mean to be cranky, but I'm not understanding the point. Noel From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Wed Mar 29 11:02:09 2017 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 19:02:09 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <66d1ab6c-1396-fa83-cb9d-2d87ab463be3@tnetconsulting.net> On 03/28/2017 06:49 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > But if people just have to press a button (basically), they won't learn > anything. I guess I'm not understanding the point of the exercise? To say they > have V6 running? So what? All they did was press a button. If it's to > experience a retro-computing environment, well, a person who's never used one > of these older systems is going to be kind of lost - what are they going to > do, type 'ls -ls' and look at the output? Not very illuminating. (On V6, > without learning 'ed', they can't even type in a small C program, and compile > and run it.) Sorry, I don't mean to be cranky, but I'm not understanding the > point. Conceptually I agree. However, I've had to teach enough people to know that they need a way to boot strap themselves into an environment to start learning. Thus I find having a streamlined process available to them to be beneficial. Then once they have gotten a taste, presuming they like it, they can go back and attempt to do more complicated things. I do consider what (I believe) Warren put together for the UUCP project to be a very good start. Simple how to style directions that are easy to follow that yield a functional system. Conversely, take a look at what's involved in IPLing a minimal MVS 3.8j system in Hercules. (Ignoring the turn key packages.) -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3717 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 11:06:40 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 21:06:40 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: I can install 4.1BSD just fine, but I seem to be having trouble writing anything to a second RP06: # mkfs /dev/hp1a 7942 isize = 5072 m/n = 3 500 # mkfs /dev/hp1g 145673 isize = 65488 m/n = 3 500 # mount /dev/hp1a /v8 # mkdir /v8/usr # mount /dev/hp1g /v8/usr # cd /v8 # mt rew # mt fsf 2 # tar xvpb 20 hp0a: hard error sn10 mbsr=82000 er1=0 er2=0 hp1a: hard error sn16 er1=5 er2=0 mkdir: cannot make directory adm ... Am I missing something, or did I run into a SIMH bug? My /dev entries all look fine. -Henry On 28 March 2017 at 14:58, David du Colombier <0intro at gmail.com> wrote: > Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. > > http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 > > These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be > sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. > > Fell free to use, improve and share. > > -- > David du Colombier > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From b4 at gewt.net Wed Mar 29 11:19:06 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 18:19:06 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: <31189C6E-570A-4954-BD4F-B4BE214A52C7@gewt.net> Yes - there is a SIMH bug One I think I reported, actually maybe... Use SIMH 3.8-1 Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 28, 2017, at 18:06, Henry Bent via TUHS wrote: > > I can install 4.1BSD just fine, but I seem to be having trouble writing anything to a second RP06: > > # mkfs /dev/hp1a 7942 > isize = 5072 > m/n = 3 500 > # mkfs /dev/hp1g 145673 > isize = 65488 > m/n = 3 500 > # mount /dev/hp1a /v8 > # mkdir /v8/usr > # mount /dev/hp1g /v8/usr > # cd /v8 > # mt rew > # mt fsf 2 > # tar xvpb 20 > hp0a: hard error sn10 mbsr=82000 er1=0 er2=0 > hp1a: hard error sn16 er1=5 er2=0 > mkdir: cannot make directory adm > ... > > Am I missing something, or did I run into a SIMH bug? My /dev entries all look fine. > > -Henry > >> On 28 March 2017 at 14:58, David du Colombier <0intro at gmail.com> wrote: >> Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. >> >> http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 >> >> These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be >> sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. >> >> Fell free to use, improve and share. >> >> -- >> David du Colombier > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 11:35:44 2017 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 21:35:44 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <31189C6E-570A-4954-BD4F-B4BE214A52C7@gewt.net> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> <31189C6E-570A-4954-BD4F-B4BE214A52C7@gewt.net> Message-ID: After looking at some open SIMH bugs, doing "set noasync" seems to fix the problem. -Henry On 28 March 2017 at 21:19, Cory Smelosky wrote: > Yes - there is a SIMH bug > > One I think I reported, actually maybe... > > Use SIMH 3.8-1 > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Mar 28, 2017, at 18:06, Henry Bent via TUHS > wrote: > > I can install 4.1BSD just fine, but I seem to be having trouble writing > anything to a second RP06: > > # mkfs /dev/hp1a 7942 > isize = 5072 > m/n = 3 500 > # mkfs /dev/hp1g 145673 > isize = 65488 > m/n = 3 500 > # mount /dev/hp1a /v8 > # mkdir /v8/usr > # mount /dev/hp1g /v8/usr > # cd /v8 > # mt rew > # mt fsf 2 > # tar xvpb 20 > hp0a: hard error sn10 mbsr=82000 er1=0 er2=0 > hp1a: hard error sn16 er1=5 er2=0 > mkdir: cannot make directory adm > ... > > Am I missing something, or did I run into a SIMH bug? My /dev entries all > look fine. > > -Henry > > On 28 March 2017 at 14:58, David du Colombier <0intro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. >> >> http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 >> >> These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be >> sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. >> >> Fell free to use, improve and share. >> >> -- >> David du Colombier >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Wed Mar 29 11:45:10 2017 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 21:45:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH Message-ID: <20170329014510.C60D718C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Grant Taylor > However, I've had to teach enough people to know that they need a way to > boot strap themselves into an environment to start learning. Right, but wouldn't they learn more from a clear and concise hand-holding which explains what they are doing and why - 'do this which does that to get this'? There is no more a royal road to knowing a system, than there is to mathematics. > I do consider what (I believe) Warren put together for the UUCP project > to be a very good start. Simple how to style directions that are easy > to follow that yield a functional system. Exactly.... Noel From usotsuki at buric.co Wed Mar 29 11:57:43 2017 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 21:57:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170329014510.C60D718C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170329014510.C60D718C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Mar 2017, Noel Chiappa via TUHS wrote: > > From: Grant Taylor > > > However, I've had to teach enough people to know that they need a way to > > boot strap themselves into an environment to start learning. > > Right, but