From aek at spies.com Sat Jun 7 11:20:25 2003 From: aek at spies.com (Al Kossow) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 18:20:25 -0700 Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Message-ID: <200306070120.h571KPRj019350@spies.com> I've located the SOLO RK05 disc image. I tested it with SIMH, and it appears to work. The command language is a bit opaque; it would be a great help if you could find out if they might still have the documentation, even if they didn't have the code itself. Hopefully, Bob Supnik can get permission to add this to the SIMH software archive. the image temporarily at www.spies.com/aek/solo.dsk --- LIST(CATALOG,ALL,CONSOLE) CONSOLE: SOLO SYSTEM FILES AUTOLOAD SCRATCH PROTECTED 1 PAGES BACKUP SEQCODE PROTECTED 4 PAGES BACKUPMAN ASCII PROTECTED 3 PAGES BACKUPTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 14 PAGES BUILDBATTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 1 PAGES BUILDTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 4 PAGES CARDS SEQCODE PROTECTED 5 PAGES CARDSMAN ASCII PROTECTED 2 PAGES CARDSTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 12 PAGES CATALOG SCRATCH PROTECTED 15 PAGES CDISKTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 10 PAGES COMMANDS ASCII UNPROTECTED 1 PAGES CONSOLE SEQCODE PROTECTED 1 PAGES CONSOLEMAN ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES CONSOLETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 8 PAGES COPY SEQCODE PROTECTED 4 PAGES COPYMAN ASCII PROTECTED 2 PAGES COPYTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 12 PAGES CPASCAL SEQCODE PROTECTED 7 PAGES CPASCALMAN ASCII PROTECTED 3 PAGES CPASCALTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 18 PAGES CPASS1 SEQCODE PROTECTED 20 PAGES CPASS1TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 54 PAGES CPASS2 SEQCODE PROTECTED 26 PAGES CPASS2TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 72 PAGES CPASS3 SEQCODE PROTECTED 35 PAGES CPASS3TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 90 PAGES CPASS4 SEQCODE PROTECTED 27 PAGES CPASS4TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 71 PAGES CPASS5 SEQCODE PROTECTED 20 PAGES CPASS5TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 56 PAGES CPASS6 SEQCODE PROTECTED 16 PAGES CPASS6TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 53 PAGES CPASS7 SEQCODE PROTECTED 18 PAGES CPASS7TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 56 PAGES CPTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 2 PAGES DISK SEQCODE PROTECTED 2 PAGES DISKMAN ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES DISKTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 9 PAGES DO SEQCODE PROTECTED 11 PAGES DOMAN ASCII PROTECTED 3 PAGES DOTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 26 PAGES EDIT SEQCODE PROTECTED 8 PAGES EDITMAN ASCII PROTECTED 5 PAGES EDITTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 20 PAGES FILE SEQCODE PROTECTED 20 PAGES FILEMAN ASCII PROTECTED 3 PAGES FILETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 54 PAGES IO SEQCODE PROTECTED 4 PAGES IOTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 13 PAGES JOB SEQCODE PROTECTED 40 PAGES JOBBUFFER1 SCRATCH PROTECTED 20 PAGES JOBBUFFER2 SCRATCH PROTECTED 20 PAGES JOBINPUT SEQCODE PROTECTED 3 PAGES JOBINPUTTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 6 PAGES JOBOUTPUT SEQCODE PROTECTED 2 PAGES JOBOUTPUTTXT ASCII PROTECTED 6 PAGES JOBPREFIX ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES JOBSERVICE SEQCODE PROTECTED 3 PAGES JOBSERVICETX ASCII PROTECTED 8 PAGES JOBSTREAM CONCODE PROTECTED 17 PAGES JOBSTREAMTXT ASCII PROTECTED 50 PAGES KERNELTEXT1 ASCII UNPROTECTED 134 PAGES KERNELTEXT2 ASCII UNPROTECTED 129 PAGES KERNELTEXT3 ASCII UNPROTECTED 147 PAGES KERNELTEXT4 ASCII UNPROTECTED 171 PAGES LIST SEQCODE PROTECTED 7 PAGES LISTMAN ASCII PROTECTED 2 PAGES LISTTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 19 PAGES MAKETEMP SEQCODE PROTECTED 4 PAGES MAKETEMPMAN ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES MAKETEMPTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 12 PAGES MOVE SEQCODE PROTECTED 2 PAGES MOVEMAN ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES MOVETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 10 PAGES MTOPTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 4 PAGES NEXT SCRATCH PROTECTED 255 PAGES PIPELINE CONCODE PROTECTED 4 PAGES PIPELINETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 8 PAGES PREFIX ASCII PROTECTED 6 PAGES PRINTER SEQCODE PROTECTED 3 PAGES PRINTERMAN ASCII PROTECTED 2 PAGES PRINTERTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 11 PAGES READ SEQCODE PROTECTED 4 PAGES READMAN ASCII PROTECTED 2 PAGES READTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 12 PAGES REALTIME CONCODE PROTECTED 11 PAGES REALTIMETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 23 PAGES RKBOOTTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 6 PAGES SOLO CONCODE PROTECTED 18 PAGES SOLOBATTEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 4 PAGES SOLOCOPY ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES SOLOFILES ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES SOLOTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 52 PAGES SPASCAL SEQCODE PROTECTED 7 PAGES SPASCALMAN ASCII PROTECTED 3 PAGES SPASCALTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 18 PAGES SPASS1 SEQCODE PROTECTED 20 PAGES SPASS1TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 53 PAGES SPASS2 SEQCODE PROTECTED 26 PAGES SPASS2TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 73 PAGES SPASS3 SEQCODE PROTECTED 35 PAGES SPASS3TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 91 PAGES SPASS4 SEQCODE PROTECTED 26 PAGES SPASS4TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 65 PAGES SPASS5 SEQCODE PROTECTED 19 PAGES SPASS5TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 54 PAGES SPASS6 SEQCODE PROTECTED 16 PAGES SPASS6TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 53 PAGES SPASS7 SEQCODE PROTECTED 18 PAGES SPASS7TEXT ASCII PROTECTED 56 PAGES START SEQCODE PROTECTED 3 PAGES STARTMAN ASCII PROTECTED 3 PAGES STARTTEXT ASCII PROTECTED 11 PAGES SUPERMAC ASCII UNPROTECTED 30 PAGES TAPE SEQCODE PROTECTED 3 PAGES TAPEMAN ASCII PROTECTED 2 PAGES TAPETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 14 PAGES TEMP1 SCRATCH PROTECTED 255 PAGES TEMP2 SCRATCH PROTECTED 255 PAGES TOTAPETEXT ASCII UNPROTECTED 4 PAGES WRITE SEQCODE PROTECTED 2 PAGES WRITEMAN ASCII PROTECTED 1 PAGES WRITETEXT ASCII PROTECTED 9 PAGES XMAC ASCII UNPROTECTED 1 PAGES 125 ENTRIES 3391 PAGES From aek at spies.com Sat Jun 7 11:39:12 2003 From: aek at spies.com (Al Kossow) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 18:39:12 -0700 Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Message-ID: <200306070139.h571dCPG020890@spies.com> I've located a paper which describes the system, which I've put up along with the disc image in www.spies.com/aek/solo I'll see about extracting all of the files. From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sat Jun 7 19:55:11 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 21:55:11 +1200 Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al In-Reply-To: <200306070120.h571KPRj019350@spies.com> References: <200306070120.h571KPRj019350@spies.com> Message-ID: <200306072155.11912.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Firstly, many thanks. I've downloaded it, and will get on to it right away. Re: Command laguage - judging from what the book "The Architecture of Concurrent Programs" says, I always assumed that the job control language was pascal itself, eg, pg 70, 71: "if the user forgets which programs are available, he may for example type: help (or anything else). The system responds by writing not executable, try list(catalog, seqcode, console) The suggested command lists the names of all sequential programs on the console." "Still more information about a program can be gained by reading its manual copy(readman, console) " and, pg 75: "The program does not know whether it is being called by another program or directly from the console." Thus like the LispMachine, the operating system is user-extensible. If it's any help, I've got the book, and it does contain a brief section on usage - I'm sure I could make a valid case for Fair Use if I copied the user HOWTO out and posted it on my web site as a HOWTO for anyone as interested as me in Concurrent Pascal and Solo - understanding that the section is only 9 pages long, and about 4 of those are half-pages. Thus it is obvious I am not intending to copy the entire book and thus bilk Prentice-Hall out of sales. Only thing is, I need to get in touch with Prentice-Hall, the publishers, to put my case to them. Anyone know the name of the person I should get in touch with? Wesley Parish On Sat, 07 Jun 2003 13:20, Al Kossow wrote: > I've located the SOLO RK05 disc image. I tested it with > SIMH, and it appears to work. The command language is a > bit opaque; it would be a great help if you could find > out if they might still have the documentation, even if > they didn't have the code itself. > > Hopefully, Bob Supnik can get permission to add this > to the SIMH software archive. > > the image temporarily at www.spies.com/aek/solo.dsk > > --- > > LIST(CATALOG,ALL,CONSOLE) > CONSOLE: > SOLO SYSTEM FILES > > PUPS mailing list > PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From ggs at shiresoft.com Sun Jun 22 16:07:02 2003 From: ggs at shiresoft.com (Guy Sotomayor) Date: 21 Jun 2003 23:07:02 -0700 Subject: [pups] Bootstrap for TS11 (or TU80) Message-ID: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com> Hi, I'm trying to locate a PDP-11 bootstrap for a TS11 or TU80. I've created a unix v7m distribution tape and want to try and install from it. Thanks. -- TTFN - Guy From robinb at ruffnready.co.uk Sun Jun 22 19:53:58 2003 From: robinb at ruffnready.co.uk (Robin Birch) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 10:53:58 +0100 Subject: [pups] Bootstrap for TS11 (or TU80) In-Reply-To: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com> References: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com> Message-ID: In message <1056262021.5111.11.camel at nazgul.shiresoft.com>, Guy Sotomayor writes >Hi, > >I'm trying to locate a PDP-11 bootstrap for a TS11 or TU80. > >I've created a unix v7m distribution tape and want to try and install >from it. > >Thanks. It should be easy to find. If no-one immediately sends you one down load the BSD2.11 installation docs as there is a copy in there. Robin -- Robin Birch From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sun Jun 22 20:41:33 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:41:33 +1200 Subject: [pups] About early Un*x clones Message-ID: <200306222241.33385.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Whitesmith under the capable guidance of Plauger - who else - came up with Idris. And a number of other Un*x clones were duly written at about the same time, according to: http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html The question is, is it possible to get ahold of those for the early Un*x hobbyist? Does anyone have any knowledge of their whereabouts, and (potential) legal statii? Wesley Parish -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From ggs at shiresoft.com Mon Jun 23 01:51:12 2003 From: ggs at shiresoft.com (Guy Sotomayor) Date: 22 Jun 2003 08:51:12 -0700 Subject: [pups] Bootstrap for TS11 (or TU80) In-Reply-To: References: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com> Message-ID: <1056297071.4005.13.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com> On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 02:53, Robin Birch wrote: > In message <1056262021.5111.11.camel at nazgul.shiresoft.com>, Guy > Sotomayor writes > >Hi, > > > >I'm trying to locate a PDP-11 bootstrap for a TS11 or TU80. > > > >I've created a unix v7m distribution tape and want to try and install > >from it. > > > >Thanks. > It should be easy to find. If no-one immediately sends you one down > load the BSD2.11 installation docs as there is a copy in there. > Thanks. I found it in the BSD2.11 docs. -- TTFN - Guy From robin.birch at royalmail.com Tue Jun 24 19:25:28 2003 From: robin.birch at royalmail.com (robin.birch at royalmail.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:25:28 +0000 Subject: [pups] PDP11 C Message-ID: <00256D4F.0033E462.00@postoffice.co.uk> Hi Everyone, This is slightly off topic I know but does anyone have a PDP11 C run time library reference manual that they can either scan for me or send me so that I can photocopy it. Regards Robin This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system. From robin.birch at royalmail.com Tue Jun 24 20:26:21 2003 From: robin.birch at royalmail.com (robin.birch at royalmail.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:26:21 +0000 Subject: [pups] PDP11 C Message-ID: <00256D4F.003981C4.00@postoffice.co.uk> Panic over, I've found a copy that I didn't realise I had :-) Regards Robin This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system. From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu Wed Jun 25 01:45:57 2003 From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pups] PDP11 C Message-ID: <200306241545.h5OFjvc28962@opihi.ucsd.edu> > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:26:21 +0000 > Subject: [pups] PDP11 C > > Panic over, I've found a copy that I didn't realise I had :-) Just out of curiousity, which operating system did you have in mind? A run-time library is rather OS-dependent. carl -- carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego clowenst at ucsd.edu From Fred.van.Kempen at microwalt.nl Wed Jun 25 02:01:14 2003 From: Fred.van.Kempen at microwalt.nl (Fred N. van Kempen) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:01:14 +0200 Subject: [pups] PDP11 C Message-ID: <7AD18F04B62B7440BE22E190A3F7721409DF0C@mwsrv04.microwalt.nl> He's using RSX :) --f > -----Original Message----- > From: Carl Lowenstein [mailto:cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 5:46 PM > To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org; robin.birch at royalmail.com > Subject: Re: [pups] PDP11 C > > > > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:26:21 +0000 > > Subject: [pups] PDP11 C > > > > Panic over, I've found a copy that I didn't realise I had :-) > > Just out of curiousity, which operating system did you have in > mind? A run-time library is rather OS-dependent. > > carl > > -- > carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego > clowenst at ucsd.edu > _______________________________________________ > PUPS mailing list > PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups > From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG Mon Jun 2 11:53:18 2003 From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 03 18:53:18 PDT Subject: [TUHS] The REEL reasons for the SCO vs. IBM affair Message-ID: <0306020153.AA19677@ivan.Harhan.ORG> Hello folks. I've been watching this whole SCO vs. IBM assault on Linux thing and here are my thoughts. I would not surprised a bit if it turns out that this idea was conceived somewhere inside Microsoft, or in the White House, in the Pentagon, or even at Area 51. This is about world control. A certain group of enormous power has been ruling this planet and holding it in slavery for the past 4000 years. They are the ones in control today. They control the world through their control of globalised imperial capitalism, total control of all media, and mind control achieved by controlling all information input into human minds. Control of computing and information resources is obviously of vital importance to them in this day and age. It is they who invented M$ Weendoze, probably the most effective brainwashing device since the Bible. It is really Weendoze that keeps them in power. There are many activists fighting against this shadow government, but their efforts are in vain for as long as they use Weendoze. Fighting the shadow government while using their OS is like going on a duel and having your opponent load your gun for you. This is precisely why the shadow government is acting so arrogantly and seemingly naively. Many conspiracy researchers have wondered how come if this shadow govt is so powerful and obviously wants to remain in control, why aren't they assassinating us or something to stop our efforts to defeat them. And I think I know the answer now. They government is not assassinating conspiracy researchers en masse because the vast majority of them use Weendoze and praise Bill Gates. Thus while thinking that they are fighting the shadow government, they actually support it. And now it seems like the shadowy powers have begun to *really* fear Linux. Because Linux more than anything poses the greatest threat to their power. It does because if all those conspiracy researchers and anti-shadow govt freedom fighters who are already out there happen to switch to Windows to Linux, the probability of which rises proportionally as Linux gains more and more use, then bye-bye shadow government. *That* is what they fear. And that is why they have undertaken this ultrasecret covert anti-Linux operation. Just my thoughts. MS P.S. Too bad that you've just missed Conspiracy Con 2003 last weekend, but they have them every year. But there is also the companion conference, Bay Area UFO Expo held in September, where they also talk a lot about conspiracies, as these conspiracies are ultimately extraterrestrial. If anyone is interested in this I strongly recommend going to the Expo this September. I'll be there if anyone wants to meet me. From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org Mon Jun 2 12:05:15 2003 From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 12:05:15 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] The REEL reasons for the SCO vs. IBM affair In-Reply-To: <0306020153.AA19677@ivan.Harhan.ORG> References: <0306020153.AA19677@ivan.Harhan.ORG> Message-ID: <20030602020515.GA2122@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 06:53:18PM -0700, Michael Sokolov wrote: > Hello folks. > > I've been watching this whole SCO vs. IBM assault on Linux thing and here are > my thoughts. I would not surprised a bit if it turns out that this idea was > conceived somewhere inside Microsoft, or in the White House, in the Pentagon. All, please post followups to this e-mail directly to Michael. Warren From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Mon Jun 2 12:51:01 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 22:51:01 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs Message-ID: <20030602025128.89BFA1E4D@minnie.tuhs.org> Greg Lehey: For example, last year Caldera released "ancient UNIX" under a BSD-style license, but now they're claiming it never happened. Maybe they don't know about the company history. And if the code in dispute is derived from ancient UNIX, there'll be egg on their face. ===== If the code in dispute is derived from an ancient UNIX covered by the Jan 2002 free license, and it doesn't clearly say so somewhere, there is certainly egg and chips on someone's face. Said license imposes few conditions, but one is that Caldera's copyright must be maintained and the notice `This product includes software developed or owned by Caldera International, Inc.' placed in `any advertising materials.' Of course, if the code comes from V6 and those notices are present and Caldera still claims it's stolen, that's another basket of eggs. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From ckeck at texoma.net Mon Jun 2 14:05:22 2003 From: ckeck at texoma.net (Cornelius Keck) Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 23:05:22 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs In-Reply-To: <20030530033124.GB39668@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: > As far as I can see (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong), most of > the key players at SCO have changed over the last 12 months. They > ppear to have few engineers left, which is presumably one reason wh > they gave the UnixWare and Linux code to outsiders to compare. I'm I'm not surprised. Considering SCO's pricing policy (ever looked at that? They charge for every little bit of configuration above and be- yond, say, Sony PS2 multiplayer environment, like extra users, more memory, more processors, ..., uname it, they charge for it), the place looks more and more like a dominion of marketing folks, and lawyers, with the latter no longer being considered a defense entity against unfriendly intrusion, but rather a business division, expected to generate substantial revenue. If a company trades innovative head- count (i.e. developers and engineers) for headcount unaware, or un- familiar with the prime business objective, then the second rate headcount will come up with many "interesting" schemes to justify their continued employment. I might be overdoing it just so. But then I have seen this happen thrice during my career, so there is a pattern. Thank you for listening to a not-too-old man rambling ;) Regards, Cornelius -- Cornelius Keck cornelius at keck.cx / ckeck at texoma.net From iking at windows.microsoft.com Tue Jun 3 01:30:46 2003 From: iking at windows.microsoft.com (Ian King) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 08:30:46 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs Message-ID: There's an old joke: If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law. If both are against you, call the other attorney names. It's possible this is an elaborate tactic to step on IBM's feet until IBM apologizes - see "The Mouse That Roared". It could be that the issues are so convoluted, the SCO folks are very crafty (and think they can irritate Big Blue enough that IBM will pay them to go away). But it is indeed possible that they are really this clueless. There are many examples of businesses that once held pre-eminent positions, layed low by bonehead business decisions. In any event, baseless lawsuits are a common business tool these days. And in a country where you can become independently wealthy by spilling coffee in your lap, and you can lose the popular vote by a large margin but be appointed to the highest office in the land by your daddy's Supreme Court - is any legal maneuver really a surprise anymore? I printed out my "ancient UNIX" license (I got a no-charge license), I'm not erasing my RK05s yet. :-) -- Ian NOTE: The above is my personal ranting, and should not be construed to reflect the policies or opinions of my employer. ________________________________ From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org on behalf of Larry McVoy Sent: Thu 5/29/2003 7:42 PM To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs > SCO is blustering more and more as the open source community exposes > them for the fruads that they have become. In the for what it is worth department, I happen to know that this stuff is more complex than it seems. For instance, I am pretty sure that ATT should have won their lawsuit over the BSD stuff and if you doubt that I'd suggest that you go compare the UFS code against the 32v or v7 code. bmap() is a good place to look. Any suggestions that that was completely rewritten are patently false, at least in my opinion. I'm a file system guy, I've done a lot of work in UFS, I'm intimately familiar with the code. In fact, I defended UFS against LFS when Kirk wouldn't (LFS is a friggin' joke, any file system hacker knows that the allocation policy is 90% of the file system). I do not have knowledge of the code it is that SCO says infringes. And I think that SCO is about as astute as I am in terms of public relations (we both tend to be our own worst enemies and I thought I was without peer in that department :-) But I suspect that there is at least some merit to what they are claiming. I have to believe that nobody is stupid enough to have zero data and jump out in public like they are doing. That's just way too far over the top. Anything is possible I guess, but doesn't it seem just a little unlikely that a corporation would commit that public a suicide? I'll probably be proved wrong but I'm a CEO, running a small company, much smaller than SCO, and there is no way I'd stick my neck out that far with no data to back it up. I'd like to think I'm smarter than they are but I tend to doubt it, they have more experience. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm _______________________________________________ TUHS mailing list TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From kstailey at yahoo.com Thu Jun 5 10:24:50 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 17:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] the SCO/Novell contract Message-ID: <20030605002450.56849.