wouldn't they learn more from a clear and concise hand-holding > which explains what they are doing and why - 'do this which does that to get > this'? > > There is no more a royal road to knowing a system, than there is to > mathematics. > > > I do consider what (I believe) Warren put together for the UUCP project > > to be a very good start. Simple how to style directions that are easy > > to follow that yield a functional system. > > Exactly.... > > Noel > And of course it's not going to help much if you want to do something weirder, like see if you can pull it up on x86 (which is what I'd like to do with it) xD Though perhaps some of the same steps may apply... -uso. From tim.newsham at gmail.com Wed Mar 29 12:44:44 2017 From: tim.newsham at gmail.com (Tim Newsham) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:44:44 -1000 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: There's a lot of fun and learning to be had besides doing an install. An easy entry point encourags more people to learn the system and get to the point where they could tackle an install of their own. The script serves two purposes 1) it sets up a clean system 2) it documents the install process you could also provide a pre-existing built system for people to play with (which is also useful). I personally prefer the script. On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Tim Newsham > > > Would be great if someone scripted it up to make it dog-simple. > > But if people just have to press a button (basically), they won't learn > anything. I guess I'm not understanding the point of the exercise? To say > they > have V6 running? So what? All they did was press a button. If it's to > experience a retro-computing environment, well, a person who's never used > one > of these older systems is going to be kind of lost - what are they going to > do, type 'ls -ls' and look at the output? Not very illuminating. (On V6, > without learning 'ed', they can't even type in a small C program, and > compile > and run it.) Sorry, I don't mean to be cranky, but I'm not understanding > the > point. > > Noel > -- Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From grog at lemis.com Wed Mar 29 12:57:21 2017 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:57:21 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: References: <20170328021342.GU20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170329025721.GP47251@eureka.lemis.com> On Tuesday, 28 March 2017 at 8:26:12 -0400, Brad Spencer wrote: > Larry McVoy writes: > >>> Looks like v9 runs on Sun-3/50. >>> >>> Now to hope my Sun-3 is a 3/50 and well...find it. ;) >> >> Heh. I went to ebay to see if you could still find 'em, no such luck. > > I have a bunch of 32bit Sun stuff that I have been wanted to get rid of > for some time. So do I, but I'm keeping it. The pizza boxes (SS2, SS5 and SS20) are just the right shape and size to prop up the monitors on my desk. Greg -- Sent from my desktop computer. Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key. See complete headers for address and phone numbers. This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 163 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Wed Mar 29 14:11:27 2017 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:11:27 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170329014510.C60D718C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20170329014510.C60D718C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <5cdb60bb-1968-b536-b710-bb6430b7ab8c@tnetconsulting.net> On 03/28/2017 07:45 PM, Noel Chiappa via TUHS wrote: > Right, but wouldn't they learn more from a clear and concise hand-holding > which explains what they are doing and why - 'do this which does that to get > this'? Sadly, the answer for some of the Jr. Admins that I've had the ... let's say pleasure ... of working with over the last five years cause me to first answer "No" and then answer "Yes". I say "No" because they would get bored and would not actually complete the task, much less learn anything. The answer is obviously "Yes" for those that would complete the task. - I found that I had to give people a caret to get them to want them to put in more effort. Perhaps it's just the batch of Jr. Admins that I was dealing with. I see and completely agree with your point for those that are properly motivated for the long haul. -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3717 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From peter at rulingia.com Wed Mar 29 16:55:40 2017 From: peter at rulingia.com (Peter Jeremy) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:55:40 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170328174254.GZ20717@mcvoy.com> References: <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> <20170328174254.GZ20717@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <20170329065540.GJ98076@server.rulingia.com> On 2017-Mar-28 10:42:54 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote: >and shove more VME stuff in there. If the 3/50 was a VME board I'm not >sure what the point was other than, perhaps, to reuse the same part in >a small case. I can't see Andy doing that, he was super cost sensitive. Unless you're planning on selling lots of them, using the same PCB and just not populating the bus interface logic might be cheaper than designing a new board. -- Peter Jeremy -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 949 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gdmr at inf.ed.ac.uk Wed Mar 29 18:22:57 2017 From: gdmr at inf.ed.ac.uk (George Ross) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:22:57 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:02:06 EDT." Message-ID: <201703290822.v2T8Mv1c009720@farg.inf.ed.ac.uk> > I think that the 3/50 was a "single board" VME system... and as you say > you really couldn't add anything to it. IIRC the only way to add anything to it was to pull the processor from its socket, plug in a daughterboard, and then plug the processor back into that. It did feel a whole lot more responsive with that extra 8MB of memory! -- George D M Ross MSc PhD CEng MBCS CITP, University of Edinburgh, School of Informatics, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH8 9AB Mail: gdmr at inf.ed.ac.uk Voice: 0131 650 5147 Fax: 0131 650 6899 PGP: 1024D/AD758CC5 B91E D430 1E0D 5883 EF6A 426C B676 5C2B AD75 8CC5 The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. From steffen at sdaoden.eu Wed Mar 29 20:41:57 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 12:41:57 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <66d1ab6c-1396-fa83-cb9d-2d87ab463be3@tnetconsulting.net> References: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <66d1ab6c-1396-fa83-cb9d-2d87ab463be3@tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: <20170329104157.758fn%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Grant Taylor via TUHS wrote: |On 03/28/2017 06:49 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: |> But if people just have to press a button (basically), they won't learn |> anything. I guess I'm not understanding the point of the exercise? \ |> To say they |> have V6 running? So what? All they did was press a button. If it's to |> experience a retro-computing environment, well, a person who's never \ |> used one |> of these older systems is going to be kind of lost - what are they \ |> going to |> do, type 'ls -ls' and look at the output? Not very illuminating. (On V6, |> without learning 'ed', they can't even type in a small C program, \ |> and compile |> and run it.) Sorry, I don't mean to be cranky, but I'm not understanding \ |> the |> point. | |Conceptually I agree. | |However, I've had to teach enough people to know that they need a way to |boot strap themselves into an environment to start learning. That reminds me of the only service call i ever made to the RedHat Service in Germany, likely about 18 years ago, when i asked them how a system can be bootstrapped, how to overcome that chicken and egg problem. |Thus I find having a streamlined process available to them to be |beneficial. Then once they have gotten a taste, presuming they like it, |they can go back and attempt to do more complicated things. There was only silence (but he really was a really good one and it was a deafening silence). That is what you are for, we only know about roasted chicken and fried egg (only meant idiomatic) in real practice. And thanks all living and all passed for the 8th, 9th and 10th Edition, now i can complete the complete mail history (already Mail and mailx in V10!). --steffen From steffen at sdaoden.eu Wed Mar 29 21:19:19 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:19:19 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix (was: Re: 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH) In-Reply-To: <20170329104157.758fn%steffen@sdaoden.eu> References: <20170329004914.D997818C083@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <66d1ab6c-1396-fa83-cb9d-2d87ab463be3@tnetconsulting.net> <20170329104157.758fn%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Message-ID: <20170329111919.EChPy%steffen@sdaoden.eu> i wrote: |And thanks all living and all passed for the 8th, 9th and 10th |Edition, now i can complete the complete mail history (already |Mail and mailx in V10!). The V9 ball does not show any trace of Mail/mailx?, however. I would be tremendously thrilled if i could get my hands on a copy of V9 code of the mentioned, may it be today or in the future. Thank you so much! --steffen From schily at schily.net Wed Mar 29 19:38:05 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:38:05 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <201703290822.v2T8Mv1c009720@farg.inf.ed.ac.uk> References: <201703290822.v2T8Mv1c009720@farg.inf.ed.ac.uk> Message-ID: <58db807d.qn8Xmvl3ZuN+bN3u%schily@schily.net> George Ross wrote: > > I think that the 3/50 was a "single board" VME system... and as you say > > you really couldn't add anything to it. > > IIRC the only way to add anything to it was to pull the processor from its > socket, plug in a daughterboard, and then plug the processor back into that. > It did feel a whole lot more responsive with that extra 8MB of memory! The method to "upgrade" a Sun-3/50 was to pull the gate arrays and add a doughter board. There have been such extensions from "Sunflower". A company that was latrer forced by Sun to rename into "Solflower". Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From schily at schily.net Wed Mar 29 18:51:12 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:51:12 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <20170329065540.GJ98076@server.rulingia.com> References: <73d56a67-9efb-bc21-d1f0-d51d5b800c9c@kilonet.net> <20170328174254.GZ20717@mcvoy.com> <20170329065540.GJ98076@server.rulingia.com> Message-ID: <58db7580.AVIrwj8f1PHS+n/O%schily@schily.net> Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2017-Mar-28 10:42:54 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote: > >and shove more VME stuff in there. If the 3/50 was a VME board I'm not > >sure what the point was other than, perhaps, to reuse the same part in > >a small case. I can't see Andy doing that, he was super cost sensitive. > > Unless you're planning on selling lots of them, using the same PCB and > just not populating the bus interface logic might be cheaper than > designing a new board. It also helps to manage many of them in larger cabinets. In 1991-1992, we added self made ISDN boards to the Boot-Prom socket of Sun 3-50s, put several of them into a Sun/3-160 cabinet that then was put into the computer room of the TU-Berlin as a ISDN<->IP gateway for students. There was e.g. a cabinet with the machines named "fa", "so", "la" "si" in the domain ".isdn.cs-tu-berlin.de". Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Thu Mar 30 12:36:02 2017 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:36:02 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] IP in v8-v10 Message-ID: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > > Can you characterize what the 3rd-party material might be? > > Me personally, no. But there are others on the list who can help do this. > Hopefully they will chime in! Here's a list, gathered from the manuals, of stuff that Bell Labs may not have the right to redistribute, with some (uncertain) attributions of origin. I did not check to see which of them appear in the TUHS archives; I doubt that /usr/src fully covered /bin and /usr/bin. This list is at best a first draft. Please weigh in with corrections. Doug Kernel internet code. BSD Imported commands esterel INRIA lisp, liszt, lxref MIT icont, iconc Arizona macsyma MIT maple Maplesoft Mail BSD matlab Mathworks more BSD (From the manpage: "More, a paginator that lives up to its name, has too many features to describe." Its prodigality has been eclipsed by "less".) netnews Duke ops5 CMU pascal, pc BSD pxp BSD readnews, checknews, postnews Duke sdb BSD smp Wolfram spitbol IIT telnet BSD tex Stanford tset BSD vi, ex, edit BSD Commands I'm not sure about, could be from Bell Labs cyntax news ropy strings Library functions termcap BSD Imported games adventure, zork, aarvark, rogue atc doctor MIT mars trek, ogre, sol, warp, sail Games I'm not sure about back boggle, hangman cribbage, fish ching gebam imp mille pacman pengo swar tso From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Mar 30 13:17:34 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 21:17:34 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix In-Reply-To: <58db807d.qn8Xmvl3ZuN+bN3u%schily@schily.net> References: <201703290822.v2T8Mv1c009720@farg.inf.ed.ac.uk> <58db807d.qn8Xmvl3ZuN+bN3u%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > George Ross wrote: > >> > I think that the 3/50 was a "single board" VME system... and as you say >> > you really couldn't add anything to it. >> >> IIRC the only way to add anything to it was to pull the processor from its >> socket, plug in a daughterboard, and then plug the processor back into that. >> It did feel a whole lot more responsive with that extra 8MB of memory! > > The method to "upgrade" a Sun-3/50 was to pull the gate arrays and add a > doughter board. There have been such extensions from "Sunflower". A company > that was latrer forced by Sun to rename into "Solflower". I know people that did unnatural things to upgrade the Sun 3/50 to