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-1013229.html Contract illuminates Novell, SCO spat By Stephen Shankland Staff Writer, CNET News.com June 4, 2003, 3:01 PM PT A 1995 contract sheds light on the conflicting Unix ownership claims by Novell and SCO Group, with SCO receiving broad rights to the operating system but Novell retaining copyrights and patents. According to a copy of the contract obtained by CNET News.com, Novell sold "all rights and ownership of Unix and UnixWare" to the SCO Group's predecessor, the Santa Cruz Operation. However, the asset purchase agreement, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, specifically excludes "all copyrights" and "all patents" from the purchase. "This agreement is kind of murky...You end up with a lot of questions, to put it mildly," said Mark Radcliffe, an intellectual property attorney with law firm Gray Cary. While the contract squarely leaves the copyright with Novell, a section that gives to SCO "all claims...against any parties relating to any right, property or asset included in the (Unix) business" could be interpreted to give SCO the right to enforce the copyright, Radcliffe said. "The question is, even though (Novell) didn't assign the intellectual property (to SCO), did (Novell) assign the rights to enforce the patents and copyrights?" The Unix ownership issue is central to a debate about whether companies can be taken to court for using Linux. On May 14, SCO claimed in letters sent to 1,500 of the world's largest companies that using Linux could open them to legal liability because Unix source code has been copied into Linux. That copying, if proven and illegal, could violate Unix copyrights and the independent spirit of the open-source movement that creates Linux, but the contract indicates SCO won't have a simple time relying on Unix copyrights in such a case. A week after SCO's letter, Novell said it never sold SCO the Unix copyrights and patents and that SCO's actions could bring legal action on itself. "We believe it unlikely that SCO can demonstrate that it has any ownership interest whatsoever in those copyrights," Novell Chief Executive Jack Messman said in a letter to SCO. The Unix ownership debate grew from SCO's $1 billion lawsuit against IBM, alleging Big Blue breached its contract with SCO and misappropriated SCO's trade secrets by moving Unix intellectual property into Linux. IBM denies the claims. SCO didn't immediately respond to questions about how the contract supports its claims to rights of copyright enforcement, but company Chief Executive Darl McBride last week said the contract had "conflicting statements." "It doesn't make sense. How would you transfer the product but not have the copyright attached? That would be like transferring a book but only getting the cover," McBride said. Novell continues to disagree with SCO. "It's pretty clear that patents and copyrights were excluded and not included in the business as it's described (in the contract), so we don't believe SCO would have copyright and patent enforcement rights," Hal Thayer, vice president of communications for Novell, said Wednesday. Novell is basing future operating system products on Linux, and open-source advocates say they are reassured by Messman's words that the company won't press its own copyright claims. "Novell is an ardent supporter of Linux and the open-source development community," Messman has said. "It's difficult to imagine any scenario in which we'd bring Unix copyright infringement action against Linux users. We certainly don't have any plans to do any such thing...and we wouldn't have undertaken this whole call to SCO to prove their claims if that was the road we wanted to pursue," Thayer said. The 1995 contract appears to give Novell the edge in the copyright debate, said John Ferrell, an intellectual property attorney with Carr and Ferrell, who reviewed the contract. "This would support Novell's contention that SCO does not own the copyrights and does not have the right to litigate" a copyright infringement case, Ferrell said. However, he said, the contract does indicate SCO could pursue a case that a Unix licensee breached its contract. But the contract is odd, Ferrell said. "It's very unusual to have the transfer of a software program and not have the rights of copyright transferred as well," he said. SCO vehemently argues that it has copyright enforcement rights, but in any case, it doesn't need the Unix copyright to go after Linux users. "I think it's perfectly clear we have the rights to enforce copyright claims," McBride said in an interview after Novell challenged SCO's Linux actions. But more likely than a copyright case, would be one based on breach of contract, he said. "The letter went to 1,500 large companies around the world, the majority of which all have (Unix) System V licenses with us...We do have sublicense rights," McBride said. "They sign up for the fact that they will not misappropriate the code." The sublicenses come through Unix purchases made with direct Unix licensees such as Silicon Graphics, Hewlett-Packard and IBM, he said. But the absence of copyright and patent claims in SCO's lawsuit against IBM is telling, Gray Cary's Radcliffe said. Copyright and patent claims can make a strong case. "If they had the rights to enforce the copyrights, how come that didn't show up in the IBM suit?" Radcliffe asked. "It's very weird they would bring a lawsuit on trade secret (misappropriation) and unfair competition and not put in copyrights and patents. Those are the strongest rights. Particularly with IBM, you don't go out and say, 'I'm not going to take the elephant-hunting rifle with me, I'm just going to take my .22-caliber.'" SCO has said it has the option to include copyright claims later. But while it's said Unix code was copied into Linux, it hasn't yet said who it believes is responsible. SCO says it will show proof of the copying later this month to some neutral parties. SCO's suit mentions concepts and methods, but not copyrights: "It is not possible for Linux to rapidly reach Unix performance standards for complete enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of Unix code, methods or concepts to achieve such performance and coordination by a larger developer such as IBM." Radcliffe said copying methods and concepts are much weaker evidence than copying code. "If they did enough due diligence to figure out there were concepts there, how the heck did they miss that there was actual code copying?" he asked. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Thu Jun 5 20:52:33 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 22:52:33 +1200 Subject: [TUHS] About Sys III status Message-ID: <200306052252.33751.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> I came across this: cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/930303.ruling.txt 17 U.S.C. 101. Version 32V source code has now been distributed, without notice, to literally thousands of licensees. Consequently, Plaintiff can have no valid copyright on 32V unless it can fit within one of the statutory or common law escape provisions. The three statutory escape provisions are listed in section 405(a). These provisions relieve a copyright owner from the harsh consequences of noticeless publication if the owner (i) omitted the notice from a "relatively small number of copies;" (ii) registers the work within five years of publication, and then makes a "reasonable effort" to add notices to the noticeless copies already distributed; or (iii) proves that a third party omitted, notice in violation of an express agreement in writing 17 U.S.C 405(a)(1)-(3). Plaintiff cannot avail itself of any of these provisions. Notice was omitted from thousands of copies of 32V; no contractual agreements require the licensees to affix notice; Plaintiff failed to copyright 32V until 1992, well over five years after 32V was published; and Plaintiff has not yet made reasonable efforts to add notices to the many noticeless publications of 32V. Consequently, Plaintiff must try to fit within the common-law doctrine of limited publication. and I felt like asking a few questions in relation to Sys III - was it copyrighted? When? And has SCO's publication of said Sys III on its Ancient Unix web site created the presumption that SCO has no further interest in Sys III? Wesley Parish -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From wkt at tuhs.org Thu Jun 5 23:24:56 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 23:24:56 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] About Sys III status In-Reply-To: <200306052252.33751.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> References: <200306052252.33751.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: <20030605132456.GA36977@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 10:52:33PM +1200, Wesley Parish wrote: > and I felt like asking a few questions in relation to Sys III - was it > copyrighted? When? And has SCO's publication of said Sys III on its Ancient > Unix web site created the presumption that SCO has no further interest in Sys > III? Well, here is a grep result: $ zcat sys3.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr /* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated copyright "\033\016O\b#\033\017", /*copyright*/ 'co', 0336, /*copyright*/ PAIR('c','o'), 0336, /*copyright*/ PAIR('c','o'), 0336, /*copyright*/ 0153, /*copyright*/ "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ "\001\0338c\0339", /*copyright*/ "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ "\003(c)", /*copyright*/ \(co \e(co copyright * Copyright 1974, Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1980 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc. This is approximately the same amount of copyright notices that appear in 32V. And we should have enough witnesses that SysIII was actually available from SCO's own website with no authentication required. So that does leave open the question as to whether anybody still holds copyright on the code. And you know what, the original copyright statements on SysV have more UCB copyright notices than AT&T/Bell Labs copyright notices :-) Warren $ zcat tape1.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr | uniq -c | sort -rn 11 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 11 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 7 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 7 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 6 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 6 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 3 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 3 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 PAIR('c','o'), 0336, /*copyright*/ 2 PAIR('c','o'), 0336, /*copyright*/ 2 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ 2 "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ 1 x/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 x/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 t/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 t/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 e/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 e/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 copyrval( nl_file, symbol, ptr, size, memdev) 1 copyrval( nl_file, symbol, ptr, size, memdev) 1 copyright 1 copyright 1 copyrest (fp1, fp2, place, size) /* Copy the rest of a file. */ 1 copyrest (fp1, fp2, place, size) /* Copy the rest of a file. */ 1 copyreader 1 copyreader 1 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 Portions of this document were copyrighted 1 Portions of this document were copyrighted 1 Portions of this document were copyrighted 1 Portions of this document were copyrighted 1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 1 0153, /*copyright*/ 1 0153, /*copyright*/ 1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 1 .\" Portions of this document were copyrighted 1 .\" Portions of this document were copyrighted 1 'co', 0336, /*copyright*/ 1 'co', 0336, /*copyright*/ 1 "\033\016O\b#\033\017", /*copyright*/ 1 "\033\016O\b#\033\017", /*copyright*/ 1 "\003(c)", /*copyright*/ 1 "\003(c)", /*copyright*/ 1 "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ 1 "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ 1 "\001\0338c\0339", /*copyright*/ 1 "\001\0338c\0339", /*copyright*/ 1 * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated 1 * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated 1 retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, area, size); 1 retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, area, size); 1 copyrval( system, V_STR, (char *) &v, sizeof v, mem); 1 copyrval( system, V_STR, (char *) &v, sizeof v, mem); 1 TR("Copyrest: returns %d\n", retcode, EMPTY, EMPTY); 1 TR("Copyrest: returns %d\n", retcode, EMPTY, EMPTY); 1 TR("Copyrest: fp1=%d fp2=%d place=%d ", fp1, fp2, place); 1 TR("Copyrest: fp1=%d fp2=%d place=%d ", fp1, fp2, place); 1 /* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., 1 /* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., 1 copyrval( system, SWPLO_STR, (char *) &swplo, sizeof swplo, memdev); 1 copyrval( system, SWPLO_STR, (char *) &swplo, sizeof swplo, memdev); 1 copyrval( system, SBRPTE_STR, (char *) &sbrpte, sizeof sbrpte, memdev); 1 copyrval( system, SBRPTE_STR, (char *) &sbrpte, sizeof sbrpte, memdev); 1 retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, EMPTY, BUFSIZE); 1 retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, EMPTY, BUFSIZE); 1 TR("Copyrest: no space\n", EMPTY, EMPTY, EMPTY); 1 TR("Copyrest: no space\n", EMPTY, EMPTY, EMPTY); From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Jun 6 07:55:50 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 07:55:50 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] About Sys V copyright notices In-Reply-To: <20030605183553.3247.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030605132456.GA36977@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030605183553.3247.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030605215550.GA39830@minnie.tuhs.org> Warren did: > > $ zcat tape1.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr | uniq -c | sort -rn On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 11:35:53AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > why did you run "uniq -c | sort" and not "sort | uniq -c" ? Because it was late. I really should have done $ zcat tape1.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn: 56 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 20 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 6 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated. 6 "\001c\bO", /*copyright*/ 4 Portions of this document were copyrighted 4 PAIR('c','o'), 0336, /*copyright*/ 2 x/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 t/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 e/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */ 2 copyright 2 0153, /*copyright*/ 2 .\" Portions of this document were copyrighted 2 'co', 0336, /*copyright*/ 2 "\033\016O\b#\033\017", /*copyright*/ 2 "\003(c)", /*copyright*/ 2 "\001\0338c\0339", /*copyright*/ 2 * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated 2 /* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., There, that's better :-) Warren From kstailey at yahoo.com Sat Jun 7 08:15:57 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 15:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Cringely on SCO vs. IBM Message-ID: <20030606221557.9555.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030605.html Technician, Steal Thyself SCO, Not IBM, May Have Put Unix Code Into Linux Instead? By Robert X. Cringely There is something about institutional memory, the way organizations do or don't remember things. Covering IBM back in the Opel and Akers eras, I noticed a very interesting thing about the way that company handled internal information, which was through the use of plausible deniability. There was a difference at IBM between knowing something and having it be known that you knew something. So when an IBMer would say he didn't know a fact or the answer to my question, it didn't always mean he lacked the information. It could just as easily have meant that he/she hadn't been BRIEFED on the information. Anything learned at the water cooler wasn't real. I wonder, then, how they handle institutional memory issues at SCO, our subject for the last couple weeks, because reality seems not to even be involved. Can it be that the very crime SCO is accusing IBM of committing could have been done, instead, by SCO itself? I think so. Remember, SCO is suing IBM for stealing bits of Unix and putting those bits inside Linux. How IBM is supposed to have done that remains a mystery, because the only version of Linux that includes any IBM authorship claim is for the S/390 mainframes, and even that wasn't written by IBM. According to folks who did the work, it was done under contract to IBM by SuSE Linux AG, the German Linux vendor. IBM provided the hardware and some access to IBM mainframe engineers, but 98 percent of the work was done by SuSE. At Linuxworld 2000, IBM didn't even help with the install or configuration of Linux on the S/390 they loaned SuSE for the show. Where, then, did IBM get those Unix parts it is supposed to have stolen? They certainly didn't come from IBM's version of Unix, AIX, which bears little internal similarity to any other Unix. I think the parts may have come from SCO, itself. Here is where institutional memory ought to come into play but doesn't seem to be. Remember that the motto of the combined Caldera and SCO was "Unifying Unix with Linux for Business." It is very possible that SCO's Linux team added UnixWare and OpenServer code to Linux. They then sent their Linux developers to SuSE when United Linux was formed. Soon after that, CEO Ransom Love departed. Now the SCO management is scouring the UnixWare, OpenServer and Linux code bases and says that they are finding cut-and-pasted code. Chances are that their former employees put it there. "Open Unix 8 is the first step in implementing the vision of the pending new company," said Ransom Love, president and CEO of Caldera Systems in a company press release way back when. "It combines the heritage of Unix with the momentum of Linux, and will be our premiere product for data intensive applications like database, email and supply chain management. The incorporation of the Linux application engine into the UnixWare kernel essentially redefines the direction of the product, and motivates a new brand identity -- Open Unix." But wait, there's more! Here is what Ransom Love said to ZDNet around the same time: ZDNet: What does the future hold for your unified Linux/Unix platform? Love: "When we talk about unifying Unix and Linux, the two have a huge amount in common. A lot of people are running their businesses on Unix, while Linux has a tremendous population on Web servers and other front-end servers. So we are taking both and combining them into one platform." So SCO/Caldera spent two years "unifying" Unix and Linux and is now outraged to find some of their intellectual property in Linux. Well duh! That's exactly what they said they were going to do. But does it even matter? As I noted last week, Novell retained the Unix patents and copyrights when it sold whatever it sold to SCO back in 1995. The best SCO can claim, given that Novell won't pursue a copyright or patent claim against IBM, is that IBM is in violation of its Unix license agreement. WHAT license agreement? That SCO/Novell deal from 1995 gets murkier and murkier when you add in the claims of The Open Group, a consortium that acquired the Unix trademark from Novell at the same time SCO wasn't acquiring the Unix copyrights or patents. "IBM's ability to call AIX a Unix system is due to its license from The Open Group," says the group's marketing vice-president Graham Bird. "This license requires IBM (and all other licensees) to warrant that it's certified products conform with the Single Unix Specification. So, SCO cannot yank IBM's right to call their certified products Unix, I'm delighted to say." If SCO doesn't own the copyrights or patents, and it doesn't even have a sublicensing agreement with the organization that owns the trademark, what rights could they possibly intend to deny IBM as of June 13th?" Nobody really knows. There is an easy solution to this problem, one that I wouldn't be at all surprised is in the works. SCO is angling to be acquired by IBM in an out-of-court settlement. Certainly, IBM can afford to buy the Unix copyrights and patents from Novell and I think Novell would sell them. That would bring everything but the Unix trademark under the same roof. And I don't think IBM really cares that much about the Unix trademark. They care much more about the Linux trademark. So let's say IBM buys up all these rights for a few hundred million dollars, then puts the whole package under the General Public License, essentially making Unix into an Open Source product. Why would IBM do something like that? They'd do it to sell more computers. People forget that IBM is mainly a hardware and services company. By putting Unix under the GPL they would become heroes to the programmers and system admins and end up selling even more hardware and services. Remember, IBM already invested $1 billion in Linux and claimed to have made that money back within a year. Buying SCO and the Novell IP could be viewed as just the next step of that very smart investment. [...snip unrelated sections...] __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Sun Jun 8 03:29:30 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 17:29:30 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 Message-ID: Hi all just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 ? , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) . tks in advance for the infos. rgs to all zmkm _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Jun 8 10:59:44 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 10:59:44 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030608005944.GA35462@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 05:29:30PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 ? > , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) . lp ? :-) Warren From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu Sun Jun 8 12:21:35 2003 From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 19:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 Message-ID: <200306080221.h582LZQ09115@opihi.ucsd.edu> > Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 10:59:44 +1000 > From: Warren Toomey > To: The Unix Heritage Society > Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 > > On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 05:29:30PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 ? > > , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) . > > lp ? :-) > Warren I think I remember being able to use the hardware Scroll Lock on a VT05 terminal with some variety of Unix, perhaps late 6th Edition. carl -- carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego clowenst at ucsd.edu From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Sun Jun 8 18:22:54 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 08:22:54 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 Message-ID: Thanks guys , I think I am going to stick to bwc suggestion it looks suitable , I got the book and found it so I�ll work on it asap. tks >From: Carl Lowenstein >To: tuhs at tuhs.org >Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 >Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 19:21:35 -0700 (PDT) > > > Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 10:59:44 +1000 > > From: Warren Toomey > > To: The Unix Heritage Society > > Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 > > > > On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 05:29:30PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on >unix7 ? > > > , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) . > > > > lp ? :-) > > Warren > >I think I remember being able to use the hardware Scroll Lock on a >VT05 terminal with some variety of Unix, perhaps late 6th Edition. > > carl >-- > carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego > clowenst at ucsd.edu >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Sun Jun 8 18:40:41 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 08:40:41 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 Message-ID: keneth thanks for the interesting infos , you solved a big puzzle for me :-) now I know why the screen is acting rather strange. ! cheers >From: Kenneth Stailey >To: zmkm zmkm >Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7 >Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:23:56 -0700 (PDT) > >Seveth Edition UNIX assumed hardcopy terminal and did not have a terminal >pager. > >Because of that assumption it also cannot backspace the way you would want >it >to on a CRT. > >Use "#" for backspace "@" for kill line (modern version is Ctrl-U). >Characters >will not be erased on screen but they will be discarded from the input >line. > >--- zmkm zmkm wrote: > > Hi all > > > > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 >? , > > like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) . > > > > tks in advance for the infos. > > > > rgs to all > > zmkm > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TUHS mailing list > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). >http://calendar.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From arnold at skeeve.com Sun Jun 8 19:56:08 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 12:56:08 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: <200306080956.h589u8si030665@localhost.localdomain> What I find fascinating (and that no-one has mentioned yet) is how anyone can claim that Unix internals are still trade secret, especially given this book: The Design of the UNIX Operating System, Maurice J. Bach. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986. ISBN 0-13-201799-7. There's also these: The Magic Garden Explained: The Internals of Unix System V Release 4: An Open Systems Design, Berny Goodheart, James Cox, John R. Mashey. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1994. ISBN 0-13-098138-9. Unix Internals: The New Frontiers, Uresh Vahalia. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1996. ISBN 0-13-101908-2. According to Amazon.com, a new edition is scheduled for 2005. The Bach book, in particular, is a rather large smoking gun that AT&T didn't care a huge amount about trade secrets. The book is still in print (and selling for a whopping $69.97 on Amazon.com!). It doesn't contain actual source code, but let's get real here... Arnold From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Sun Jun 8 20:32:56 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 10:32:56 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: add on the lion book >From: Aharon Robbins >To: tuhs at tuhs.org >Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate >Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 12:56:08 +0300 > >What I find fascinating (and that no-one has mentioned yet) is how anyone >can claim that Unix internals are still trade secret, especially given >this book: > > The Design of the UNIX Operating System, > Maurice J. Bach. > Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986. > ISBN 0-13-201799-7. > >There's also these: > > The Magic Garden Explained: > The Internals of Unix System V Release 4: > An Open Systems Design, > Berny Goodheart, James Cox, John R. Mashey. > Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1994. > ISBN 0-13-098138-9. > > Unix Internals: The New Frontiers, > Uresh Vahalia. > Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1996. > ISBN 0-13-101908-2. > According to Amazon.com, a new edition is scheduled for 2005. > >The Bach book, in particular, is a rather large smoking gun that AT&T >didn't care a huge amount about trade secrets. The book is still in >print (and selling for a whopping $69.97 on Amazon.com!). It doesn't >contain actual source code, but let's get real here... > >Arnold >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From arnold at skeeve.com Sun Jun 8 23:09:39 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 16:09:39 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: <200306081309.h58D9dDc001829@localhost.localdomain> > add on the lion book Yes, that's been officially published, as well as in N-th generation photo copies. But the books I cited are for System V, including SVR4, which is much more relevant for the issue under discussion... Pfui. What a mess this whole business is. Arnold From kstailey at yahoo.com Mon Jun 9 12:32:55 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: <200306080956.h589u8si030665@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20030609023255.2087.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com> Two words: "version control". If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version control archives will say who inserted it. It will be very easy to prove if Caldera inserted the code themselves. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Mon Jun 9 20:20:10 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 10:20:10 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: Looks like sco has learned a lot from its cozying up with microsoft that is instead of meeting market challenges with better technology and competitive pricing against its competitors it resorts to the lowest form bullying marketing gimmicks and legal arm twisting just like microsoft style , so now they look like shooting themselves in the foot , good ! let's hope they shoot both feet !. >From: Kenneth Stailey >To: tuhs at tuhs.org >Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate >Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:32:55 -0700 (PDT) > >Two words: "version control". > >If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version >control >archives will say who inserted it. It will be very easy to prove if >Caldera >inserted the code themselves. > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). >http://calendar.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From kstailey at yahoo.com Mon Jun 9 21:57:58 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 04:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] IBM doesn't intend to respond to SCO's threat Message-ID: <20030609115758.58851.qmail@web10008.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/OEG20030606S0039 Linux-Unix ties spelled out By Charles J. Murray EE Times June 6, 2003 (5:08 p.m. ET) PARK RIDGE, Ill. � SCO Group revealed the foundation of its legal battle with the Linux community, when it rolled out evidence of large blocks of Linux code that it contends were stolen from Unix. Analysts who saw the samples of the allegedly stolen code said the evidence is damaging and that SCO Group has a formidable legal case. �If everything SCO showed me today is true, then the Linux community should be very concerned,� said Bill Claybrook, research director for Linux and open-source software at the Aberdeen Group (Boston). If SCO (Lindon, Utah) prevails in its legal efforts, many observers believe the action could, at best, result in hundreds of multimillion-dollar licensing payments from Fortune 1000 companies and, at worst, damage the foundation of open-source software. The revelations by the SCO Group Wednesday (June 4) followed a turbulent week in which the company exchanged both allegations and counterallegations with Linux supporters and with Novell Inc. (Provo, Utah), which has proclaimed in an open letter that SCO doesn't own the copyrights and patents to Unix, the operating system Novell sold to SCO in 1995. SCO's revelations also served as a response to the Linux community, which has complained over the past two months that it doubted SCO's contentions of theft because the company had not publicly disclosed evidence to support its claims. Claybrook and another analyst who had been given an opportunity to see examples of the alleged theft said the blocks of Unix and Linux were strikingly similar. The two blocks of software, they said, contained as many as 80 lines of identical code, along with identical developers' comments. �One could argue that developers could write exact or very similar code, but the developers' comments in the code are basically your DNA, or fingerprints, for a particular piece of source code,� said Laura DiDio, a senior analyst with the Yankee Group (Boston), who viewed the evidence. �It's very unlikely that code and comments could be identical by pure chance,� Claybrook said. DiDio and Claybrook said they were given side-by-side copies of Unix and Linux code to compare. Neither was paid for the work, and both agreed that the evidence suggests SCO has a strong case in its $1 billion suit against IBM Corp. and in its scrap with the Linux community. Linux supporters, however, were quick to question the meaning of the evidence. �Can SCO prove that this code came from SCO to Linux, and not from Linux to SCO?� asked Jon �Maddog� Hall, executive director of Linux International (Nashua, N.H.), a Linux advocacy organization. �Or did the code that's in SCO Unix come from a third source? Show me the facts,� he said. SCO's battle with the open-source community grabbed headlines two months ago when it filed a $1 billion lawsuit in the state court of Utah against IBM, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition in the Linux market. In May, on the heels of that suit, SCO sent letters to Fortune 1,000 companies and 500 other businesses advising them to seek legal counsel if they use Linux. SCO's actions angered Linux supporters, who allegedly deluged the company with angry e-mails, threatened drive-by shootings, and posted SCO's executives' home phone numbers and addresses on Web sites. On May 28, Novell jumped into the fray, arguing that it never sold the Unix copyrights or patents to SCO when it consummated the Unix sale in 1995. In an open letter to SCO, Novell said, �Apparently you share this view, since over the last few months you have repeatedly asked Novell to transfer the copyrights to SCO, requests Novell has rejected.� Novell assailed In a subsequent news conference on May 30, SCO chief executive officer Darl McBride lashed out at Novell, restating SCO's claim that it owns the Unix operating system patents and implying that Novell has a hidden agenda for insisting otherwise. �We strongly disagree with Novell's position and view it as a desperate measure to curry favor with the Linux community,� McBride said. Last week's analyst revelations, however, cast the battle in a new light. Until the analysts weighed in, Linux backers had relied on the defense that no one had seen proof of the allegations. Most said they didn't understand why SCO had refused to release the alleged infringements for public scrutiny. Some said they viewed SCO's actions as a means to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about open-source software. But analysts categorically disagreed with that viewpoint last week. �SCO is not trying to destroy Linux,� said DiDio of the Yankee Group. �That's silly. This is about paying royalties.� SCO contends that by co-opting code from Unix, Linux has severely damaged SCO's intellectual property. According to some estimates, the company collected annual revenue of between $200 million and $250 million on Unix System 5 (sic) software before the rise of Linux. After Linux reached the mainstream, those revenue figures dropped to about $60 million a year. Because it believes Linux incorporates code that's been �stolen� from Unix, it has warned hundreds of companies to stop using Linux or start paying royalties. �SCO's words were that Linux distributors and others who are using Linux are 'distributing stolen goods,' � said Claybrook of Aberdeen Group. Some companies, such as Sun Microsystems Inc., already pay hefty royalties to SCO for Unix. Two weeks ago, Microsoft Corp. joined that group when it agreed to pay royalties that were said to be �significantly in excess of $10 million,� one source said. Microsoft declined to comment on the details. Facing a choice Many observers believe SCO's case is bolstered by the fact that it is represented by high-powered attorney David Boies, who prosecuted the Microsoft antitrust case and represented Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election vote-counting scandal. Analysts said IBM will be the first company to face a choice in the legal matter. �If IBM wants to cure this problem, they could start by buying all the appropriate licenses and then paying SCO a billion dollars,� Claybrook said. �But SCO now says that a billion may not be enough to cover their damages.� Users of Linux also face a decision about whether to ignore SCO's letters or pay for a license. Analysts said companies may face that decision as soon as June 13, the date on which SCO has threatened to terminate its existing Unix contracts with IBM. Intellectual-property attorneys advise that companies that received a letter from SCO first determine whether IBM is indemnifying them, as users, against legal action. IBM, for its part, has said it doesn't intend to respond to SCO's threat. �We believe our contact is perpetual and irrevocable,� an IBM spokeswoman said. �We've already paid for it, and there is nothing else we need to do.� Whether the legal actions will harm Linux in the long run is still open to question, experts said. The Linux community, unconvinced by SCO's actions, says it is still waiting for more solid proof that SCO really has a case. Most say that showing the alleged violations to a few analysts who sign nondisclosure agreements isn't enough. �We still don't see the need for secrecy,� said Hall of Linux International. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Tue Jun 10 00:00:31 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 09:00:31 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate Message-ID: Kenneth Stailey: Two words: "version control". If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version control archives will say who inserted it. It will be very easy to prove if Caldera inserted the code themselves. Alas, two more words: "read-write storage." Version control info is stored in a file; how do we know (as SCalderaO might argue) that some hacker hasn't edited it after the fact to pretend something was put in by Caldera, or that they just lied about it to begin with? Version control data might be a useful, but I suspect only as a trail to specific people whose could then offer personal testimony about the history of a particular piece of code. The testimony would be harder to impeach than the code. Even a read-only copy of the version control info, e.g. a CD-ROM, isn't a lot more solid; some hard evidence would be needed of when that CD-ROM was written, beyond the easily-forged timestamps on the disc itself, and there could still be a claim that someone just lied when writing it, especially if there is a claim that malice was involved. So it still would probably come down to personal testimony. The usual disclaimer applies: I'm no lawyer. I'm just trying to think of counter-arguments, both those reasonable in abstract and those that seem to fit within the spirit of the complaint against IBM. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From gerberb at zenez.com Tue Jun 10 01:33:08 2003 From: gerberb at zenez.com (Boyd Lynn Gerber) Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 09:33:08 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I think Novell for got about the admendment to the orignal agreement. http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=110907 I do not necessarily agree with what they are doing, but I think they do have to protect their rights. I know I would. tt, -- Boyd Gerber ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047 From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed Jun 11 00:16:50 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 07:16:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] one person comments on his attorney's take on the SCO NDA Message-ID: <20030610141650.7048.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3752 In a nutshell the SCO NDA is a gag, a muzzle. It restricts you to only being able to say "yes there is common code" or "no there is no common code", nothing else may be said by you without violating the NDA. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed Jun 11 04:49:05 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:49:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird Message-ID: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sco.com/scosource/ Way to weird: http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html Q: What is SVR6? A: SVR6 is the code name for the next-generation operating platform designed to take advantage of Web services and is the foundation of our SCOx strategy. As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to advance the UNIX kernel for both 32-bit and 64-bit architectures. This will be accomplished through the support of key industry partners who will also contribute to this next-generation platform. SVR6 will be formally announced at our upcoming SCO Forum event to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada on August 17-19 at the MGM Grand Hotel. It just keeps getting weirder: http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From asmodai at wxs.nl Wed Jun 11 05:16:33 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:16:33 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> -On [20030610 21:02], Kenneth Stailey (kstailey at yahoo.com) wrote: >http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html > >Q: What is SVR6? >A: SVR6 is the code name for the next-generation operating platform designed to >take advantage of Web services and is the foundation of our SCOx strategy. As >the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to advance >the UNIX kernel for both 32-bit and 64-bit architectures. This will be >accomplished through the support of key industry partners who will also >contribute to this next-generation platform. SVR6 will be formally announced at >our upcoming SCO Forum event to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada on August 17-19 at >the MGM Grand Hotel. OK, I am trying to maintain a neutral stance to SCO, even though they're making it hard to do, but why does the above sound to me like trying to get extra ammo they can use in court? I mean I can already envision the way the talks will go: "But your honour, we are heavily dependent on our source code, since we are planning to unveil the SVR6 product in August and the things which happened with IBM and Linux put our plans in jeopardy..." >It just keeps getting weirder: > >http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html Ohh, now I get it. Where on earth do they get the SCO Linux pedigree and heritage from? I very much doubt that Linus was doing stuff based on SCO. (Hey, everyone with a bit of clue of what happened knows it was based upon Minix, sort of, but definately not SCO stuff.) I seriously, seriously wonder where this is leading to. The USA does not have the best track record where it comes to sensible court rulings, but if they have any Unix expert present he can refute a lot of the so-called claims SCO is making. This reminds me a lot of U-571, where Hollywood rewrote part of the real world history for storyline sake. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ E pluribus unum... From asmodai at ao.mine.nu Wed Jun 11 06:15:31 2003 From: asmodai at ao.mine.nu (Paul Ward) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:15:31 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> Message-ID: <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu> JRa> -On [20030610 21:02], Kenneth Stailey (kstailey at yahoo.com) wrote: >>http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html JRa> Ohh, now I get it. Where on earth do they get the SCO Linux pedigree JRa> and heritage from? I very much doubt that Linus was doing stuff based JRa> on SCO. (Hey, everyone with a bit of clue of what happened knows it was JRa> based upon Minix, sort of, but definately not SCO stuff.) Looks like the average marketing droid stuff... I like the way SCO appear to not want anything to do with kernels 2.0.x, 2.2.x, 2.3.x or 2.5.x even though that graph clearly shows UnixWare getting "contributions" from the Linux 2.2.x tree - case of someone being too quick with the highlight methinks. And, with all this SCO talk about SVR6 and about how good SCO UNIX is.. how come OpenServer feels very antiquated, and UnixWare very trashy and amateur? meep, another "asmodai" :) -- Best regards, Paul mailto:asmodai at ao.mine.nu From asmodai at wxs.nl Wed Jun 11 06:38:17 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 22:38:17 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu> Message-ID: <20030610203817.GK81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> -On [20030610 22:32], Paul Ward (asmodai at ao.mine.nu) wrote: >meep, another "asmodai" :) *grin* Been using the nick for a long while now even... Think I must be getting close to a 10 year anniversary or so. :) > Paul mailto:asmodai at ao.mine.nu ^^-> Forgotten Realms by chance? -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ And your ways appear a total lack of Faith... From asmodai at wxs.nl Wed Jun 11 06:39:50 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 22:39:50 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu> Message-ID: <20030610203950.GL81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> Ships, sorry about that, seems mutt picked up a MUA follow-up to header and I didn't notice, because I relied on `r' just being a normal reply. :( Again, apologies. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ Hope is the last refuge for mad men and dreamers... From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Jun 11 08:24:21 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:24:21 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > It just keeps getting weirder: > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why are they intimating that they will sue Linus? This is becoming an alternate reality. Warren From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Wed Jun 11 08:57:08 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:57:08 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <000001c32fa3$a3452be0$239efea9@who5> Hello again from Gregg C Levine Folks it become an alternate reality, when SCO started the lawsuit. As far as I can see, and this is based on watching these posts, and others, on a different list, SCO is having problems. For example, they were not at LWE this past January, however, they were present last year, and for the few years that I've been going. I suspect that the company is having a bad time this time period and faked up the lawsuit to make up for that. And that's only my opinions. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Warren Toomey > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 6:24 PM > To: Kenneth Stailey > Cc: tuhs at tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] This is too weird > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > It just keeps getting weirder: > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html > > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why > are they intimating that they will sue Linus? > > This is becoming an alternate reality. > > Warren > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG Wed Jun 11 07:01:08 2003 From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 03 14:01:08 PDT Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux Message-ID: <0306102101.AA25507@ivan.Harhan.ORG> Here is my response to SCO vs. Linux. The thing is, some of the things they are saying I agree with most emphatically, except that what those things really support is not SCO but our TUHS cause. Their main line, at least as I interpret it, is that UNIX is the real OS, UNIX is better than Linux, and Linux is just a naughty child that is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the adults. I agree wholeheartedly! I and many other UNIX bigots have been more vocal about this than SCO. BUT... UNIX is not what SCO means by this term, UNIX is V7 -> 4BSD! That is the real UNIX, USG is just a bad commercialized branch that no one ever really liked anyway! So to all those Fortune 1000 (or whatever that was) companies warned by SCO to stop running Linux, they should throw out those cheap micros, put all their old large VAXen back online, and run True UNIX, 4.3 BSD UNIX! And that *is* real UNIX, it comes directly from V7 and openly and proudly admits to this fact! Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court to determine what the hell it really is? But SCO probably won't be too happy about it as they just gave away the True UNIX (V7) to the World for free, and it's non-retractable. So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, BSD will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just as free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to seize it by force in a revolution. MS (donning the flameproof spacesuit) From grog at lemis.com Wed Jun 11 11:19:39 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:49:39 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Wednesday, 11 June 2003 at 8:24:21 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: >> It just keeps getting weirder: >> http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html > > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why > are they intimating that they will sue Linus? I think that that was a slip of the tongue. At any rate, I don't think they have any intention of suing Linus. Maybe it's part of a FUD campaign. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed Jun 11 13:02:05 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 20:02:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030611030205.67622.qmail@web10010.mail.yahoo.com> --- Warren Toomey wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > It just keeps getting weirder: > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html > > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why > are they intimating that they will sue Linus? > > This is becoming an alternate reality. > > Warren When we find out that there's SCO code in Cygwin call me. ;) The chart is a good way to confuse things. The poor guy that made the original must be crying that he let SCO use it years ago. The part that confuses me is that I remember there were dotted lines one on the original UNIX history chart that showed non-source-code-copying influences and now even the real UNIX history chart is using only solid lines. It makes MINIX look like it has 7th Ed code in it instead of just being a 7th Ed API implementation from scratch like it is. That's the part that's really on drugs by the time SCO is using it as evidence that there is a Linux pedigree or whatever that connects 7th Ed to Linux. I think the real story is that they want to make as much press as they can since it boosts their stock. Meanwhile every time they say they own UNIX they are complete liars because: > http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html > > As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to To what? Violate their agreements with The Open Group? http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585678840.html "Reference to the SCO web site shows that they own certain intellectual property and that they correctly attribute the trademark to The Open Group. SCO has never owned "UNIX". SCO is licensed to use the registered trademark UNIX "on and in connection" with their products that have been certified by The Open Group, as are all other licensees," the statement said. "These are the only circumstances in which a licensee may use the trademark UNIX on and in connection with its products. Statements that SCO 'owns the UNIX operating system', has 'licensed UNIX to XYZ' are clearly inaccurate and misleading." __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From asmodai at wxs.nl Wed Jun 11 16:03:53 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:03:53 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux In-Reply-To: <0306102101.AA25507@ivan.Harhan.ORG> References: <0306102101.AA25507@ivan.Harhan.ORG> Message-ID: <20030611060353.GM81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> -On [20030611 03:39], Michael Sokolov (msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG) wrote: >So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, BSD >will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing >community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can >instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just as >free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh >diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to seize >it by force in a revolution. That's what I have been wondering about as well, it feels like the AT&T versus the Regents of the University of Berkeley all over again. But I'll stick to Free/Net/OpenBSD on slightly less archaic machines though. ;) -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ And empty words are evil... From asmodai at wxs.nl Wed Jun 11 16:10:10 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:10:10 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20030611061010.GN81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> -On [20030611 03:46], Greg Lehey (grog at lemis.com) wrote: >I think that that was a slip of the tongue. At any rate, I don't >think they have any intention of suing Linus. Maybe it's part of a >FUD campaign. Not sure if you guys noticed that, but they pulled Caldera Linux off of their FTP site. I seriously wonder if there are any normal people with a sane mind there at SCO. I mean, it is so different from their previous antics in which they even allowed the old source code of the Unixes without any problems. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear... From grog at lemis.com Wed Jun 11 16:18:56 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:48:56 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030611061010.GN81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030611061010.GN81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> Message-ID: <20030611061856.GK40071@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Wednesday, 11 June 2003 at 8:10:10 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote: > -On [20030611 03:46], Greg Lehey (grog at lemis.com) wrote: >> I think that that was a slip of the tongue. At any rate, I don't >> think they have any intention of suing Linus. Maybe it's part of a >> FUD campaign. > > Not sure if you guys noticed that, but they pulled Caldera Linux off of > their FTP site. Definitely. They made a statement about it with the claim that they can't justify distributing it. My take is that they weren't making any money with it. > I seriously wonder if there are any normal people with a sane mind > there at SCO. I'm sure most are. But they don't want to get fired. > I mean, it is so different from their previous antics in which they > even allowed the old source code of the Unixes without any problems. Indeed. I have an ongoing analysis page at http://www.lemis.com/grog/sco.html which addresses most of these issues. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From arnold at skeeve.com Wed Jun 11 17:05:43 2003 From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:05:43 +0300 Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs IBM: what unix patents? Message-ID: <200306110705.h5B75hpO007877@localhost.localdomain> Just out of curiousity, what patents are there in the current Unix System V system? The setuid patent was released to the public, so that can't be an issue. And copyright, trade secrets, blah blah, I can understand. But I'm curious what is there in System V that has actually been patented? Thanks, Arnold From asmodai at wxs.nl Wed Jun 11 19:08:49 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 11:08:49 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] SCO to have violated GPL? Message-ID: <20030611090849.GO81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> As seen on Slashdot: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1123176,00.asp Some members of the open-source community are claiming that the SCO Group may have violated the terms of the GNU GPL (General Public License) by incorporating source code from the Linux kernel into the Linux Kernel Personality feature found in SCO Unix without giving the changes back to the community or displaying copyright notices attributing the code to Linux. A source close to SCO, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told eWEEK that parts of the Linux kernel code were copied into the Unix System V source tree by former or current SCO employees. That could violate the conditions of the GNU GPL, which states that any amendments to open-source code used in a commercial product must be given back to the community or a copyright notice must be displayed attributable to Linux, he said. The source, who has seen both the Unix System V source code and the Linux source code and who assisted with a SCO project to bring the two kernels closer together, said that SCO "basically re-implemented the Linux kernel with functions available in the Unix kernel to build what is now known as the Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) in SCO Unix." The LKP is a feature that allows users to run standard Linux applications along with standard Unix applications on a single system using the UnixWare kernel. "During that project we often came across sections of code that looked very similar, in fact we wondered why even variable names were identical. It looked very much like both codes had the same origin, but that was good as the implementation of 95 percent of all Linux system calls on the Unix kernel turned out to be literally 'one-liners'," the source said. Only a handful of system calls.socketcall, ipc and clone.were fairly difficult to implement as they involved the obvious differentiators between Linux and Unix: networking, inter-process communication and kernel threads, the source said. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ I am the impossibility... From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Wed Jun 11 21:52:18 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:52:18 +1200 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <20030611030205.67622.qmail@web10010.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030611030205.67622.qmail@web10010.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200306112352.18254.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> And Coherent! No, SCO has lost it, and lost all chance of ever regaining the trust of anyone with the barest skerrick of knowledge of Unix history. I checked out an interesting web site: http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html I had no idea that cloning Unix had gotten off to such an early start - Idris from Plauger et al., Cromix from Cromemco, Yourdon's Omnix, Oasis, etc. SCO hasn't got a leg to stand on - on the other hand, are those toenails I see stuck in its teeth? Wesley Parish On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:02, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > --- Warren Toomey wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > > It just keeps getting weirder: > > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html > > > > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why > > are they intimating that they will sue Linus? > > > > This is becoming an alternate reality. > > > > Warren > > When we find out that there's SCO code in Cygwin call me. ;) > > The chart is a good way to confuse things. The poor guy that made the > original must be crying that he let SCO use it years ago. > > The part that confuses me is that I remember there were dotted lines one on > the original UNIX history chart that showed non-source-code-copying > influences and now even the real UNIX history chart is using only solid > lines. It makes MINIX look like it has 7th Ed code in it instead of just > being a 7th Ed API implementation from scratch like it is. > > That's the part that's really on drugs by the time SCO is using it as > evidence that there is a Linux pedigree or whatever that connects 7th Ed to > Linux. > > I think the real story is that they want to make as much press as they can > since it boosts their stock. > > Meanwhile every time they say they own UNIX they are complete liars because: > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html > > > > As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to > > To what? Violate their agreements with The Open Group? > > http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585678840.html > > "Reference to the SCO web site shows that they own certain intellectual > property and that they correctly attribute the trademark to The Open Group. > SCO has never owned "UNIX". SCO is licensed to use the registered > trademark UNIX "on and in connection" with their products that have been > certified by The Open Group, as are all other licensees," the statement > said. > > "These are the only circumstances in which a licensee may use the trademark > UNIX on and in connection with its products. Statements that SCO 'owns the > UNIX operating system', has 'licensed UNIX to XYZ' are clearly inaccurate > and misleading." > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). > http://calendar.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From kstailey at yahoo.com Thu Jun 12 02:42:53 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] The Open Group vs. SCO Message-ID: <20030611164253.48601.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.opengroup.org/ Who Owns UNIX�? You may have seen recent press articles announcing that SCO is the owner of UNIX or has licensed UNIX to Microsoft. Such statements are inaccurate, misleading and cause considerable confusion. The Open Group has owned the registered trademark UNIX since 1994. Here http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/who-owns-unix.htm is what we said in response to a Linux Weekly News article last week. Also available is a backgrounder http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/unix-backgrounder.htm that explains the history and reasons why The Open Group takes action on trademark misuse. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From sethm at loomcom.com Thu Jun 12 03:53:18 2003 From: sethm at loomcom.com (Seth Morabito) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:53:18 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] The Open Group vs. SCO In-Reply-To: <20030611164253.48601.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <95A33658-9C35-11D7-9947-000393CC2C24@loomcom.com> On Wednesday, June 11, 2003, at 09:42 AM, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > http://www.opengroup.org/ > > Who Owns UNIX®? > You may have seen recent press articles announcing that SCO is the > owner of > UNIX or has licensed UNIX to Microsoft. Such statements are inaccurate, > misleading and cause considerable confusion. The Open Group has owned > the > registered trademark UNIX since 1994 [...] But wait! I thought Michael Sokolov was the owner of the One True UNIX?!? I'm so confused! [tongue planted firmly in cheek] -Seth From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Thu Jun 12 03:17:33 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:17:33 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird In-Reply-To: <200306112352.18254.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Message-ID: <000101c3303d$594f1880$239efea9@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine Wes, I remember " Cromix from Cromemco", the company made Single Board Computers, I think they started making replacement hardware for the Imsai family. I didn't know that they had cloned, or something like that, for example UNIX, under its name. Heck, I even came within some order of magnitude of buying a setup from them, then. Funny, funny, the first Get Away Special, wore one of those, the school who built the thing, used a kludge from RS to program it. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Wesley Parish > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 7:52 AM > To: tuhs at tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] This is too weird > > And Coherent! > > No, SCO has lost it, and lost all chance of ever regaining the trust of anyone > with the barest skerrick of knowledge of Unix history. > > I checked out an interesting web site: > http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html > I had no idea that cloning Unix had gotten off to such an early start - Idris > from Plauger et al., Cromix from Cromemco, Yourdon's Omnix, Oasis, etc. > > SCO hasn't got a leg to stand on - on the other hand, are those toenails I see > stuck in its teeth? > > Wesley Parish > > On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:02, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > --- Warren Toomey wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > > > It just keeps getting weirder: > > > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html > > > > > > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why > > > are they intimating that they will sue Linus? > > > > > > This is becoming an alternate reality. > > > > > > Warren > > > > When we find out that there's SCO code in Cygwin call me. ;) > > > > The chart is a good way to confuse things. The poor guy that made the > > original must be crying that he let SCO use it years ago. > > > > The part that confuses me is that I remember there were dotted lines one on > > the original UNIX history chart that showed non-source-code-copying > > influences and now even the real UNIX history chart is using only solid > > lines. It makes MINIX look like it has 7th Ed code in it instead of just > > being a 7th Ed API implementation from scratch like it is. > > > > That's the part that's really on drugs by the time SCO is using it as > > evidence that there is a Linux pedigree or whatever that connects 7th Ed to > > Linux. > > > > I think the real story is that they want to make as much press as they can > > since it boosts their stock. > > > > Meanwhile every time they say they own UNIX they are complete liars because: > > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html > > > > > > As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to > > > > To what? Violate their agreements with The Open Group? > > > > http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585678840.html > > > > "Reference to the SCO web site shows that they own certain intellectual > > property and that they correctly attribute the trademark to The Open Group. > > SCO has never owned "UNIX". SCO is licensed to use the registered > > trademark UNIX "on and in connection" with their products that have been > > certified by The Open Group, as are all other licensees," the statement > > said. > > > > "These are the only circumstances in which a licensee may use the trademark > > UNIX on and in connection with its products. Statements that SCO 'owns the > > UNIX operating system', has 'licensed UNIX to XYZ' are clearly inaccurate > > and misleading." > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). > > http://calendar.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > TUHS mailing list > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > -- > Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" > You ask, "What is the most important thing?" > Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." > I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com Thu Jun 12 12:22:56 2003 From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:22:56 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Re: SCO vs IBM: what unix patents? Message-ID: Arnold asked, > Just out of curiousity, what patents are there in the current Unix System V > system? The setuid patent was released to the public, so that can't be > an issue. And copyright, trade secrets, blah blah, I can understand. But > I'm curious what is there in System V that has actually been patented? One article I read mentioned three, all visible in the USPTO database: 5,652,854 (filed 1995, granted 1997, assigned to Novell) 5,265,250 (filed 1990, granted 1993, originally assigned to AT&T) 6,097,384 (filed 1995, granted 2000, assigned to Novell) The first has to do with page table mapping and virtual address space, the second with RPC, the third with managing memory in subobjects. I have no idea how central these are to the case. They appear rather peripheral to me. Dennis From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Thu Jun 12 21:31:52 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 11:31:52 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux Message-ID: Michael I don�t agree with you on this , your complain about linux is unfair , on the contrary to many unixers especially the new generation of hackers and new unix users even those users fed up with Microsoft gimmicks , linux was miracle touch that helped to re energize the otherwise stale unix market , simply look at the market today which operating system has grown beyond any expectations ? . Another thing , in the days of corporate greed and bullying a-la-microsoft way, linux played a significant role to cement the open source movement. Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why it didn�t burst in the open ? , it�s troubles doesn�t have anything to do with linux it�s been there way before linux surfaced. I will not go into this flame war which is better BSD or Linux because both are dear to me and each has its own strong points and weaknesses . Finally , this whole nonsense from SCO wouldn't be there if SCO had any good products to offer or enjoying good revenue , so this law suite shows how desperate SCO is sinking in the red and using this law suite to float itself again . Love it or hate it linux is here to stay J . _______________ preparing for eventual flame war , automatic sprinkler = check fire extinguishers = check fire fighting water hose = check fire proof suite and helmet = check all systems go . zmkm >From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov) >To: tuhs at tuhs.org >Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux >Date: Tue, 10 Jun 03 14:01:08 PDT > >Here is my response to SCO vs. Linux. The thing is, some of the things they >are >saying I agree with most emphatically, except that what those things really >support is not SCO but our TUHS cause. Their main line, at least as I >interpret >it, is that UNIX is the real OS, UNIX is better than Linux, and Linux is >just a >naughty child that is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the adults. I >agree wholeheartedly! I and many other UNIX bigots have been more vocal >about >this than SCO. > >BUT... UNIX is not what SCO means by this term, UNIX is V7 -> 4BSD! That is >the >real UNIX, USG is just a bad commercialized branch that no one ever really >liked anyway! So to all those Fortune 1000 (or whatever that was) companies >warned by SCO to stop running Linux, they should throw out those cheap >micros, >put all their old large VAXen back online, and run True UNIX, 4.3 BSD UNIX! >And >that *is* real UNIX, it comes directly from V7 and openly and proudly >admits to >this fact! Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from >Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court >to >determine what the hell it really is? > >But SCO probably won't be too happy about it as they just gave away the >True >UNIX (V7) to the World for free, and it's non-retractable. > >So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, >BSD >will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing >community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can >instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just >as >free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh >diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to >seize >it by force in a revolution. > >MS (donning the flameproof spacesuit) >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From kstailey at yahoo.com Fri Jun 13 04:30:42 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 11:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Pirates Of Penguinance (Apologies to Gilbert, Sullivan, and most of humanity) Message-ID: <20030612183042.9629.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/PiratesOfPenguinance __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com From jcapp at anteil.com Thu Jun 12 23:39:58 2003 From: jcapp at anteil.com (Jim Capp) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:39:58 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Another response to SCO vs. Linux Message-ID: <20030612133949.GA7438@anteil.com> Hi All, I have been an avid UNIX fan since 1983 when I read my first UNIX manual and realized the power and flexibility of the command line utilities and portability of the C compiler. I have used many flavors of *NIX and the companies I worked for sold a lot of SCO products. However, it became increasingly annoying to have to spend an extra $1,000 to get a C compiler. Beginning in 1994, we began replacing AT&T Unix, SCO Xenix, and SCO Unix with Linux. The final straw for us using SCO was when a major client upgraded their system from a 2-CPU NCR to a 4-CPU Gateway and it took us hours to locate all the necessary drivers to make it fly. Then afterwards, the client could not find their license materials. Just for fun, we popped in a RH7.1 version of Linux and it booted fine, located all the hardware and installed itself in about a half-hour. It has been running that way for the last two years. We had another client simply upgrade their SCO Unix system from a Pentium-100 to a Pentium III. After spending hours trying to move their SCO license and finding out that the bootloaders didn't like *something* (unknown to this day) we went back to the customer and suggested another path. Today, that system is running Linux/Apache/PHP/PostgreSQL. The bottom line is that Linux works well. The fact that it is nearly free (cost of media/downloads/time etc.) is a nice bonus. IMHO, SCO is a victim of their own design (who would symbolically link 1,000 files to some strange /opt/SCO/.../.../etc/init.d/....??? I guess when your business models don't pan out, you can always sue somebody ... especially when someone like Microsoft gives you the money. Do you really think Microsoft would pay $10,000,000 to anyone else without a fight and without trying every other business tactic that they have used in the past? Finally, to threaten pulling IBM's AIX license unless they "settle" is hubris. My only fear is that a judge might think 80 out of 2.5 million lines of code has some significant value :-/ I sincerely hope the dialogue of practical arguments against SCO that I have seen in this list make it to the right people in defense of IBM. Sincerely, Jim Capp From jcapp at anteil.com Thu Jun 12 23:52:55 2003 From: jcapp at anteil.com (Jim Capp) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:52:55 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Re: Your message to TUHS awaits moderator approval In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030612135247.GA7527@anteil.com> Hmmm, I thought I *was* a member ... is it possible I am a member as jcapp at kp.net? or jcapp at acm.org? Do I need to submit under another address or am I missing the boat? Thanks, Jim On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 11:32:44PM +1000, tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org wrote: > Your mail to 'TUHS' with the subject > > Another response to SCO vs. Linux > > Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. > > The reason it is being held: > > Post by non-member to a members-only list > > Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive > notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel > this posting, please visit the following URL: > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/confirm/tuhs/de9265d7287d853c78061cb586498f97f7b80c45 From an at atrn.org Fri Jun 13 06:21:24 2003 From: an at atrn.org (Andy Newman) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 06:21:24 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <70860DDD-9D13-11D7-99FA-003065DC717E@atrn.org> zmkm zmkm wrote: > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? Well some of it, via CMU and many, many other paths, is a significant component of "the other" mass market, end-user OS. And if you believe Apple's marketing they ship more Unix (woops, OpenGroup says they're not allowed to say that) systems than anyone else. From grog at lemis.com Fri Jun 13 09:16:27 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:46:27 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030612231627.GH1015@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why > it didn?t burst in the open ? Glad you asked. It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago. Don't underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu Fri Jun 13 14:55:17 2003 From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 21:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux Message-ID: <200306130455.h5D4tHa15069@opihi.ucsd.edu> > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:46:27 +0930 > From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" > To: zmkm zmkm > Content-Disposition: inline > > On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > > > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why > > it didn?t burst in the open ? > > Glad you asked. It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago. Don't > underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux. > > Greg In case you are referring to the BSD vs. AT&T suit, BSD won. carl From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp Tue Jun 17 15:04:40 2003 From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:04:40 +0900 (JST) Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation Message-ID: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> Hi I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. Is it possible without any modification ? Does anyone try this ? Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? Thanks - Akito From wkt at tuhs.org Tue Jun 17 15:53:33 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:53:33 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> References: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> Message-ID: <20030617055333.GA19155@minnie.tuhs.org> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:04:40PM +0900, Akito Fujita wrote: > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. > > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. > Is it possible without any modification ? No, I don't think you can run UNIX/32V using SIMH. You need something that really looks like a VAX-11/780. Warren From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp Tue Jun 17 16:09:06 2003 From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:09:06 +0900 (JST) Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: <20030617055333.GA19155@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> <20030617055333.GA19155@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030617.150906.74753149.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> From: Warren Toomey Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:53:33 +1000 > On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:04:40PM +0900, Akito Fujita wrote: > > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. > > > > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 > > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. > > Is it possible without any modification ? > > No, I don't think you can run UNIX/32V using SIMH. > You need something that really looks like a VAX-11/780. Also I have looked for more better emulator than SIMH, but I've never find anything yet. Does anyone have a good information about it ? - Akito From asmodai at wxs.nl Tue Jun 17 19:03:00 2003 From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:03:00 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] I knew that penguin couldn't be trusted Message-ID: <20030617090259.GD81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org> If you believe Mr Sontag's words of course. I sincerely wonder what kind of medication the guy is using. http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt1055784622054/0616_marshall.html Best part: At this point I started to think about the public interest and about restrictive monopolies laws. It was almost as though Sontag was reading my mind.and yes, SCO has that base covered too. I listened to how IBM has bypassed U.S. export controls with Linux. How "Syria and Libya and North Korea" are all building supercomputers with Linux and inexpensive Intel hardware, in violation of U.S. export control laws. These laws would normally restrict export of technologies such as JFS, NUMA, RCU, and SMP.and, (I was waiting for this) "encryption technologies." "We know that is occurring in Syria," I heard, even though my mind was fogging over at this point. "So are you saying that the U.S. government might file a "Friend of the Court Brief" to support your case against IBM?" I blurted out. "Don't be surprised" was Sontag's answer. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven / asmodai / a capoeirista PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B http://www.tendra.org/ | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/ Is there a place deep within, a place where you hide your darkest Sins..? From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed Jun 18 03:26:26 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:26:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> Message-ID: <20030617172626.66147.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> --- Akito Fujita wrote: > Hi > > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. > > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. > Is it possible without any modification ? VAX-11/780 is a unibus VAX. Micro VAX III / SIMH VAX is a Qbus VAX. http://world.std.com/~bdc/projects/vaxen/vax-perf.html SIMH is "Mayfair III" on that page. > Does anyone try this ? > Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? > or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? > > Thanks > > > - Akito > > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Wed Jun 18 05:29:06 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 19:29:06 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation Message-ID: Hi all what about eVAX ??? , any one tried this ? is it any good ?? Akito I don't know if you got my earlier email it was bounced back earlier today from TUHS any way v32 doesn't support virtual memory. zmkm >From: Kenneth Stailey >To: Akito Fujita , tuhs at tuhs.org >CC: Akito Fujita >Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation >Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:26:26 -0700 (PDT) > > >--- Akito Fujita wrote: > > Hi > > > > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH. > > > > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 > > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only. > > Is it possible without any modification ? > >VAX-11/780 is a unibus VAX. >Micro VAX III / SIMH VAX is a Qbus VAX. > >http://world.std.com/~bdc/projects/vaxen/vax-perf.html > >SIMH is "Mayfair III" on that page. > > > Does anyone try this ? > > Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? > > or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > - Akito > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TUHS mailing list > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! >http://sbc.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Wed Jun 18 06:09:09 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Akito Fujita wrote: [snip] > Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? > or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? [snip] I don't know if it is any better since I haven't ever used it, but supposedly ts10 can emulate a vax. http://sourceforge.net/projects/ts10/ Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. -- Albert Einstein They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- Carl Sagan From sword7 at speakeasy.org Wed Jun 18 12:26:14 2003 From: sword7 at speakeasy.org (Timothy Stark) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:26:14 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c33540$fdcf34a0$1f915c42@sword70> All, Yes, latest ts10 versions are at ftp://ftp.firesword7.net/pub/ts10/develop. 