something that had enough memory not to suck. Oh, and to have real disks, rather than the crazy SCSI to ESDI disks that had performance only marginally better than floppy drives.... IIRC, the hard part was getting a VME "cage" to allow other cards to in inserted, which killed the pizza-box implementation of the 3/50. But it's been a long time since that happened, and maybe I'm misremembering. Maybe that was only possible with the 3/60. Warner From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Mar 30 15:02:41 2017 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:02:41 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] IP in v8-v10 In-Reply-To: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: Technically, BSD code would be under BSDL with allows distribution.... Warner On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Doug McIlroy wrote: >> > Can you characterize what the 3rd-party material might be? >> >> Me personally, no. But there are others on the list who can help do this. >> Hopefully they will chime in! > > Here's a list, gathered from the manuals, of stuff that Bell Labs > may not have the right to redistribute, with some (uncertain) > attributions of origin. I did not check to see which of them appear in > the TUHS archives; I doubt that /usr/src fully covered /bin and /usr/bin. > > This list is at best a first draft. Please weigh in with corrections. > > Doug > > Kernel internet code. BSD > > Imported commands > > esterel INRIA > lisp, liszt, lxref MIT > icont, iconc Arizona > macsyma MIT > maple Maplesoft > Mail BSD > matlab Mathworks > more BSD (From the manpage: "More, a paginator that lives up to its name, has > too many features to describe." Its prodigality has been eclipsed by "less".) > netnews Duke > ops5 CMU > pascal, pc BSD > pxp BSD > readnews, checknews, postnews Duke > sdb BSD > smp Wolfram > spitbol IIT > telnet BSD > tex Stanford > tset BSD > vi, ex, edit BSD > > Commands I'm not sure about, could be from Bell Labs > > cyntax > news > ropy > strings > > Library functions > > termcap BSD > > Imported games > > adventure, zork, aarvark, rogue > atc > doctor MIT > mars > trek, ogre, sol, warp, sail > > Games I'm not sure about > > back > boggle, hangman > cribbage, fish > ching > gebam > imp > mille > pacman > pengo > swar > tso > From dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org Thu Mar 30 21:06:51 2017 From: dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org (Derek Fawcus) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:06:51 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] IP in v8-v10 In-Reply-To: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20170330110651.GA34550@cowbell.employees.org> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:36:02PM -0400, Doug McIlroy wrote: > This list is at best a first draft. Please weigh in with corrections. > > Doug > > Kernel internet code. BSD I've only had a quick glance (mainly at v10), but the kernel TCP/IP (IP, TCP, UDP, ARP) looks to be a home grow one built around Richie's Streams. DF From steffen at sdaoden.eu Thu Mar 30 21:16:01 2017 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:16:01 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Searching for 9th Edition Research Unix mail / Mail / mailx Message-ID: <20170330111601.xKVES%steffen@sdaoden.eu> I am maintaining a BSD Mail derivative and one goal of the project is to have the complete history of Unix mail and BSD Mail in the repository. There yet exists a [timeline] branch, which has been fed with data from TUHS (thank you!) and CSRG; but it is coarse and further linear history and so the new V8 and V10 cannot be inserted, i will need to add new [unix-mail] and [bsd-Mail] (and maybe [bsd-csrg] with all commits preserved, like Spinellis did so in the Unix-history repository). Thanks to TUHS the former can be almost completed, except that there is no trace of 9th Edition mail. It would be fantastic if finally this project could provide the complete history of Unix mail. I would be thankful for informations where to get a copy of 9th Edition mail. Thank you. P.S.: apologizing for capturing the other thread with such a coarse message. --steffen From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Thu Mar 30 21:47:52 2017 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:47:52 +0800 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH Message-ID: <0F0B9BFC06289346B88512B91E55670D2FF9@EXCHANGE> Thanks for the hints, and whatnot... I got v8 running! > ---------- > From: Tim Newsham > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 7:50 AM > To: David du Colombier > Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society > Subject: Re: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH > > Would be great if someone scripted it up to make it dog-simple. > Here's how I did it for v6: http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/myv6/README > (I should do this, but I'm not sure I'll have time in the near future). > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:58 AM, David du Colombier < 0intro at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Here are my notes to run 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH. > > http://9legacy.org/9legacy/doc/simh/v8 > > These notes are quite raw and unpolished, but should be > sufficient to get Unix running on SIMH. > > Fell free to use, improve and share. > > -- > David du Colombier > > > > > > -- > > Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | > thenewsh.blogspot.com > From 0intro at gmail.com Fri Mar 31 00:16:20 2017 From: 0intro at gmail.com (David du Colombier) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:16:20 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: <20170330161620.14f47d53@neon.9fans.fr> I've created a 8th Edition Unix disk image for SIMH. http://9legacy.org/download/unix/v8-simh.tar.bz2 This archive contains the RP06 disk image and the startup file. You can run it this way : $ simh-vax780 v8.ini Let me know if you encounter any issue. -- David du Colombier From norman at oclsc.org Fri Mar 31 01:55:25 2017 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:55:25 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) Message-ID: <1490889329.23882.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Josh Good: Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? ====== Remember that UNIX has long been a family of systems; it's risky to make blanket statements! The following is from memory; I haven't looked at this stuff for a while and am a few kilometers from my manuals as I type this. I can dig out the complete story later if anyone wants it; for now, this is just the flavour and the existence proof. Research UNIX, once it supported Ethernet at all, did so using devices in /dev; e.g. /dev/qe0[0-7] were the conventional names for the first DEQNA/DELQA device on a MicroVAX. There were eight subdevices per physical device, each a channel that might receive datagrams of a particular 16-bit type, programmed by an ioctl. To set up what we now call an IP interface, one did the following: a. Open an unused channel for the proper Ethernet physical device. (I think the devices were exclusive- open to make this easier: open /dev/qe00, then qe01, and so on until one succeeds.) b. Issue the ioctl to set the desired datagram type, usually 0x800. c. Push the IP stream line discipline onto the open file. d. Issue an ioctl to inform that IP instance of its address and netmask. Now datagrams of the specified type arriving on that device are fed to the IP subsystem, and the IP subsystem uses the IP address and mask and possibly other information to decide which datagrams to route to that IP instance, which sends them out that physical device. I forget how ARP and Ethernet encapsulation fit in. I know that they were someone more naive early on, and that in the 10/e systems I can now admit I have running at home I made things a bit smarter and less brittle. But that's the basic architecture. So how does one actually make, say, a TCP connection? Another layer of the same sort: There are devices /dev/ipX, served by an IP device driver that is part of the IP subsystem. Originally minor device X was hard-connected to IP protocol X; I later changed that to be ioctl-configured as well. To make TCP usable: a. Open /dev/ip6 (old school), or find an unused /dev/ipX (again they are exclusive-open) and configure it to accept protocol 6. b. Push the TCP stream line discipline onto the open file. c. There are probably things one could then configure, but I don't remember them offhand. To make a TCP call, open an unused /dev/tcpNN device; write something to it (or maybe it was an ioctl) with the desired destination address; wait for an error or success. On success, writes to the file descriptor send to the network, encapsulated as a TCP stream; reads receive. To receive a TCP call, open an unused /dev/tcpNN device, and write something (or ioctl) to say `I want to listen on this local port.' Then read the file. When a call arrives, you will read a message saying who's calling, and what /dev/tcpXX device you should open to accept the call. Notice the general scheme: for both TCP and IP (and there was a primitive UDP at one point, but it has fallen out of use on my systems), the protocol implementation comprises: 1. A line discipline: push it onto devices that will transport your data. 2. A device driver: use those devices to send and receive calls. The two are inextricably coupled inside the operating system, of course. There are all sorts of unfortunate details surrounding communications; e.g. the TCP code knows it is talking to IP, and constructs datagrams with partly-filled-in IP headers. (It is not clear one can do better than that in practice, because the protocols themselves really are linked, but I still think it's unfortunate.) On the other hand, that the junctions between plumbing are accessible makes some things very simple. I wrote a PPP implementation in user mode, with no kernel changes: to plug itself into IP, it just pushed the IP line discipline onto one end of a pipe, and read and wrote datagrams on the other. I later extended it to PPPoE by having it open an Ethernet device set to the proper datagram types (there is one for data and another for connection setup). On the other other hand, there are no permissions on stream line disciplines, so an untrustworthy person (if I allowed such on my systems) could push the IP line discipline onto his own pipe and send whatever datagrams he liked. This is decidedly a flaw. Those familiar with the original stream-system implementation have already spotted a lesser flaw: the file descriptor with IP pushed on (or TCP, or whatever) must remain open; when it is closed, everything shuts down. In practice it is usually useful to have a daemon listening to that file anyway; that's a good way for the system to report errors or confusion. In practice, TCP incalls and outcalls all went through a special daemon anyway, so that programs didn't have to be full of TCP-specific crap; that's what Dave Presotto's `connection server' is all about. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From ron at ronnatalie.com Fri Mar 31 02:05:04 2017 From: ron at ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:05:04 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) In-Reply-To: <1490889329.23882.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1490889329.23882.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: <035c01d2a96f$6555ee00$3001ca00$@ronnatalie.com> It's a violation of the network layering concept to require or even allow the user to bind the application data streams to a physical device. -----Original Message----- From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Norman Wilson Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 11:55 AM To: tuhs at tuhs.org Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) Josh Good: Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? From rminnich at gmail.com Fri Mar 31 02:14:00 2017 From: rminnich at gmail.com (ron minnich) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:14:00 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) In-Reply-To: <035c01d2a96f$6555ee00$3001ca00$@ronnatalie.com> References: <1490889329.23882.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> <035c01d2a96f$6555ee00$3001ca00$@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: I have a slightly different take on all this, namely, that Unix as it was worked, and that innovations in interfaces moved to another platform. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From 0intro at gmail.com Fri Mar 31 04:30:31 2017 From: 0intro at gmail.com (David du Colombier) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 20:30:31 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170330161620.14f47d53@neon.9fans.fr> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> <20170330161620.14f47d53@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: <20170330203031.065891fd@neon.9fans.fr> This image is ready to be used with aiju's Blit emulator, which is available as part of 9front. http://code.9front.org/hg/plan9front/file/tip/sys/src/games/blit This emulator works on most Plan 9 distributions. You just have to copy the /sys/lib/blit and /sys/src/games/blit directories to your system. With the v8.ini startup file provided, the console will be listening on port 8888/tcp once SIMH has been started. You have to run the emulator and connect to the console: % cd /sys/src/games/blit % mk install % games/blit -t tcp!hostname!8888 Once connected, enter your login and password. login: root Then, you can launch the mux window system: $ /usr/blit/bin/mux Once started, you can run any graphical program. Binaries are located in the /usr/blit/bin directory. For example, here is jim text editor: http://9legacy.org/img/v8/jim_01.png -- David du Colombier From norman at oclsc.org Fri Mar 31 05:24:25 2017 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:24:25 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) Message-ID: <1490901871.26986.