11/780 emulation is not finished yet because I am figuring out how some memory and unibus configuration programming works. I have working Massbus emulation for 11/780 emulation. Tim Stark -----Original Message----- From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Andru Luvisi Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:09 PM To: Akito Fujita Cc: tuhs at tuhs.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Akito Fujita wrote: [snip] > Are there more better emulator than SIMH ? > or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ? [snip] I don't know if it is any better since I haven't ever used it, but supposedly ts10 can emulate a vax. http://sourceforge.net/projects/ts10/ From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp Wed Jun 18 15:28:34 2003 From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:28:34 +0900 (JST) Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030618.142834.74748811.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> From: "zmkm zmkm" Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 19:29:06 +0000 > I don't know if you got my earlier email it was bounced back earlier today > from TUHS any way v32 doesn't support virtual memory. Yes, I know it. I want to make sure how different it from BSD. That is reason why I want to run UNIX/32V. Perhaps, no one have seen UNIX/32V which is running in Japan. Also we can run old [34]BSD stuff without modification, if we have VAX-11/780 emulator. - Akito From nao at tom-yam.or.jp Wed Jun 18 15:54:05 2003 From: nao at tom-yam.or.jp (nao) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:54:05 +0900 (JST) Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation In-Reply-To: Akito Fujita's message of "Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:28:34 +0900 (JST)" <20030618.142834.74748811.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> References: <20030618.142834.74748811.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> Message-ID: <200306180554.h5I5s5IT057207@miffy.tom-yam.or.jp> Hi, In message "Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation" on 03/06/18, Akito Fujita writes: >I want to make sure how different it from BSD. >That is reason why I want to run UNIX/32V. >Perhaps, no one have seen UNIX/32V which is running in Japan. > >Also we can run old [34]BSD stuff without modification, >if we have VAX-11/780 emulator. Some report on UNIX/32V for VAX-11/780 located at the University of Tokyo appeared in a Japanese journal for computer architecture in 1981. See the following web page for details. CAVEAT: it contains lots of Japanese characters. http://www.ipsj.or.jp/members/SIGNotes/Jpn/08/1981/041/article005.html Naoki Hamada nao at tom-yam.ro.jp From peterjeremy at optushome.com.au Thu Jun 19 21:00:54 2003 From: peterjeremy at optushome.com.au (Peter Jeremy) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:00:54 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux In-Reply-To: <200306130455.h5D4tHa15069@opihi.ucsd.edu> References: <200306130455.h5D4tHa15069@opihi.ucsd.edu> Message-ID: <20030619110053.GC9069@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 09:55:17PM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote: >> From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" >> On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: >> > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why >> > it didn?t burst in the open ? >> >> Glad you asked. It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago. Don't >> underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux. >In case you are referring to the BSD vs. AT&T suit, BSD won. But BSD basically stagnated during the suit - which took 2-3 years. No-one wanted to have anything to do with BSD whilst the suit was on and it took a while to recover. Linux was unaffected and basically gained 3-4 years headstart. What Greg is suggesting is that if something equivalent comes along for Linux (and I don't believe the SCO case is it), it will put a really serious dent in its growth. Even if Linux won, the after-effect will last for years. Peter From kstailey at yahoo.com Fri Jun 20 09:31:06 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page Message-ID: <20030619233106.83233.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From kstailey at yahoo.com Fri Jun 20 09:35:39 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: <20030619233106.83233.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/ancient-unix/ 20th Jun 2003 home | news | register | members | privacy policy | faqs | about | contact Not Logged In Directory Listing SCO Ancient Unix Software License Agreement THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. ("SCO") HEREBY GRANTS TO YOU THE SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT STATED BELOW ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES STATED IN THIS SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT. BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, OR USING THE ANCIENT UNIX SOURCE CODE, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ THIS SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT, UNDERSTAND IT, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT. THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ANCIENT UNIX SOURCE CODE (AGREEMENT) A. THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC., a California corporation (SCO), having an office at 400 Encinal Street, Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900 and you as LICENSEE, agree that, as of the Effective Date hereof, as defined in Section 7.1, the terms and conditions set forth in this AGREEMENT shall apply to use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT. B. SCO makes certain licensing rights for SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS available under this AGREEMENT, including rights to make and use DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS. Such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is identified in Section 3 of this AGREEMENT . C. This AGREEMENT sets forth the entire agreement and understanding between the parties as to the subject matter hereof and merges all prior discussions between them, and neither of the parties shall be bound by any conditions, definitions, warranties, understandings or representations with respect to such subject matter other than as expressly provided herein or as duly set forth on or subsequent to the date of acceptance hereof in writing and signed by a proper and duly authorized representative of the party to be bound thereby. No provision appearing on any form originated by LICENSEE shall be applicable unless such provision is expressly accepted in writing by an authorized representative of SCO. D. The AUTHORIZED COUNTRY for this AGREEMENT shall be any countries not excluded by Section 5.2 I. DEFINITIONS 1.1 AUTHORIZED COUNTRY means one or more countries specified above. 1.2 CPU means a computer having one or more processing units and a single global memory space. 1.3 COMPUTER PROGRAM means any instruction or instructions for controlling the operation of a CPU. 1.4 DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT means COMPUTER PROGRAMS in OBJECT CODE format based on a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. 1.5 DESIGNATED CPU means all CPUs licensed as such for a specific SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. 1.6 OBJECT CODE means a COMPUTER PROGRAM in binary form, resulting from the compilation of SOURCE CODE by computer or compiler into machine executable code and which is in a form of computer programs not convenient to human understanding of the program logic, but which is appropriate for execution or interpretation by computer. 1.7 SOURCE CODE means COMPUTER PROGRAMS written in certain programming languages in electronic media form and in a form convenient for reading and review by a trained individual, such as a printed or written listing of programs, containing specific algorithms, instructions, plans, routines and the like, for controlling the operation of a computer system, but which is not in a form that would be suitable for execution directly on computer hardware. 1.8 SOURCE CODE PRODUCT means a SCO software offering, primarily in SOURCE CODE form. Such offering may also include OBJECT CODE components. 1.9 SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM means a SCO software offering that is (i) specifically designed for a 16-Bit computer, or (ii) the 32V version, and (iii) specifically excludes UNIX System V and successor operating systems. 2. GRANT OF RIGHTS 2.1 (a) SCO grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive right to use, in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY, each SOURCE CODE PRODUCT identified in Section 3 of this AGREEMENT, solely for personal use (as restricted in Section 2.1(b)) and solely on or in conjunction with DESIGNATED CPUs, and/or Networks of CPUs, licensed by LICENSEE through this SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. Such right to use includes the right to modify such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT and to prepare DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT based on such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, provided that any such modification or DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that contains any part of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT subject to this AGREEMENT is treated hereunder the same as such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. SCO claims no ownership interest in any portion of such a modification or DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that is not part of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. (b) Personal use is limited to noncommercial uses. Any such use made in connection with the development of enhancements or modifications to SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS is permitted only if (i) neither the results of such use nor any enhancement or modification so developed is intended primarily for the benefit of a third party and (ii) any copy of any such result, enhancement or modification, furnished by LICENSEE to a third party holder of an equivalent Software License with SCO where permitted by Section 8.4(b) below, is furnished for no more than the cost of reproduction and shipping. Any such copy that includes any portion of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be subject tothe provisions of such Section 8.4. (c) LICENSEE may produce printed and on-line copies of documentation included with the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT as necessary for use with the DESIGNATED CPUs. All copies must include a legally sufficient copyright notice and a statement that the documents include a portion or all of SCO's copyrighted documentation, which is being reproduced with permission. (d) Commercial use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS or of any result, enhancement or modification associated with the use of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS under this AGREEMENT is not permitted. Such commercial use is permissible only pursuant to the terms of an appropriate commercial software agreement between SCO or a corporate affiliate thereof and LICENSEE. For purposes of this AGREEMENT, commercial use includes, but is not limited to, furnishing copies to third parties in a manner not permitted by Section 8.4(b). (e) SCO also grants LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive right to make copies of DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS and, subject to U. S. Government export requirements and to Section 8.4(b), to furnish such copies directly to other LICENSEES who have an equivalent Software License with SCO before or at the time of furnishing each copy of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT. 2.2 (a) Any notice acknowledging a contribution of a third party appearing in a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be included in corresponding portions of DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS made by LICENSEE. (b) Each portion of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT shall include an appropriate copyright notice. Such copyright notice may be the copyright notice or notices appearing in or on the corresponding portions of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT on which such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is based or, if copyrightable changes are made in developing such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT, a copyright notice identifying the owner of such changes. 2.3 No right is granted hereunder to use any trademark of SCO (or a corporate affiliate thereof). However, LICENSEE must state in packaging, labeling or otherwise that a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is derived from SCO's software under license from SCO and identify such software (including any trademark, provided the proprietor of the trademark is appropriately identified). LICENSEE agrees not to use a name or trademark for a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that is confusingly similar to a name or trademark used by SCO (or a corporate affiliate thereof). 2.4 A single back-up CPU may be used as a substitute for the DESIGNATED CPU without notice to SCO during any time when such DESIGNATED CPU is inoperative because it is malfunctioning or undergoing repair, maintenance or other modification. 3. LICENSED SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and successor operating systems: 16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V 4. DELIVERY SCO makes no guarantees or commitments that any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is available from SCO. If available, and upon acceptance by LICENSEE of the terms of this AGREEMENT, SCO will provide LICENSEE one (1) copy of such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT via its FTP site established for such purpose. 5. EXPORT 5.1 LICENSEE agrees that it will not, without the prior written consent of SCO, export, directly or indirectly, SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS covered by this AGREEMENT to any country outside of the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY. 5.2 LICENSEE acknowledges that the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS, the media, and any immediate product (including processes) produced directly by the use of any such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS are subject to export controls under the U.S. Export Administration Regulations and the export regulations of other countries. LICENSEE may not export or re-export, directly or indirectly, the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS, the media, any related technical information or materials covered by this AGREEMENT, or any immediate product (including processes) produced directly by the use of any such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to any country that is in violation of U.S. Export Administration Regulations and/or the export regulations of other countries unless an appropriate authorization from the U.S. Commerce Department and any other relevant government authority has been obtained. 5.3 LICENSEE agrees that its obligations under Sections 5.1 and 5.2 shall survive and continue after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT. 6. FEES AND TAXES 6.1 The rights granted to LICENSEE for use of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS identified in Section 3 above are granted to LICENSEE at no charge. 6.2 LICENSEE shall pay all taxes (and any related interest or penalty), however designated, imposed as a result of the existence or operation of this AGREEMENT, except (i) any tax imposed upon SCO (or a corporate affiliate thereof) in the jurisdiction in which LICENSEE is located if such tax is allowable as a credit against United States income taxes of SCO (or such an affiliate) and (ii) any income tax imposed upon SCO (or such an affiliate) by the United States or any governmental entity within the United States proper (the fifty (50) states and the District of Columbia). To assist in obtaining the credit identified in (i) of this Section 6.2, LICENSEE shall furnish SCO with such evidence as may be required by United States taxing authorities to establish that any such tax has been paid. If SCO is required to collect a tax to be paid by LICENSEE, LICENSEE shall pay such tax to SCO on demand. 7. TERM 7.1 This AGREEMENT shall become effective on and as of the date of acceptance of the terms of this AGREEMENT. The initial term of this AGREEMENT shall be for one (1) year. Thereafter, the AGREEMENT will automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms unless either party gives the other, no later than ninety (90) days before the end of the initial term, or then current extension, written notice of its intent to terminate this AGREEMENT. Nothing in this AGREEMENT shall be construed to require either party to extend this AGREEMENT beyond the initial term or any subsequent term. 7.2 LICENSEE may terminate its rights under this AGREEMENT by written notice to SCO certifying that LICENSEE has discontinued use of and returned or destroyed, at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT. 7.3 If LICENSEE fails to fulfill one or more of its obligations under this AGREEMENT, SCO may, upon its election and in addition to any other remedies it might have, at any time terminate all the rights granted by it hereunder to LICENSEE. Upon such termination LICENSEE shall immediately discontinue use of and return or destroy, at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in its possession. 7.4 In the event of termination of LICENSEE's rights under Sections 7.2 or 7.3, (i) all fees that LICENSEE has become obligated to pay shall become immediately due and payable and (ii) SCO shall have no obligation to refund any amounts paid to it hereunder. 8. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 8.1 This AGREEMENT shall prevail notwithstanding any conflicting terms or legends which may appear in a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. 8.2 SCO warrants that it is empowered to grant the rights granted herein. SCO and other developers make no other representations or warranties, expressly or impliedly. By way of example but not of limitation, SCO and other developers make no representations or warranties of merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose, or that the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT will not infringe any patent, copyright or trademark. SCO and other developers shall not be held to any liability with respect to any claim by LICENSEE, or a third party on account of, or arising from, the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. 8.3 Neither the execution of this AGREEMENT nor anything in any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be construed as an obligation upon SCO or any other developer to furnish any person, including LICENSEE, any assistance of any kind whatsoever, or any information or documentation. 8.4 (a) LICENSEE agrees that it shall hold all parts of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT in confidence for SCO. LICENSEE further agrees that should it make such disclosure of any or all of such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS (including methods or concepts utilized therein) to anyone to whom such disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are granted hereunder, LICENSEE shall appropriately notify each such person to whom any such disclosure is made that such disclosure is made in confidence and shall be kept in confidence and have each such person sign a confidentiality agreement containing restrictions on disclosure substantially similar to those set forth herein. If LICENSEE should become aware of a violation of SCO's intellectual property and/or proprietary rights, LICENSEE shall promptly notify SCO and cooperate with SCO in such enforcement. If information relating to a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT subject to this AGREEMENT at any time becomes available without restriction to the general public by acts not attributable to LICENSEE, LICENSEE's obligations under this section shall not apply to such information after such time. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8.4(a), LICENSEE may make available copies of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, either in modified or unmodified form, to third parties in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY having Source Code Licenses of the same scope herewith from SCO for the same SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, if and only if (i) LICENSEE first requests verification of the status of the recipient by contacting SCO at the address contained in Section 8.8(a) or other number specified by SCO, and (ii) SCO gives written verification of the recipient's software license status. LICENSEE shall maintain a record of each such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT made available. 8.5 On SCO's request, but not more frequently than annually, LICENSEE shall furnish to SCO a statement, listing the location, type and serial number of the DESIGNATED CPU hereunder and stating that the use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT has been reviewed and that each such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is being used solely on the DESIGNATED CPU (or temporarily on a back-up CPU) for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in full compliance with the provisions of this AGREEMENT. 8.6 The obligations of LICENSEE under Section 8.4 shall survive and continue after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT. 8.7 Neither this AGREEMENT nor any rights hereunder, in whole or in part, shall be assignable or otherwise transferable by LICENSEE and any purported assignment or transfer shall be null and void. 8.8 (a) Correspondence with SCO relating to this AGREEMENT shall be sent to: THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. 400 Encinal Street Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900 United States of America Attention: Law and Corporate Affairs 8.9 LICENSEE shall obtain all approvals from any governmental authority in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY required to effectuate this AGREEMENT according to its terms, including any such approvals required for LICENSEE to make payments to SCO pursuant to this AGREEMENT. LICENSEE shall bear all expenses associated with obtaining such approvals. 8.10 The construction and performance of this AGREEMENT shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, USA. Click ACCEPT to proceed. [Buttons still work, in fact I just got my copy of Sys III :) ] Last reviewed Mayl 2, 2000 Login --- Kenneth Stailey wrote: > http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html > > http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html ------ ------ ------ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Jun 20 09:56:52 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:56:52 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030619233106.83233.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com> <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030619235652.GA40975@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 04:35:39PM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/ancient-unix/ > > The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are > restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR > OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of > the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and > successor operating systems: > > 16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V > > Click ACCEPT to proceed. > > [Buttons still work, in fact I just got my copy of Sys III :) ] I would be very careful here. At the very least, the contract doesn't explicitly cover SysIII, although you could argue that it is a SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM. And the Caldera license explicitly forbids SysIII. Warren From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Fri Jun 20 10:10:52 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:10:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: <20030619235652.GA40975@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Warren Toomey wrote: [snip] > I would be very careful here. At the very least, the contract doesn't > explicitly cover SysIII, although you could argue that it is a > SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM. And the Caldera license explicitly forbids > SysIII. It seems to me that the fact that SCO offered SysIII on the page linked to from the license agreement implies that SCO intended for SysIII to be covered by this license. Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: "Taking the envelope and pencil in his otherwise empty hands, the medium feels it, stares into space, grunts, foams at the mouth, and otherwise becomes very psychic." - Theodore Annemann From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au Fri Jun 20 11:52:47 2003 From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:52:47 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: References: <20030619235652.GA40975@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030620015247.GF273@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> On 2003-Jun-19 17:10:52 -0700, Andru Luvisi wrote: >On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Warren Toomey wrote: >[snip] >> I would be very careful here. At the very least, the contract doesn't >> explicitly cover SysIII, although you could argue that it is a >> SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM. And the Caldera license explicitly forbids >> SysIII. > >It seems to me that the fact that SCO offered SysIII on the page linked to >from the license agreement implies that SCO intended for SysIII to be >covered by this license. I think the status of SysIII was always a bit murky. Whilst it may have been old SCO's intention that the Ancient UNIX license covered SysIII, the license doesn't say so. Since the license doesn't explicitly allow SysIII, it would be up to you to convince the judge that the license does implicitly cover SysIII. Of course, by publishing SysIII, SCO have blown any trade secret claims relating to SysIII out of the water. But that doesn't make it legal for you to use it. Peter From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Fri Jun 20 13:00:52 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 23:00:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000101c336d8$297d01c0$239efea9@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine It seems that the archive is still available under their mismanaged FTP server. Since I already agreed to that oddball license, I am now downloading them from the FTP site. (I trimmed the original message there was a complaint!) Warren, the HTML pages make a reference to an older webpage on the TUHS webservers, is a CD still available? Or are they making that up? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Kenneth Stailey > Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 7:36 PM > To: Kenneth Stailey; tuhs at tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page > --- Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html > > > > http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.ht ml > > ------ > ------ > ------ > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! > http://sbc.