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Ron Natalie: It's a violation of the network layering concept to require or even allow the user to bind the application data streams to a physical device. ===== Oh, come on. If you mean an applications programmer shouldn't have to wallow in low-level network details, I agree. That's one of the reasons I think the socket interface now standard in nearly every UNIX is an abomination. It reminds me of the binary data structures you had to assemble just to open a file in TOPS-10, only ten times worse. But if you mean it's a violation of layering for the kernel to expose the pieces and let user-mode code to the work, I strongly disagree. By that argument, the very idea of inetd is an abomination. Possibly even the ifconfig command. And don't even get the hypothetical you started on microkernels. User-mode code for device drivers or file systems? Outrageous violation of layering! Send in the New Jersey Inquisition!! Or perhaps you misunderstand how it all works. Device files for Ethernet devices, /dev/ip*, and so on are like those for disk devices: you could allow anyone to read and write them, but in practice you probably wouldn't: you'd restrict access to the super-user and perhaps a special group to admit some sort of privilege reduction (like the group allowed to read disks on some systems, or to read /dev/kmem). That parts of the stack are assembled in user mode is a feature, not a bug. The one glaring flaw, as I said, is that no permissions are checked when pushing a stream line discipline onto a file. I think that happened because when Dennis first wrote the code, he was thinking about modules to implement canonical-tty semantics, or to invoke the very-different Datakit networking model. It's a fundamental flaw, though. I have had thoughts about fixing it, but never enough time nor enough motivation. (My technical mind is pretty much filled up by what I am paid to do these days; I haven't done much hobby computing in years.) Norman Wilson Toronto ON From norman at oclsc.org Fri Mar 31 05:24:42 2017 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:24:42 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) Message-ID: <1490901886.27069.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Joerg Schilling: This is done on a UNIX implementation that uses STREAMS. SVr4 is such a UNIX. ====== I know that SVr4 has STREAMS (somewhat more elaborate than the original stream I/O system, but the same principles), and knew (though I'd forgotten) that Ethernet devices are stream-capable. I did an implementation of the late lamented Coraid's AoE protocol that took advantage of that. Somewhat like the Research IP implementation, in fact: there was an AoE line discipline to be pushed onto an Ethernet device, coupled to devices in /dev/dsk and /dev/rdsk. But is IP done that way in SVr4 (or at least in Solaris, its most-visible descendant)? I had the impression that the IP stack was more like the BSD one, with everything coupled together within the kernel and a fundamentally socket interface. I've never actually looked at the code, though. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From scj at yaccman.com Fri Mar 31 05:29:27 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:29:27 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] IP in v8-v10 In-Reply-To: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <529dbb7ed9d90a8ece209cae4229aa3b017040a3@webmail.yaccman.com> Can't help much, but I did write fish and ching. ching took a string from the input, hashed it, converted into hexagrams, and quoted a couple of lines of i Ching text .  The text was copied from a book, presumably copyrighted, although considering how long ago this all was maybe the copyright has expired now... I wrote fish for my young son -- it played the kids game.  Without graphics it wasn't very compelling.  But there is an interesting story about it.  A couple of weeks after the first version, I realized that if my opponent (e.g., the computer) asked me for, e.g. a six, and later I drew a six, I should ask the opponent for sixes.  With this small change the game defeated all kids and most adults, and the game was even less interesting as a result.  I ended up putting in an option to dumb the game back to its original level. A couple of years later, at a Usenix meeting, I was publicly called out for writing a game "that cheated".    Unless somebody hacked my code somewhere along the way, the game simply played excellent strategy... Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug McIlroy" To: Cc: Sent:Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:36:02 -0400 Subject:[TUHS] IP in v8-v10 > > Can you characterize what the 3rd-party material might be? > > Me personally, no. But there are others on the list who can help do this. > Hopefully they will chime in! Here's a list, gathered from the manuals, of stuff that Bell Labs may not have the right to redistribute, with some (uncertain) attributions of origin. I did not check to see which of them appear in the TUHS archives; I doubt that /usr/src fully covered /bin and /usr/bin. This list is at best a first draft. Please weigh in with corrections. Doug Kernel internet code. BSD Imported commands esterel INRIA lisp, liszt, lxref MIT icont, iconc Arizona macsyma MIT maple Maplesoft Mail BSD matlab Mathworks more BSD (From the manpage: "More, a paginator that lives up to its name, has too many features to describe." Its prodigality has been eclipsed by "less".) netnews Duke ops5 CMU pascal, pc BSD pxp BSD readnews, checknews, postnews Duke sdb BSD smp Wolfram spitbol IIT telnet BSD tex Stanford tset BSD vi, ex, edit BSD Commands I'm not sure about, could be from Bell Labs cyntax news ropy strings Library functions termcap BSD Imported games adventure, zork, aarvark, rogue atc doctor MIT mars trek, ogre, sol, warp, sail Games I'm not sure about back boggle, hangman cribbage, fish ching gebam imp mille pacman pengo swar tso -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From norman at oclsc.org Fri Mar 31 05:43:52 2017 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:43:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Release of 8th, 9th and 10th Editions Unix Message-ID: <1490903037.27646.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Arnold: > Well, I'll take credit for pushing Norman yet again. :-) ARGGH. That should have been Well, I'll take credit for pushing Warren ... ^^^^^^ ===== I confess I didn't notice the fumble the first time. But in fact Warren has had the dubious pleasure of pushing me for something more than once. So just think of it as another level of indirection. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From scj at yaccman.com Fri Mar 31 05:44:13 2017 From: scj at yaccman.com (Steve Johnson) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:44:13 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] UUNET In-Reply-To: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <970ebcd6f057fd09e0335319bb27f0ace8b61b1f@webmail.yaccman.com> I had some private email from a couple of this list's members, asking about the relationship between UUNET and Usenix.  I presume some questions arose because Rick Adams was on the Usenix board, and, although we on the Usenix board tried to be open about things it's been a while, and apparently some people remain suspicious about what happened.  They urged me to share this history with the list: I'm happy to share my memories of how UUNET came to be associated with, and later disassociated from Usenix. At the time, newsgroups were growing in popularity.  To get a usegroup delivered, you had to talk with someone who got the newsgroups and get them to agree to call your computer and deliver it -- all communication was through modems and phone calls.  The traffic was growing rapidly and it was clear that we were heading for a brick wall.   Some universities and private companies found themselves with computer phone bills of $10,000 a month or higher, and some critical nodes lived in daily fear that somebody was going to notice this and shut it down.   Because the network was made up of individually negotiated links, this was likely to lead to a snowball effect if it got started, Also, at the time Usenix had a lot of cash.   We were budgeting conferences to have 1000 attendees and getting 2500.  We decided as a board to offer to help people who could propose a plan to prevent this Usenet collapse, and sent out a fairly broad plea to our members for project proposals.   We received two.  The first was Lauren Weinstein's, to use cable to distribute netnews, and we agreed to help him purchase some equipment to upload digital signals to be sent in the "screen refresh" signal time (that sounds so dated today!) from a satellite to cable TV.   He was able to run a successful experiment, but the cable companies and Lauren never managed to get together to carry it further.   The other proposal was Rick Adams.  He had already formed a company (to my knowledge, the first of what would be called ISPs) and he proposed an agreement to distribute netnews at a low cost if we could help him upgrade his computer equipment to handle the increased load.  We sought legal help to make sure we were not messing up our nonprofit status, and settled on the following:  Usenix would guarantee a loan (I recall the amount was roughly $250,000) that he would get from a bank, and he would distribute netnews at a low cost.  I was treasurer at the time, and went with Rick to talk to the bank.   We agreed to open a savings account at the bank and put $250,000 into it for the duration of the loan -- since we had a lot of cash, this was no problem for us.  In the event that Rick failed, we would pay any balance of the loan.  And we asked Rick for regular financial statements for the duration of the loan. As everyone knows now, RIck was extremely successful (he had about 5 years of growth at about 15% per month(!) as I recall).  After several years, Rick's budget was several times the size of Usenix's, and we mutually agreed to dissolve the agreement.  Rick paid off the loan, and the netnews disaster never happened. Looking back on this, there is not a thing I would have done differently (except perhaps to buy some stock in uunet!). Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From john at jfloren.net Fri Mar 31 07:38:30 2017 From: john at jfloren.net (John Floren) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:38:30 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] IP in v8-v10 In-Reply-To: <529dbb7ed9d90a8ece209cae4229aa3b017040a3@webmail.yaccman.com> References: <201703300236.v2U2a2oF018229@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <529dbb7ed9d90a8ece209cae4229aa3b017040a3@webmail.yaccman.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Steve Johnson wrote: > Can't help much, but I did write fish and ching. > > ching took a string from the input, hashed it, converted into hexagrams, and > quoted a couple of lines of i Ching text . The text was copied from a book, > presumably copyrighted, although considering how long ago this all was maybe > the copyright has expired now... > Funny you mention ching, I recently went poking around /usr/games and realized that ching wasn't there any more, although I remembered it from very old Linux systems. So I found the source somewhere and applied some extremely basic tweaks to get it building: https://github.com/floren/ching As the original author, if you think I ought to take that repo down for any reason, let me know. john From schily at schily.net Fri Mar 31 02:48:30 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:48:30 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) In-Reply-To: <1490889329.23882.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1490889329.23882.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: <58dd36de.eTE7TJkq6BWTxw4q%schily@schily.net> Norman Wilson wrote: > Josh Good: > > Which brings up a question I have: why didn't UNIX implement ethernet > network interfaces as file names in the filesystem? Was that "novelty" a > BDS development straying away from AT&T UNIX? > > ====== > > Remember that UNIX has long been a family of systems; > it's risky to make blanket statements! > > The following is from memory; I haven't looked at this > stuff for a while and am a few kilometers from my > manuals as I type this. I can dig out the complete > story later if anyone wants it; for now, this is just > the flavour and the existence proof. > > Research UNIX, once it supported Ethernet at all, did > so using devices in /dev; e.g. /dev/qe0[0-7] were the This is done on a UNIX implementation that uses STREAMS. SVr4 is such a UNIX. lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 29 Mrz 3 2009 /dev/bge -> ../devices/pseudo/clone at 0:bge lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 38 Mrz 3 2009 /dev/bge0 -> ../devices/pci at 0,0/pci1462,6710 at b:bge0 /dev/bge is a clone device and allows to access and plumb further devices. /dev/bge0 is the first Broadcom Gigabit Ethernet device. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From arnold at skeeve.com Fri Mar 31 14:39:40 2017 From: arnold at skeeve.com (arnold at skeeve.com) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 22:39:40 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) In-Reply-To: <1490901886.27069.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1490901886.27069.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: <201703310439.v2V4de7u010448@freefriends.org> More off topic ... Norman Wilson wrote: > I did an implementation of the late lamented Coraid's AoE protocol that > took advantage of that. Coraid and AoE are alive and well, reincarnated by Brantley Coile under a slightly different umbrella. But he owns the IP and the name (once again) and is supporting any Coraid customer who needs it. FWIW, Arnold From noel.hunt at gmail.com Fri Mar 31 14:40:47 2017 From: noel.hunt at gmail.com (Noel Hunt) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 15:40:47 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Pi, samuel, cin and 8th, 9th, 10th Edition Unix Message-ID: I was just the other day apprised of the fact that Warren Toomey had finally got permission to make public sources from Eight, Ninth and Tenth Edition Unix. It was Paul McJones from the Software Preservation Group who made me aware of this because some months ago I was in touch with him in regard to the status of source for 'pads/pi' which is on the SPG website. That was donated by Bjorn Stroustrup in 2004 I believe, as an example of a large C++ project, along with sources for 'cfront'. I myself have been working on pads/pi in a desultory fashion since 1990 when I left the Basser Department of Computer Science at the University of Sydney; we had an Eighth Edition licence, hence source code, and all of the blit/jerq utilities. I ported 'pads' to the Plan9 graphics model many years ago, and finally started to port 'pi' to Solaris 11 a couple of years ago. This works in a rudimentary fashion, but needs a Dwarf interface. Given that Bjorn Stroustrup released this code long ago (a much later version than what I had), I daresay there are no problems with its publication. I have, however, also worked on 'samuel' and ported its functionality to the Plan9 'sam'. 