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From drwho8 at worldnet.att.net Fri Jun 20 10:57:52 2003 From: drwho8 at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 20:57:52 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page References: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001701c336c6$fb277f00$239efea9@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine It seems that the archive is still available under their mismanaged FTP server. Since I already agreed to that oddball license, I am now downloading them from the FTP site. Warren, the HTML pages make a reference to an older webpage on the TUHS webservers, is a CD still available? Or are they making that up? Gregg C Levine drwho8 at worldnet.att.net "Oh my!" The Second Doctor's nearly favorite phrase. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kenneth Stailey" To: "Kenneth Stailey" ; Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 7:35 PM Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page > http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/ancient-unix/ > > > > > 20th Jun 2003 > > > home | news | register | members | privacy policy | faqs | about | contact > > > Not Logged In > Directory Listing > > > > SCO Ancient Unix > Software License Agreement > > THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. ("SCO") HEREBY GRANTS TO YOU THE SPECIAL > SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT STATED BELOW ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES STATED IN THIS > SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT. BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, OR USING THE > ANCIENT UNIX SOURCE CODE, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ THIS SPECIAL > SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT, UNDERSTAND IT, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT. > > THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ANCIENT > UNIX SOURCE CODE (AGREEMENT) > > A. THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC., a California corporation (SCO), having an > office at 400 Encinal Street, Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900 and you as > LICENSEE, agree that, as of the Effective Date hereof, as defined in Section > 7.1, the terms and conditions set forth in this AGREEMENT shall apply to use by > LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT. > > B. SCO makes certain licensing rights for SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS available under > this AGREEMENT, including rights to make and use DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS. Such > SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is identified in Section 3 of this AGREEMENT . > > C. This AGREEMENT sets forth the entire agreement and understanding between the > parties as to the subject matter hereof and merges all prior discussions > between them, and neither of the parties shall be bound by any conditions, > definitions, warranties, understandings or representations with respect to such > subject matter other than as expressly provided herein or as duly set forth on > or subsequent to the date of acceptance hereof in writing and signed by a > proper and duly authorized representative of the party to be bound thereby. No > provision appearing on any form originated by LICENSEE shall be applicable > unless such provision is expressly accepted in writing by an authorized > representative of SCO. > > D. The AUTHORIZED COUNTRY for this AGREEMENT shall be any countries not > excluded by Section 5.2 > > I. DEFINITIONS > > 1.1 AUTHORIZED COUNTRY means one or more countries specified above. > > 1.2 CPU means a computer having one or more processing units and a single > global memory space. > > 1.3 COMPUTER PROGRAM means any instruction or instructions for controlling the > operation of a CPU. > > 1.4 DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT means COMPUTER PROGRAMS in OBJECT CODE format based > on a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. > > 1.5 DESIGNATED CPU means all CPUs licensed as such for a specific SOURCE CODE > PRODUCT. > > 1.6 OBJECT CODE means a COMPUTER PROGRAM in binary form, resulting from the > compilation of SOURCE CODE by computer or compiler into machine executable code > and which is in a form of computer programs not convenient to human > understanding of the program logic, but which is appropriate for execution or > interpretation by computer. > > 1.7 SOURCE CODE means COMPUTER PROGRAMS written in certain programming > languages in electronic media form and in a form convenient for reading and > review by a trained individual, such > as a printed or written listing of programs, containing specific algorithms, > instructions, plans, routines and the like, for controlling the operation of a > computer system, but which is not in a form that would be suitable for > execution directly on computer hardware. > > 1.8 SOURCE CODE PRODUCT means a SCO software offering, primarily in SOURCE CODE > form. Such offering may also include OBJECT CODE components. > > 1.9 SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM means a SCO software offering that is (i) > specifically designed for a 16-Bit computer, or (ii) the 32V version, and (iii) > specifically excludes UNIX System V and > successor operating systems. > > 2. GRANT OF RIGHTS > > 2.1 (a) SCO grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive > right to use, in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY, each SOURCE CODE PRODUCT identified in > Section 3 of this AGREEMENT, solely for personal use (as restricted in Section > 2.1(b)) and solely on or in conjunction with DESIGNATED CPUs, and/or Networks > of CPUs, licensed by LICENSEE through this SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT > for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. Such right to use > includes the right to modify such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT and to prepare DERIVED > BINARY PRODUCT based on such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, provided that any such > modification or DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that contains any part of a SOURCE CODE > PRODUCT subject to this > AGREEMENT is treated hereunder the same as such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. SCO claims > no ownership interest in any portion of such a modification or DERIVED BINARY > PRODUCT that is not part of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. > > (b) Personal use is limited to noncommercial uses. Any such use made in > connection with the development of enhancements or modifications to SOURCE CODE > PRODUCTS is permitted only if (i) neither the results of such use nor any > enhancement or modification so developed is intended primarily for the benefit > of a third party and (ii) any copy of any such result, enhancement or > modification, furnished by LICENSEE to a third party holder of an equivalent > Software License with SCO where permitted by Section 8.4(b) below, is furnished > for no more than the cost of reproduction and shipping. Any such copy that > includes any portion of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be subject tothe provisions > of such Section 8.4. > > (c) LICENSEE may produce printed and on-line copies of documentation included > with the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT as necessary for use with the DESIGNATED CPUs. All > copies must include a legally sufficient copyright notice and a statement that > the documents include a portion or all of SCO's copyrighted documentation, > which is being reproduced with permission. > > (d) Commercial use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS or of any result, > enhancement or modification associated with the use of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS > under this AGREEMENT is not permitted. Such commercial use is permissible only > pursuant to the terms of an appropriate commercial software agreement between > SCO or a corporate affiliate thereof and LICENSEE. For purposes of this > AGREEMENT, commercial use includes, but is not limited to, furnishing copies to > third parties in a manner not permitted by Section 8.4(b). > > (e) SCO also grants LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive right > to make copies of DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS and, subject to U. S. Government > export requirements and to Section 8.4(b), to furnish such copies directly to > other LICENSEES who have an equivalent Software License with SCO before or at > the time of furnishing each copy of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT. > > 2.2 (a) Any notice acknowledging a contribution of a third party appearing in a > SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be included in corresponding portions of DERIVED > BINARY PRODUCTS made by LICENSEE. > > (b) Each portion of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT shall include an appropriate > copyright notice. Such copyright notice may be the copyright notice or notices > appearing in or on the corresponding portions of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT on > which such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is based or, if copyrightable changes are > made in developing such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT, a copyright notice > identifying the owner of such changes. > > 2.3 No right is granted hereunder to use any trademark of SCO (or a corporate > affiliate thereof). However, LICENSEE must state in packaging, labeling or > otherwise that a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is derived from SCO's software under > license from SCO and identify such software (including any trademark, provided > the proprietor of the trademark is appropriately identified). LICENSEE agrees > not to use a name or trademark for a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that is confusingly > similar to a name or trademark used by SCO (or a corporate affiliate thereof). > > 2.4 A single back-up CPU may be used as a substitute for the DESIGNATED CPU > without notice to SCO during any time when such DESIGNATED CPU is inoperative > because it is malfunctioning or undergoing repair, maintenance or other > modification. > > 3. LICENSED SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS > > The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are > restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR > OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of > the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and > successor operating systems: > > 16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V > > 4. DELIVERY > > SCO makes no guarantees or commitments that any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is > available from SCO. If available, and upon acceptance by LICENSEE of the terms > of this AGREEMENT, SCO will provide LICENSEE one (1) copy of such SOURCE CODE > PRODUCT via its FTP site established for such purpose. > > 5. EXPORT > > 5.1 LICENSEE agrees that it will not, without the prior written consent of SCO, > export, directly or indirectly, SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS covered by this AGREEMENT > to any country outside of the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY. > > 5.2 LICENSEE acknowledges that the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS, the media, and any > immediate product (including processes) produced directly by the use of any > such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS are subject to export controls under the U.S. Export > Administration Regulations and the export regulations of other countries. > LICENSEE may not export or re-export, directly or indirectly, the SOURCE CODE > PRODUCTS, the media, any related technical information or materials covered by > this AGREEMENT, or any immediate product (including processes) produced > directly by the use of any such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to any country that is in > violation of U.S. Export Administration Regulations and/or the export > regulations of other countries unless an appropriate authorization from the > U.S. Commerce Department and any other relevant government authority has been > obtained. > > 5.3 LICENSEE agrees that its obligations under Sections 5.1 and 5.2 shall > survive and continue after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT. > > 6. FEES AND TAXES > > 6.1 The rights granted to LICENSEE for use of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS > identified in Section 3 above are granted to LICENSEE at no charge. > > 6.2 LICENSEE shall pay all taxes (and any related interest or penalty), however > designated, imposed as a result of the existence or operation of this > AGREEMENT, except (i) any tax imposed upon SCO (or a corporate affiliate > thereof) in the jurisdiction in which LICENSEE is located if such tax is > allowable as a credit against United States income taxes of SCO (or such an > affiliate) and (ii) any income tax imposed upon SCO (or such an affiliate) by > the United States or any governmental entity within the United States proper > (the fifty (50) states and the District of Columbia). To assist in obtaining > the credit identified in (i) of this Section 6.2, LICENSEE shall furnish SCO > with such evidence as may be required by United States taxing authorities to > establish that any such tax has been paid. If SCO is required to collect a tax > to be paid by LICENSEE, LICENSEE shall pay such tax to SCO on demand. > > 7. TERM > > 7.1 This AGREEMENT shall become effective on and as of the date of acceptance > of the terms of this AGREEMENT. The initial term of this AGREEMENT shall be for > one (1) year. Thereafter, the AGREEMENT will automatically renew for successive > one (1) year terms unless either party gives the other, no later than ninety > (90) days before the end of the initial term, or then current extension, > written notice of its intent to terminate this AGREEMENT. Nothing in this > AGREEMENT shall be construed to require either party to extend this AGREEMENT > beyond the initial term or any subsequent term. > > 7.2 LICENSEE may terminate its rights under this AGREEMENT by written notice to > SCO certifying that LICENSEE has discontinued use of and returned or destroyed, > at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT. > > 7.3 If LICENSEE fails to fulfill one or more of its obligations under this > AGREEMENT, SCO may, upon its election and in addition to any other remedies it > might have, at any time terminate all the rights granted by it hereunder to > LICENSEE. Upon such termination LICENSEE shall immediately discontinue use of > and return or destroy, at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in > its possession. > > 7.4 In the event of termination of LICENSEE's rights under Sections 7.2 or 7.3, > (i) all fees that LICENSEE has become obligated to pay shall become immediately > due and payable and (ii) SCO shall have no obligation to refund any amounts > paid to it hereunder. > > 8. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS > > 8.1 This AGREEMENT shall prevail notwithstanding any conflicting terms or > legends which may appear in a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. > > 8.2 SCO warrants that it is empowered to grant the rights granted herein. SCO > and other developers make no other representations or warranties, expressly or > impliedly. By way of example but not of limitation, SCO and other developers > make no representations or warranties of merchantability or fitness for any > particular purpose, or that the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT will not > infringe any patent, copyright or trademark. SCO and other developers shall not > be held to any liability with respect to any claim by LICENSEE, or a third > party on account of, or arising from, the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. > > 8.3 Neither the execution of this AGREEMENT nor anything in any SOURCE CODE > PRODUCT shall be construed as an obligation upon SCO or any other developer to > furnish any person, including LICENSEE, any assistance of any kind whatsoever, > or any information or documentation. > > 8.4 (a) LICENSEE agrees that it shall hold all parts of the SOURCE CODE > PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT in confidence for SCO. LICENSEE further > agrees that should it make such disclosure of any or all of such SOURCE CODE > PRODUCTS (including methods or concepts utilized therein) to anyone to whom > such disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are granted hereunder, > LICENSEE shall appropriately notify each such person to whom any such > disclosure is made that such disclosure is made in confidence and shall be kept > in confidence and have each such person sign a confidentiality agreement > containing restrictions on disclosure substantially similar to those set forth > herein. > > If LICENSEE should become aware of a violation of SCO's intellectual property > and/or proprietary rights, LICENSEE shall promptly notify SCO and cooperate > with SCO in such enforcement. > > If information relating to a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT subject to this AGREEMENT at > any time becomes available without restriction to the general public by acts > not attributable to LICENSEE, LICENSEE's obligations under this section shall > not apply to such information after such time. > > (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8.4(a), LICENSEE may make > available copies of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, either in modified or unmodified > form, to third parties in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY having Source Code Licenses of > the same scope herewith from SCO for the same SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, if and only > if (i) LICENSEE first requests verification of the status of the recipient by > contacting SCO at the address contained in Section 8.8(a) or other number > specified by SCO, and (ii) SCO gives written verification of the recipient's > software license status. LICENSEE shall maintain a record of each such SOURCE > CODE PRODUCT made available. > > 8.5 On SCO's request, but not more frequently than annually, LICENSEE shall > furnish to SCO a statement, listing the location, type and serial number of the > DESIGNATED CPU hereunder and stating that the use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE > PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT has been reviewed and that each such SOURCE > CODE PRODUCT is being used solely on the DESIGNATED CPU (or temporarily on a > back-up CPU) for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in full compliance with the > provisions of this AGREEMENT. > > 8.6 The obligations of LICENSEE under Section 8.4 shall survive and continue > after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT. > > 8.7 Neither this AGREEMENT nor any rights hereunder, in whole or in part, shall > be assignable or otherwise transferable by LICENSEE and any purported > assignment or transfer shall be null and void. > > 8.8 (a) Correspondence with SCO relating to this AGREEMENT shall be sent to: > > THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. > 400 Encinal Street > Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900 > United States of America > > Attention: Law and Corporate Affairs > > 8.9 LICENSEE shall obtain all approvals from any governmental authority in the > AUTHORIZED COUNTRY required to effectuate this AGREEMENT according to its > terms, including any such approvals required for LICENSEE to make payments to > SCO pursuant to this AGREEMENT. LICENSEE shall bear all expenses associated > with obtaining such approvals. > > 8.10 The construction and performance of this AGREEMENT shall be governed by > the laws of the State of California, USA. > > > Click ACCEPT to proceed. > > [Buttons still work, in fact I just got my copy of Sys III :) ] > > > > > > > Last reviewed Mayl 2, 2000 > > > > > Login > > > > > > --- Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html > > > > http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html > > ------ > ------ > ------ > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! > http://sbc.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Jun 20 17:01:59 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:01:59 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: <001701c336c6$fb277f00$239efea9@who5> References: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> <001701c336c6$fb277f00$239efea9@who5> Message-ID: <20030620070159.GA44912@minnie.tuhs.org> On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 08:57:52PM -0400, Gregg C Levine wrote: > Warren, the HTML pages make a reference to an older webpage on the TUHS > webservers, is a CD still available? Or are they making that up? We used to distibute CD copies of the Archive on a voluntary basis, but with all the ftp & http mirrors these days I decided it was all too much work. However, if you want a CD of something, ask away & someone might put their hand up :-) Warren From bwc at coraid.com Fri Jun 20 23:21:20 2003 From: bwc at coraid.com (bwc at coraid.com) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:21:20 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002? Message-ID: <4a63dc02eee9c2657a34cf34ebd328bc@coraid.com> I've got a sheet of paper here that is a license from Caldera dated January 23, 2002. Isn't that the current license? I don't see any timer limit on the license. Brantley From kstailey at yahoo.com Fri Jun 20 23:59:41 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 06:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes Message-ID: <20030620135941.9596.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com> Hi, Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set of files into a tape image. Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11? Thanks, Ken __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From kstailey at yahoo.com Sat Jun 21 00:56:23 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 07:56:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002? In-Reply-To: <4a63dc02eee9c2657a34cf34ebd328bc@coraid.com> Message-ID: <20030620145623.63399.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> --- bwc at coraid.com wrote: > I've got a sheet of paper here that is a license from Caldera dated > January 23, 2002. Isn't that the current license? I don't see any timer > limit on the license. > > Brantley I'm no lawyer but I think that unless there are provisions for revoking the license in the license then the license is perpetual. Question: The SCO Group is Caldera's new name. What is the relationship between THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC and Caldera / The SCO Group? > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Sat Jun 21 01:12:24 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:12:24 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002? Message-ID: <20030620151300.9D09A1EEC@minnie.tuhs.org> Just to clarify, what Brantley has is his own copy of the Bill Broderick letter, printed from the PDF file. If it's valid, it is effectively unrevokable anyway as it grants permission to use and distribute freely to anyone as long as credit to Caldera is maintained. But as long as nobody has a signed original it may be messy to prove that it's valid. On the other hand, I assume that if it can be shown that Caldera were aware of the letter and behaved as if it were valid, there are no secrets left to protect in V7 or 32/V. On the other leg, however, that letter doesn't open up System III. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From kstailey at yahoo.com Sat Jun 21 01:18:58 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 08:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page In-Reply-To: <000101c336d8$297d01c0$239efea9@who5> Message-ID: <20030620151858.70075.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com> God, I spelled "ancient" wrong last night. :) It's hell getting old. The license says: << 3. LICENSED SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and successor operating systems: 16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V >> It does not mention System III explicitly either by inclusion or exclusion so it depends on interpretation. The System III distribution includes both PDP-11 and VAX source but only PDP-11 binaries. Do you think the term "early versions of 32-Bit UNIX Operating System" covers something that came out four years after 32V, is still fully 16-bit compatible, and does not take advantage of the full 4GB address space the way that a true 32-bit system would? The README says << The version of System III here ran on the PDP-11 platform, and was supplied by Keith Bostic. boot contains the tape bootstrap, cpio.tape contains the standalone cpio(1) program, and mini-root contains a dump of the root file system. A tar archive of the whole of System III is available in sys3.tar.gz >> __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Sat Jun 21 02:11:33 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes In-Reply-To: <20030620135941.9596.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > Hi, > > Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set > of files into a tape image. Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11? Check out the Perl scripts tapadd.pl, tapcat.pl, and mkdisttap.pl in http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_Simh/211bsd.tar.gz For details of the tape format, search for "Magnetic Tapes" in simh_doc.txt. Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should not do is to include untried ideas of his own.'' Ratfor follows this precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone else. -- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR: A Preprocessor for a Rational Fortran" From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Sat Jun 21 02:36:48 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:36:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? Message-ID: I am having difficulty installing SysIII on simh. I have attached my simh pdp11 ini file (sys3.simh.bootstrap) and the Perl script used to create the install tape (mksys3tap.pl). Everything seems to go fine while installing the miniroot, but when I try to boot from the "installed" system I don't get very far. Below is a transcript. Any ideas? Andru $ pdp11 sys3.simh.bootstrap PDP-11 simulator V2.10-3 RL: creating new file Create bad block table on last track? [N] UNIX tape boot loader UNIX -- Initial Load: Tape-to-Disk The type of disk drive on which the Root file system will reside, as well as the type of tape drive that will be used for Tape 1 must be specified below. Answer the questions with a 'y' or 'n' followed by a carriage return or line feed. There is no type-ahead -- wait for the question to complete. The character '@' will kill the entire line, while the character '#' will erase the last character typed. RP03 at address 176710?: n RP04/5/6 at address 176700?: n RL01 at address 174400?: y Drive number (0-3)?: 0 Disk drive 0 selected. Mount a formatted pack on drive 0. Ready?: y TU10/TM11 at address 172520?: y Drive number (0-7)?: 0 Tape drive 0 selected. The tape on drive 0 will be read from the current position at 800bpi, 5120 characters (10 blocks) per record, and written onto the pack on drive 0 starting at block 0. Ready?: y Size of filesystem to be copied is 6000 blocks. What is the pack volume label? (e.g. p0001): The pack will be labelled p0001. The boot block for your type of disk drive will now be installed. The file system copy is now complete. To boot the basic unix for your disk and tape drives as indicated above, mount this pack on drive 0 and read in the boot block (block 0) using whatever means you have available; see romboot(8), 70boot(8). Then boot the program unixrltm using diskboot(8). Normally: #0=unixrltm The system will initially come up single-user; see init(8). If you have an upper case only console terminal, you must execute: stty lcase; see stty(1). After UNIX is up, link the file unixrltm to unix using ln(1). # ln /unixrltm /unix Set the date(1). Good Luck! The tape will now be rewound. HALT instruction, PC: 002460 (BR 2456) sim> boot rl0 #0=unixrltm ka6 = 1512 aps = 141774 pc = 1476 ps = 30010 trap type 0 ka6 = 1512 aps = 141666 pc = 113444 ps = 30300 trap type 0 panic: trap -------------- next part -------------- set cpu 22b att rl0 test.dsk att tm0 sys3.tap b tm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mksys3tap.pl Type: application/x-perl Size: 643 bytes Desc: URL: From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Sat Jun 21 03:50:23 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:50:23 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? Message-ID: Andu wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete tar and make a dsk out of it) . zmkm >From: Andru Luvisi >Reply-To: Andru Luvisi >To: tuhs at tuhs.org >Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? >Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:36:48 -0700 (PDT) > >I am having difficulty installing SysIII on simh. I have attached my simh >pdp11 ini file (sys3.simh.bootstrap) and the Perl script used to create >the install tape (mksys3tap.pl). Everything seems to go fine while >installing the miniroot, but when I try to boot from the "installed" >system I don't get very far. Below is a transcript. Any ideas? > >Andru > > >$ pdp11 sys3.simh.bootstrap > >PDP-11 simulator V2.10-3 >RL: creating new file >Create bad block table on last track? [N] >UNIX tape boot loader >UNIX -- Initial Load: Tape-to-Disk > >The type of disk drive on which the Root file system will reside, >as well as the type of tape drive that will be used for Tape 1 >must be specified below. > >Answer the questions with a 'y' or 'n' followed by >a carriage return or line feed. >There is no type-ahead -- wait for the question to complete. >The character '@' will kill the entire line, >while the character '#' will erase the last character typed. > >RP03 at address 176710?: n >RP04/5/6 at address 176700?: n >RL01 at address 174400?: y >Drive number (0-3)?: 0 >Disk drive 0 selected. > >Mount a formatted pack on drive 0. >Ready?: y > >TU10/TM11 at address 172520?: y >Drive number (0-7)?: 0 >Tape drive 0 selected. > >The tape on drive 0 will be read from the current position >at 800bpi, 5120 characters (10 blocks) per record, >and written onto the pack on drive 0 starting at block 0. > >Ready?: y >Size of filesystem to be copied is 6000 blocks. >What is the pack volume label? (e.g. p0001): >The pack will be labelled p0001. >The boot block for your type of disk drive will now be installed. > >The file system copy is now complete. > >To boot the basic unix for your disk and tape drives >as indicated above, mount this pack on drive 0 >and read in the boot block (block 0) using >whatever means you have available; see romboot(8), 70boot(8). > >Then boot the program unixrltm using diskboot(8). >Normally: #0=unixrltm > >The system will initially come up single-user; see init(8). >If you have an upper case only console terminal, >you must execute: stty lcase; see stty(1). > >After UNIX is up, link the file unixrltm to unix using ln(1). > # ln /unixrltm /unix > >Set the date(1). > >Good Luck! > >The tape will now be rewound. > > >HALT instruction, PC: 002460 (BR 2456) >sim> boot rl0 >#0=unixrltm >ka6 = 1512 >aps = 141774 >pc = 1476 ps = 30010 >trap type 0 >ka6 = 1512 >aps = 141666 >pc = 113444 ps = 30300 >trap type 0 >panic: trap > ><< sys3.simh.bootstrap >> ><< mksys3tap.pl >> >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From macbiesz at optonline.net Sat Jun 21 04:07:04 2003 From: macbiesz at optonline.net (Maciek Bieszczad) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:07:04 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c33756$c28272f0$05fea8c0@maciek> I'm having some trouble trying to build sys3.tap with mksys3tap.pl. I also tried another script (the original mkdisttap.pl from 2.11BSD), but none of these perl scripts seem to work for me. Am I doing something wrong here? Maciek [~/sys3]# ls boot cpio.tape mini-root mksys3tap.pl* script [~/sys3]# ./mksys3tap.pl > sys3.tap [~/sys3]# ls -l sys3.tap -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3076812 Jun 18 18:59 sys3.tap [~/sys3]# cat script set cpu 22b att rl0 test.dsk att tm0 sys3.tap b tm [~/sys3]# pdp11 script PDP-11 simulator V2.10-4 RL: creating new file Create bad block table on last track? [N] Trap stack push abort, PC: 000002 (BITB @(R3)+,@(R3)+) sim> From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Sat Jun 21 04:21:34 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > Andu > > wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete tar > and make a dsk out of it) . I'm not clear on what you mean by this. Here is how I was planning to do the install: 1) Boot from tape 2) Install miniroot on disk 3) Boot from disk 4) Untar rest of installation onto disk from tar tape file The instructions in usr/src/man/docs/setup (in the tar file) talk about using cpio and cpio format tape files instead of tar, but all I have is a tar file. I have not managed to finish step 3. Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: Appel's method avoids making a large number of small trampoline bounces by occasionally jumping off the Empire State Building. -- Henry G. Baker, "Cheney on the M.T.A." From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Sat Jun 21 04:29:19 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? In-Reply-To: <000001c33756$c28272f0$05fea8c0@maciek> Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Maciek Bieszczad wrote: > I'm having some trouble trying to build sys3.tap with mksys3tap.pl. I > also tried another script (the original mkdisttap.pl from 2.11BSD), but > none of these perl scripts seem to work for me. Am I doing something > wrong here? It looks like the same thing I am doing, but... > [~/sys3]# ls > boot cpio.tape mini-root mksys3tap.pl* script > [~/sys3]# ./mksys3tap.pl > sys3.tap > [~/sys3]# ls -l sys3.tap > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3076812 Jun 18 18:59 sys3.tap We don't seem to have the same sizes... -rw-r--r-- 1 luvisi luvisi 3086172 Jun 20 09:44 sys3.tap -rw-r--r-- 1 luvisi luvisi 9216 Mar 18 16:12 boot -rw-r--r-- 1 luvisi luvisi 3072000 Mar 18 16:12 mini-root If I replace add_file("boot", 512); with add_file("/dev/null", 512); I get 3076812, so I suspect that your "boot" file is empty. Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should not do is to include untried ideas of his own.'' Ratfor follows this precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone else. -- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR: A Preprocessor for a Rational Fortran" From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp Sat Jun 21 18:12:53 2003 From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita) Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 17:12:53 +0900 (JST) Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes In-Reply-To: References: <20030620135941.9596.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20030621.171253.74751175.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> From: Andru Luvisi Subject: Re: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:11:33 -0700 (PDT) > On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Kenneth Stailey wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set > > of files into a tape image. Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11? > > Check out the Perl scripts tapadd.pl, tapcat.pl, and mkdisttap.pl in > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_Simh/211bsd.tar.gz > > For details of the tape format, search for "Magnetic Tapes" in > simh_doc.txt. You can see "SIMH Magtape Representation and Handling" also. (http://simh.trailing-edge.com/docs/simh_magtape.pdf) - Akito From kstailey at yahoo.com Sun Jun 22 00:57:11 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 07:57:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] emulating old PDP-11's Message-ID: <20030621145711.84636.qmail@web10006.mail.yahoo.com> Hi, Seems that SIMH/PDP11, p11 and ts10 do not simulate older PDP-11's They appear to cover only /*3 (/23, /53, /73, etc) models. Am I wrong about this? Are there any open source emulators for the /40, /45, or /70? I know about Charon and Esatz. Thanks, Ken __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From wkt at tuhs.org Sun Jun 22 09:39:00 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:39:00 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Newer copies of SysV? Message-ID: <20030621233900.GA460@minnie.tuhs.org> All, I just received this from Sebastien Loisel. I don't have any recent SysV sources, but I though I'd pass this on to the mailing list in case anybody else can help Sebastien. Warren ----- Forwarded message from "S. Loisel" ----- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:44:21 -0400 From: "S. Loisel" Subject: System V To: wkt at tuhs.org Hello, I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm interested in the current Unix debacle. I'm diffing linux kernel sources against Unix sources, and I've written a program to do that efficiently, but I'm afraid that what Unix sources I can locate aren't actually relevant (I've been using what I can find at minnie.tuhs.org...) I know that a lot of people have the correct sources and that they were even available for download on the web, so I was wondering if you could hook me up somehow? I'm a researcher at McGill university in Montreal (http://www.math.mcgill.ca/loisel/) and I would only be using that source code for research. I intend to diff the files and then provide a list of similar files, and I hope to quote the common portions (assuming they are short enough for "fair use.") If you can't help me, can you tell me someone who could? Thank you very much, Sebastien Loisel ----- End forwarded message ----- From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz Sun Jun 22 20:41:33 2003 From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:41:33 +1200 Subject: [TUHS] About early Un*x clones Message-ID: <200306222241.33385.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz> Whitesmith under the capable guidance of Plauger - who else - came up with Idris. And a number of other Un*x clones were duly written at about the same time, according to: http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html The question is, is it possible to get ahold of those for the early Un*x hobbyist? Does anyone have any knowledge of their whereabouts, and (potential) legal statii? Wesley Parish -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people." From iosglpgc at teleline.es Sun Jun 22 22:08:28 2003 From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 13:08:28 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 Message-ID: <000f01c338b6$ff2405a0$0100000a@cicm.iosg.com> Is it possible to get a UNIX that runs on a 8086 or 8088 PC? Or for 80286 or 80386? Xenix? AT&T? SCO? Interactive UNIX? Where please? From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Mon Jun 23 02:21:11 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 In-Reply-To: <000f01c338b6$ff2405a0$0100000a@cicm.iosg.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Natalia Portillo wrote: > Is it possible to get a UNIX that runs on a 8086 or 8088 PC? > Or for 80286 or 80386? > > Xenix? > AT&T? > SCO? > Interactive UNIX? Minix is available and under a BSD like license. I don't know if it will suit you since it isn't derived from AT&T code, and the source for the for the compiler is not included. http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: Churchill's Commentary on Man: Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on. From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu Mon Jun 23 02:33:23 2003 From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Andru Luvisi wrote: [snip] > Minix is available and under a BSD like license. I don't know if it will > suit you since it isn't derived from AT&T code, and the source for the for > the compiler is not included. > > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html I spoke too soon. Apparently the sources for ACK are now available: ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/kjb/ACK/ACK-5.2.tar.gz Andru -- Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst Quote Of The Moment: Heisenberg may have been here. From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Mon Jun 23 03:29:11 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:29:11 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 Message-ID: andru actually it's indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer to the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C compiler and an assembler in the distribution , I am currently using 2.0.3 and I like it except for few reservations about its developments tools , it's nice in the way unix purist used to like versions 6 and 7 , small efficient neat and trying hard to become fully posix . the development tools aren't as good as they should be I don't like the ACK (amersterdam compiler kit) it feels gaged but its latest c compiler is highly ansi compatible , its assembler is a close cousin to the old assembler in IBM PC/IX version of unix. to answer natalia you can run it in two modes 16 bit and 32 bit check the 2.0.3 distribution page there are several packages 86/286/386 , don't bother with the so called 2.0.0. or CD distribution it's old., the real nice touch is the version that runs in dos under windows , it's cute but be aware not everything works in due to the limited resources , but I like it for quick hacks. minix was done for educational purposes the book published by AST the guy behind minix contains complete source code and oriented towards students . here's the direct link to 2.0.3. http://www.cs.vu.nl/pub/minix/2.0.3/ good luck >From: Andru Luvisi >Reply-To: Andru Luvisi >To: Natalia Portillo >CC: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org >Subject: Re: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 >Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:33:23 -0700 (PDT) > >On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Andru Luvisi wrote: >[snip] > > Minix is available and under a BSD like license. I don't know if it >will > > suit you since it isn't derived from AT&T code, and the source for the >for > > the compiler is not included. > > > > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html > >I spoke too soon. Apparently the sources for ACK are now available: > ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/kjb/ACK/ACK-5.2.tar.gz > >Andru >-- >Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst > >Quote Of The Moment: > Heisenberg may have been here. > >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Mon Jun 23 03:37:53 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:37:53 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? Message-ID: andru I should've known better before I rush my reply :-) , what I meant was since gnu cpio can uncompress those cpio files , so I assumed that it can be uncompressed booted and re packaged as a single .dsk image (like the unix7 thing) , but since I have no background in pdp11 hardware I am not sure how can this be done. cheers. zmkm >From: Andru Luvisi >Reply-To: Andru Luvisi >To: zmkm zmkm >CC: tuhs at tuhs.org >Subject: Re: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh? >Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:21:34 -0700 (PDT) > >On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > > > Andu > > > > wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete >tar > > and make a dsk out of it) . > >I'm not clear on what you mean by this. Here is how I was planning to do >the install: > > 1) Boot from tape > 2) Install miniroot on disk > 3) Boot from disk > 4) Untar rest of installation onto disk from tar tape file > >The instructions in usr/src/man/docs/setup (in the tar file) talk about >using cpio and cpio format tape files instead of tar, but all I have is a >tar file. > >I have not managed to finish step 3. > >Andru >-- >Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst > > > >Quote Of The Moment: > Appel's method avoids making a large number of small trampoline bounces > by occasionally jumping off the Empire State Building. > -- Henry G. Baker, "Cheney on the M.T.A." > _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Mon Jun 23 03:47:12 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:47:12 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 Message-ID: natalia check also comp.os.minix it's active. zmkm >From: "Natalia Portillo" >To: >Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 >Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 13:08:28 +0100 > >Is it possible to get a UNIX that runs on a 8086 or 8088 PC? >Or for 80286 or 80386? > >Xenix? >AT&T? >SCO? >Interactive UNIX? > >Where please? > >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Jun 23 07:28:41 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:28:41 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030622212841.GA10384@minnie.tuhs.org> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 05:29:11PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > actually [Minix is] indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer to > the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C compiler and > an assembler in the distribution Sorry to be a pedant here, but Minix was written wholly from scratch and has no AT&T code in it at all. I know, I've been playing with it since version 1.1. See also Tanenbaum's Operating Systems: Design and Implementation textbook for the fully story. Ciao! Warren From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Mon Jun 23 17:15:39 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:15:39 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 Message-ID: warren you missunderstood my point , I didn't imply it has at&t code !, what I meant is it has the look and feel of at&t unix and indeed it was modeled (if you prefer instead of derived :-) ) after unix 6 as per the author and the way it look and feel. as for the book , yup I read both the original book and the second one , that's what I meant it's an educational project oriented towards students. cheers zmkm >From: Warren Toomey >To: The Unix Heritage Society >Subject: Re: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 >Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:28:41 +1000 > >On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 05:29:11PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > actually [Minix is] indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer >to > > the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C >compiler and > > an assembler in the distribution > >Sorry to be a pedant here, but Minix was written wholly from scratch and >has no AT&T code in it at all. I know, I've been playing with it since >version 1.1. See also Tanenbaum's Operating Systems: Design and >Implementation >textbook for the fully story. > >Ciao! > Warren >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail From new_zmkm at hotmail.com Mon Jun 23 17:15:23 2003 From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:15:23 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 Message-ID: warren you missunderstood my point , I didn't imply it has at&t code !, what I meant is it has the look and feel of at&t unix and indeed it was modeled (if you prefer instead of derived :-) ) after unix 6 as per the author and the way it look and feel. as for the book , yup I read both the original book and the second one , that's what I meant it's an educational project oriented towards students. cheers zmkm >From: Warren Toomey >To: The Unix Heritage Society >Subject: Re: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 >Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:28:41 +1000 > >On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 05:29:11PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > > actually [Minix is] indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer >to > > the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C >compiler and > > an assembler in the distribution > >Sorry to be a pedant here, but Minix was written wholly from scratch and >has no AT&T code in it at all. I know, I've been playing with it since >version 1.1. See also Tanenbaum's Operating Systems: Design and >Implementation >textbook for the fully story. > >Ciao! > Warren >_______________________________________________ >TUHS mailing list >TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Jun 23 17:31:35 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:31:35 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030623073135.GA16384@minnie.tuhs.org> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:15:39AM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote: > warren > > you missunderstood my point , I didn't imply it has at&t code! Ah, apologies. I usually take ``derived'' to mean ``used code from'' :-) Ciao! Warren From loisel at math.mcgill.ca Tue Jun 24 04:27:10 2003 From: loisel at math.mcgill.ca (Sebastien Loisel) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 14:27:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] System V Message-ID: Hello, I have located 30 boot floppies for AT&T UNIX SVR4.0 2.1 for the 386 Apparently, only SCSI hard drive controllers are supported. I don't have a machine with a SCSI hard drive (and I'd rather not sacrifice a live machine to svr4.) I tried booting in in bochs, and it sort of works, but it panics relatively early. I suspect it's for the lack of SCSI emulation in bochs, but I'm not sure. I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and 14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my rh8 box. Anyone knows enough about this operating system to help me out? Perhaps some hints as to where the kernel sources might be located, how they are encoded? (I hope the kernel sources are in fact on the disks!) Sebastien Loisel From michael_davidson at pacbell.net Tue Jun 24 04:42:05 2003 From: michael_davidson at pacbell.net (Michael Davidson) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 11:42:05 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] System V References: Message-ID: <3EF749FD.2000905@pacbell.net> Sebastien Loisel wrote: > >I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've >grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the >clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is >what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but >many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of >bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and >14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my >rh8 box. > I suspect that most of the disks are either System V .pkg datastreams or cpio archives. Since this is obviously an installable binary distribution the only "source code" that you are going to find on it are the header files in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc and, perhaps, a few example or demo programs. Don't bother looking for kernel source code - it isn't there. From loisel at math.mcgill.ca Tue Jun 24 05:38:56 2003 From: loisel at math.mcgill.ca (Sebastien Loisel) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 15:38:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] System V In-Reply-To: <3EF749FD.2000905@pacbell.net> Message-ID: Thanks. At least now I can stop fighting with those svr4 floppies. Did the svr4/386 sources ever get out in the wild? Sebastien Loisel On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Michael Davidson wrote: > Sebastien Loisel wrote: > > > > >I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've > >grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the > >clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is > >what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but > >many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of > >bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and > >14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my > >rh8 box. > > > I suspect that most of the disks are either System V .pkg datastreams > or cpio archives. > > Since this is obviously an installable binary distribution the only > "source code" that you are going to find on it are the header files > in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc and, perhaps, a few example > or demo programs. > > Don't bother looking for kernel source code - it isn't there. > > > > > From mcrosby at marthon.org Tue Jun 24 06:18:42 2003 From: mcrosby at marthon.org (Matthew Crosby) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:18:42 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Newer copies of SysV? In-Reply-To: <20030621233900.GA460@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20030621233900.GA460@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030623201842.GA67841@marthon.org> Solaris is derived from Sys V, and the source is readily available to educational institutions. It could be a help... (though I warn you, they kernel in particular has a changed a LOT from stock Sys V) Remember that vanilla sys V source is still nominally under NDA for whoever has it, so I wouldn't bet on getting it... On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:39:00AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > All, > I just received this from Sebastien Loisel. I don't have any recent > SysV sources, but I though I'd pass this on to the mailing list in > case anybody else can help Sebastien. > > Warren > > ----- Forwarded message from "S. Loisel" ----- > > Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:44:21 -0400 > From: "S. Loisel" > Subject: System V > To: wkt at tuhs.org > > Hello, > > I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm interested in the current Unix debacle. > I'm diffing linux kernel sources against Unix sources, and I've written > a program to do that efficiently, but I'm afraid that what Unix sources > I can locate aren't actually relevant (I've been using what I can find > at minnie.tuhs.org...) > > I know that a lot of people have the correct sources and that they were > even available for download on the web, so I was wondering if you could > hook me up somehow? > > I'm a researcher at McGill university in Montreal > (http://www.math.mcgill.ca/loisel/) and I would only be using that > source code for research. I intend to diff the files and then provide a > list of similar files, and I hope to quote the common portions (assuming > they are short enough for "fair use.") > > If you can't help me, can you tell me someone who could? > > Thank you very much, > > Sebastien Loisel -- Matthew Crosby mcrosby at marthon.org "Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate" From loisel at math.mcgill.ca Tue Jun 24 06:30:09 2003 From: loisel at math.mcgill.ca (Sebastien Loisel) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:30:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [TUHS] Newer copies of SysV? In-Reply-To: <20030623201842.GA67841@marthon.org> Message-ID: Thanks for the information. I've already started asking around at McGill university for licenses, archives and such. Sebastien Loisel On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Matthew Crosby wrote: > Solaris is derived from Sys V, and the source is readily available to > educational institutions. It could be a help... (though I warn you, they > kernel in particular has a changed a LOT from stock Sys V) > > Remember that vanilla sys V source is still nominally under NDA for whoever > has it, so I wouldn't bet on getting it... > From kstailey at yahoo.com Tue Jun 24 07:23:43 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 14:23:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 In-Reply-To: <20030623073135.GA16384@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030623212343.26545.