'samuel' does not appear in any of the archives that Wareen Toomey has made available, so I am wondering what its status may be. It was written by John Puttress at the labs in the late '80s, when he was apparently working under Ted Kowalski. Ted Kowalski is also a 'person of interest' because he wrote 'cin', the C interpreter, an interface to which exists in 'samuel'. Ted Kowalski unfortunately passed away some years ago and no-one seems to know where the source is. It again, isn't in any of the archives that Wareen Toomey has been able to make available. If anyone has any information about 'samuel' or 'cin', I would be delighted to hear from him or her. Bruce Ellis, who wrote 'cyntax', told me that he worked on 'cin' a lot (in the '90s I think, when he worked at Bell Labs) but it was succeeded by something named 'vice', about which I can find no information. Again, I would be grateful for any information about this. Regards, Noel Hunt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mjkerpan at kerpan.com Fri Mar 31 15:05:16 2017 From: mjkerpan at kerpan.com (Michael Kerpan) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:05:16 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: <20170330203031.065891fd@neon.9fans.fr> References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> <20170330161620.14f47d53@neon.9fans.fr> <20170330203031.065891fd@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: Has the Blit emulator been ported to anything other than Plan 9 or does one need to set up a VM running Plan 9 to test out the graphics? Mike On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:30 PM, David du Colombier <0intro at gmail.com> wrote: > This image is ready to be used with aiju's Blit emulator, > which is available as part of 9front. > > http://code.9front.org/hg/plan9front/file/tip/sys/src/games/blit > > This emulator works on most Plan 9 distributions. You just > have to copy the /sys/lib/blit and /sys/src/games/blit > directories to your system. > > With the v8.ini startup file provided, the console will be > listening on port 8888/tcp once SIMH has been started. > > You have to run the emulator and connect to the console: > > % cd /sys/src/games/blit > % mk install > % games/blit -t tcp!hostname!8888 > > Once connected, enter your login and password. > > login: root > > Then, you can launch the mux window system: > > $ /usr/blit/bin/mux > > Once started, you can run any graphical program. > Binaries are located in the /usr/blit/bin directory. > > For example, here is jim text editor: > > http://9legacy.org/img/v8/jim_01.png > > -- > David du Colombier From khm at sciops.net Fri Mar 31 15:36:14 2017 From: khm at sciops.net (Kurt H Maier) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 22:36:14 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] 8th Edition Research Unix on SIMH In-Reply-To: References: <20170328205823.45fee6fe@neon.9fans.fr> <20170330161620.14f47d53@neon.9fans.fr> <20170330203031.065891fd@neon.9fans.fr> Message-ID: <20170331053614.GE97595@wopr> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 01:05:16AM -0400, Michael Kerpan wrote: > Has the Blit emulator been ported to anything other than Plan 9 or > does one need to set up a VM running Plan 9 to test out the graphics? 9front works fine on actual hardware, no vm necessary. khm From schily at schily.net Fri Mar 31 08:11:25 2017 From: schily at schily.net (Joerg Schilling) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:11:25 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Ethernet in /dev (was Re: Were all of you.. Hippies?) In-Reply-To: <1490901886.27069.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> References: <1490901886.27069.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Message-ID: <58dd828d.WLrIXtDSHxyFDrfe%schily@schily.net> Norman Wilson wrote: > But is IP done that way in SVr4 (or at least in Solaris, its > most-visible descendant)? I had the impression that the > IP stack was more like the BSD one, with everything coupled > together within the kernel and a fundamentally socket interface. The code has been implemented in a way that mainly differs in that "ifconfig" needs to be called with "ifconfig plumb" before you can use the interface. In former times, sockets have been emulated in userland, but this prevents a socket filedescriptor returned from a dup(sockfd) to work as expected. As a result, POSIX later required sockets to be an integral part of the implementation and sockets went into the kernel again. BTW: there was a paper from Sun that explains that sockets are faster then using the STREAMS based t_open() and friends. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ From dave at horsfall.org Fri Mar 31 16:03:24 2017 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 17:03:24 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] [Uucp] utzoo In-Reply-To: <20170330074552.GA32142@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20170330074552.GA32142@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Mar 2017, Warren Toomey via Uucp wrote: > On 03/29/2017 11:09 PM, Dave Horsfall via Uucp wrote: > > Let the cancel/rmgroup/flame wars begin :-) > > :-P And I still bear the scars from the aus.bizarre war... And I'll bet that not many people remember that little episode :-) > > (Been too busy to set up "utzoo" yet, so if anyone is desperate for it > > then they can have it instead; my long-term goal is to run SimH on a > > RasbPi but first I have to afford one...) > > What's your address? I've got an unused Raspberry Pi that I'll send you > (or anyone else). ;-) First come, first serve. To be sent privately... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." From b4 at gewt.net Fri Mar 31 16:15:10 2017 From: b4 at gewt.net (Cory Smelosky) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 23:15:10 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] [Uucp] bringing systems up In-Reply-To: References: <20170331023521.GA97595@wopr> Message-ID: Due to having an actual NSA VAX...I think I should get NSAVAX ;) Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 30, 2017, at 23:13, Dave Horsfall via Uucp wrote: > >> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017, Kurt H Maier via Uucp wrote: >> >> kremvax and moskvax are online. What's the policy on uucp.map entries >> for hosts that never really existed in the first place? > > Hmmm... I wouldn't mind having "kgbvax" in that case (I've relinquished > "utzoo" to Henry Spencer himself). Or possibly "ciavax" or "fbivax"... > > -- > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."