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com> My turn to be the apologetic pendant but Andy wrote that he was trying to clone version 7 not version 6. A quick way to check is look for a stat.h file with a "struct stat" in it. That was added after version 6. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE Tue Jun 24 07:57:23 2003 From: helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE (Wolfgang Helbig) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:57:23 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes Message-ID: <200306232205.h5NM5Un00269@bsd.korb> Just to keep it Unix-like, I wrote enblock, which takes a file in stdin a produces a tape file on stdout in SIMH-format. It takes one option, the block size, which defaults to 512. It writes an end of file mark after each run. To write more than one file on one tape, type enblock tape ; enblock >tape to write an end of tape mark, type enblock >tape You'll find enblock.c at http://www.ba-stuttgart.de/~helbig/os/v6/enblock.c >Hi, > >Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set >of files into a tape image. Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11? > >Thanks, >Ken From grog at lemis.com Tue Jun 24 08:15:51 2003 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:45:51 +0930 Subject: [TUHS] System V In-Reply-To: References: <3EF749FD.2000905@pacbell.net> Message-ID: <20030623221550.GX93137@wantadilla.lemis.com> On Monday, 23 June 2003 at 15:38:56 -0400, Sebastien Loisel wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Michael Davidson wrote: >> Sebastien Loisel wrote: >>> I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've >>> grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the >>> clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is >>> what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but >>> many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of >>> bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and >>> 14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my >>> rh8 box. >> >> I suspect that most of the disks are either System V .pkg datastreams >> or cpio archives. >> >> Since this is obviously an installable binary distribution the only >> "source code" that you are going to find on it are the header files >> in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc and, perhaps, a few example >> or demo programs. >> >> Don't bother looking for kernel source code - it isn't there. >> > Thanks. At least now I can stop fighting with those svr4 floppies. > > Did the svr4/386 sources ever get out in the wild? Doubtless, but it wasn't legal. Greg -- Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kstailey at yahoo.com Wed Jun 25 00:34:45 2003 From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:34:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes In-Reply-To: <200306232205.h5NM5Un00269@bsd.korb> Message-ID: <20030624143445.33838.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com> Hi Wolfgang, By default your software is copyright under the Berne treaty. If you indend to make this public-domain please add a comment indicating that this is so. Thanks, Ken --- Wolfgang Helbig wrote: > Just to keep it Unix-like, I wrote enblock, which takes a file in stdin > a produces a tape file on stdout in SIMH-format. It takes one option, > the block size, which defaults to 512. It writes an end of file mark > after each run. To write more than one file on one tape, type > > enblock tape ; enblock >tape > to write an end of tape mark, type > enblock >tape > > You'll find enblock.c at > http://www.ba-stuttgart.de/~helbig/os/v6/enblock.c > > > >Hi, > > > >Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a > set > >of files into a tape image. Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11? > > > >Thanks, > >Ken > > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com From iosglpgc at teleline.es Wed Jun 25 06:13:52 2003 From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:13:52 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <007801c33a8d$52b21c70$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com> Finally the posts became absolutely out of context. I was talking about getting UNIX variants, nor "derivates" (such as Linux or MINIX), nor current in-development projects like Free/Open/Net-BSD. From wkt at tuhs.org Wed Jun 25 08:22:13 2003 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:22:13 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants Message-ID: <20030624222213.GA34084@minnie.tuhs.org> I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is. Warren Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700 Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 From: "Ian King" To: "Natalia Portillo" , I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a derivative. :-) Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things started branching it gets pretty confusing. It's possibly an indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' (Coherent? XINU?) from a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess). FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 8086 (I recall buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so years ago). Is that more the sort of thing you're looking for? The current version(s) of XINU are available at http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html, according to Google. -- Ian From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Wed Jun 25 08:28:40 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:28:40 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants In-Reply-To: <20030624222213.GA34084@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <000001c33aa0$07e48120$239efea9@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine Go ahead and laugh, but your server could be having a bad day today. That being said, I am curious myself, as to the differences. Can someone come up with the definite explanation regarding which is which? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Warren Toomey > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:22 PM > To: The Unix Heritage Society > Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is. > Warren > > Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700 > Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 > From: "Ian King" > To: "Natalia Portillo" , > > I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a derivative. > :-) Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things > started branching it gets pretty confusing. It's possibly an > indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' (Coherent? XINU?) from > a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess). > > FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 8086 (I recall > buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so years ago). Is > that more the sort of thing you're looking for? The current version(s) > of XINU are available at http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html, > according to Google. -- Ian > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From jwillis at coherent-logic.com Fri Jun 27 08:54:51 2003 From: jwillis at coherent-logic.com (John Willis) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:54:51 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 Message-ID: Just noticed in the publication data for "The UNIX Programming Environment" that it was created on a VAX 11/750 running V7 UNIX. How is this possible? I have an 11/750 and V7 is my favorite UNIX... if I could do this, it would be awesome. Anyone have any insights? From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Fri Jun 27 09:15:23 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 19:15:23 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c33c38$d25ab160$239efea9@who5> Hello again from Gregg C Levine I have a copy here of it, and I'll check it, and also a copy of the C book. John, yes it was, and the one for C, is the 9th one of UNIX, on the 8550. Is it possible, gang, that the releases for the VAX, track a different sequence of events, then for the PDP-11? But more importantly, both books were done using the UNIX tools and using output devices that are actually typesetters, rather then printers. I know. I've met both. However, considering that the author of the first is one of the authors for the definitive C book, would they have had access to unreleased versions? Dennis you worked on that historic text with Brian Kernighan, and the book we are talking about, Brian worked with someone else, can you check on my assertions, and report back? John, you have a 11/750? Where do you keep it? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of John Willis > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:55 PM > To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 > > Just noticed in the publication data for "The UNIX Programming Environment" > that > it was created on a VAX 11/750 running V7 UNIX. How is this possible? I have > an 11/750 and V7 is my favorite UNIX... if I could do this, it would be > awesome. > > Anyone have any insights? > > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From jwillis at coherent-logic.com Fri Jun 27 09:24:38 2003 From: jwillis at coherent-logic.com (John Willis) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 17:24:38 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 In-Reply-To: <000401c33c38$d25ab160$239efea9@who5> Message-ID: I have an entire room of my house dedicated to computers including a VAX 11/750, a MicroVAX 3100, a VAXstation 3100, a VAXstation 2000, a MicroVAX II, and a huge HP 9000/800 I40... Needless to say, it gets hot. -----Original Message----- From: Gregg C Levine [mailto:hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:15 PM To: 'John Willis'; tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org Subject: RE: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 Hello again from Gregg C Levine I have a copy here of it, and I'll check it, and also a copy of the C book. John, yes it was, and the one for C, is the 9th one of UNIX, on the 8550. Is it possible, gang, that the releases for the VAX, track a different sequence of events, then for the PDP-11? But more importantly, both books were done using the UNIX tools and using output devices that are actually typesetters, rather then printers. I know. I've met both. However, considering that the author of the first is one of the authors for the definitive C book, would they have had access to unreleased versions? Dennis you worked on that historic text with Brian Kernighan, and the book we are talking about, Brian worked with someone else, can you check on my assertions, and report back? John, you have a 11/750? Where do you keep it? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of John Willis > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:55 PM > To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 > > Just noticed in the publication data for "The UNIX Programming Environment" > that > it was created on a VAX 11/750 running V7 UNIX. How is this possible? I have > an 11/750 and V7 is my favorite UNIX... if I could do this, it would be > awesome. > > Anyone have any insights? > > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Fri Jun 27 10:03:18 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 20:03:18 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 Message-ID: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org> Look again. The colophon in my copy of The UNIX Programming Environment (first paperback printing of the first edition) says This book was typeset in Times Roman and Courier by the authors, using a Mergenthaler Linotron 202 typesetter driven by a VAX-11/750 running the 8th Edition of the UNIX operating system. I don't have a copy of the latter-day (now contains ISO) C book, but if I recall correctly when it was written, it was probably typed in on a VAX 8550 running the 9th edition system. Probably it was the latter-day 9th, which had crept along quite a bit beyond the hasty 9/e manual. After I made some radical changes to the way device drivers plugged into the kernel, I changed it to print `9Vr2' when it booted, partly to distinguish the old system from the newer one and partly to annoy enough people to reach critical energy to produce a 10/e manual. The tactic took a while but was ultimately successful. For those who don't know the historic chain, the systems loosely called V8, V9, and V10 were never real releases in any sense; they were just names hung on the continuously-evolving system we ran in the 1980s in the Computing Science Research Center at Bell Labs. Brian and Dennis and Rob (and, for six years, I) used that system for everyday work as well as as a sandbox for systems work; hence the credit in the books. There were tapes called V8 and V9 issued to a few specific places under special on-off letter agreement, but they correspond only approximately to the like-numbered manuals. Norman Wilson Toronto ON (which feels a lot like New Jersey this evening) From iosglpgc at teleline.es Fri Jun 27 10:57:47 2003 From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 01:57:47 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Canary Islands Message-ID: <000c01c33c47$2217b730$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com> Just guessing, Any of these antique VAX and other machines running UNIXes arrived my islands? Does anybody know? Is there a possibility for a museum (my computer museum) to get one of these machines? Thanks to all ;) From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Fri Jun 27 11:00:33 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:00:33 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 In-Reply-To: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <000301c33c47$940b02c0$239efea9@who5> Hello again from Gregg C Levine Don't go getting your panties in a twist, Norman, (to quote an old friend.), I did look before completing the posting. And yes it did say that. I have here a personal edition of the C book, (I bought it, because I wanted to have the thing here when I did work in the language, and needed to double check a reference.). I have out a copy of the book that John is kvetching about from my local library. I checked that one, and it strangely enough agrees with what you're saying, and with John too. I find it, ah, logical, that the guys would use a Mergenthaler Linotron 202 typesetter for their print runs. Actually the word is imagesetter. But that term will do. As I recall you worked there for a while, and do know what you're talking about, so I'm not going to indulge myself in a flame war. Besides I've actually done enough typesetting so as to be able to argue the point with the bit brains at Adobe, so I'll even agree with you now. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Norman Wilson > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:03 PM > To: tuhs at tuhs.org > Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 > > Look again. The colophon in my copy of The UNIX Programming Environment > (first paperback printing of the first edition) says > This book was typeset in Times Roman and Courier by the > authors, using a Mergenthaler Linotron 202 typesetter driven > by a VAX-11/750 running the 8th Edition of the UNIX operating > system. > > I don't have a copy of the latter-day (now contains ISO) C book, but > if I recall correctly when it was written, it was probably typed in > on a VAX 8550 running the 9th edition system. Probably it was the > latter-day 9th, which had crept along quite a bit beyond the hasty > 9/e manual. After I made some radical changes to the way device > drivers plugged into the kernel, I changed it to print `9Vr2' when > it booted, partly to distinguish the old system from the newer one > and partly to annoy enough people to reach critical energy to produce > a 10/e manual. The tactic took a while but was ultimately successful. > > For those who don't know the historic chain, the systems loosely > called V8, V9, and V10 were never real releases in any sense; they > were just names hung on the continuously-evolving system we ran in > the 1980s in the Computing Science Research Center at Bell Labs. > Brian and Dennis and Rob (and, for six years, I) used that system > for everyday work as well as as a sandbox for systems work; hence > the credit in the books. There were tapes called V8 and V9 issued > to a few specific places under special on-off letter agreement, but > they correspond only approximately to the like-numbered manuals. > > Norman Wilson > Toronto ON > (which feels a lot like New Jersey this evening) > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net Fri Jun 27 11:00:33 2003 From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:00:33 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants In-Reply-To: <000b01c33c46$3673c580$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com> Message-ID: <000201c33c47$939584a0$239efea9@who5> Hello from Gregg C Levine Okay. That's almost how I describe the state of the art to my friends, and co-workers, and even customers. But shouldn't you have sent this to the list as well as to me? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: Natalia Portillo [mailto:iosglpgc at teleline.es] > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:51 PM > To: 'Gregg C Levine' > Subject: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > I think that you can always compare with ice creams. > > UNIX is an ice cream brand. > It have many flavours: Bell/AT&T, BSD, Xenix, AIX, A/UX, Coherent, etc. > There are other brands. > MINIX which have only a flavour. > Linux, with many flavours as RedHat, YDL, Debian, etc > > > -----Mensaje original----- > > De: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org > > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] En nombre de Gregg C Levine > > Enviado el: martes, 24 de junio de 2003 23:29 > > Para: 'Warren Toomey'; 'The Unix Heritage Society' > > Asunto: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > > > > > Hello from Gregg C Levine > > Go ahead and laugh, but your server could be having a bad day today. > > That being said, I am curious myself, as to the differences. Can > > someone come up with the definite explanation regarding which is > > which? > > ------------------- > > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > > "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org > > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > > > Behalf Of Warren Toomey > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:22 PM > > > To: The Unix Heritage Society > > > Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > > > > > I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is. > > > Warren > > > > > > Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 > > > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700 > > > Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 > > > From: "Ian King" > > > To: "Natalia Portillo" , > > > > > > > > I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a > > derivative. > > > :-) Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things > > > started branching it gets pretty confusing. It's possibly an > > > indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' (Coherent? XINU?) > > from > > > a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess). > > > > > > FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 8086 (I recall > > > buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so years ago). Is > > > that more the sort of thing you're looking for? The current > > version(s) > > > of XINU are available at > > http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html, > > > according to Google. -- Ian > > > _______________________________________________ > > > TUHS mailing list > > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TUHS mailing list > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > From iosglpgc at teleline.es Fri Jun 27 11:00:47 2003 From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 02:00:47 +0100 Subject: RV: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants Message-ID: <000f01c33c47$8ce57b60$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com> Sorry this message was intented to be sent to the list. (sorry gregg) > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Natalia Portillo [mailto:iosglpgc at teleline.es] > Enviado el: viernes, 27 de junio de 2003 1:51 > Para: 'Gregg C Levine' > Asunto: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > > I think that you can always compare with ice creams. > > UNIX is an ice cream brand. > It have many flavours: Bell/AT&T, BSD, Xenix, AIX, A/UX, > Coherent, etc. > There are other brands. > MINIX which have only a flavour. > Linux, with many flavours as RedHat, YDL, Debian, etc > > > -----Mensaje original----- > > De: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org > > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] En nombre de Gregg C Levine > > Enviado el: martes, 24 de junio de 2003 23:29 > > Para: 'Warren Toomey'; 'The Unix Heritage Society' > > Asunto: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > > > > > Hello from Gregg C Levine > > Go ahead and laugh, but your server could be having a bad day today. > > That being said, I am curious myself, as to the differences. Can > > someone come up with the definite explanation regarding which is > > which? > > ------------------- > > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > > "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org > > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On > > > Behalf Of Warren Toomey > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:22 PM > > > To: The Unix Heritage Society > > > Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants > > > > > > I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is. > > > Warren > > > > > > Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 > > > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700 > > > Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086 > > > From: "Ian King" > > > To: "Natalia Portillo" , > > > > > > > > I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a > > derivative. > > > :-) Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things > > > started branching it gets pretty confusing. It's possibly an > > > indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' > (Coherent? XINU?) > > from > > > a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess). > > > > > > FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to > 8086 (I recall > > > buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so > years ago). Is > > > that more the sort of thing you're looking for? The current > > version(s) > > > of XINU are available at > > http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html, > > > according to Google. -- Ian > > > _______________________________________________ > > > TUHS mailing list > > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TUHS mailing list > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > > > From agrier at poofygoof.com Fri Jun 27 11:32:02 2003 From: agrier at poofygoof.com (Aaron J. Grier) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 18:32:02 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Re: V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 In-Reply-To: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20030627013202.GX7074@goldberry.poofy.goof.com> On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 08:03:18PM -0400, Norman Wilson wrote: > I don't have a copy of the latter-day (now contains ISO) C book, but > if I recall correctly when it was written, it was probably typed in on > a VAX 8550 running the 9th edition system. "[...] using a Graphic Systems phototypesetter driven by a PDP-11/70 running under the UNIX operating system." -- Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier at poofygoof.com "Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court to determine what the hell it really is?" -- Michael Sokolov From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca Fri Jun 27 13:28:30 2003 From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 23:28:30 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 Message-ID: <20030627032910.CCD551FC6@minnie.tuhs.org> Fear not, Gregg; no twists intended or assumed. It could well be that there was an earlier print run of The UNIX Programming Environment that got it wrong and claimed to be done with V7 on an 11/750. But I've never seen it (which is why I specified the exact edition and printing I was quoting); and if it said that it was an error or a fib. So far as I know nobody ever did a port of straight V7 to a VAX. TUPE was written just before I arrived at the Labs; it's possible that the 11/70 was still around during the writing, though it was gone before I came. I don't know whether the name V8 was coined before the 11/70 was retired. Maybe Dennis remembers more. The original edition of The C Programming Language was certainly done on an 11/70; it may have been published before the VAX hardware existed in the field, and certainly before that part of Bell Labs had one. My beat-up paperback copy (copyright 1978, third printing) credits Graphic Systems for the typesetter, the 11/70 for the system hardware, but just says UNIX--no version stated--for the OS. Norman Wilson Toronto ON From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com Fri Jun 27 14:46:34 2003 From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:46:34 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Re: V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750 Message-ID: <3aa1c8ef356619d06b93fc64ee312297@plan9.bell-labs.com> To clean up some of the questions: We (in our group) owned successively two photographic typesetters: The original Graphics Systems C/A/T, which was used to render the camera- ready copy for several editions of the manual, also the first edition of K&R as well as other books. This exposed characters by flashing a Xenon lamp through a spinning cylinder with the character images arranged around the axis; the character was imaged onto a fiber-optic bundle, which moved horizontally with respect to the paper. The paper was moved vertically. The Linotron 202; it had a CRT on which lines of characters were drawn, with an unmoving, line-wide fiber bundle. Rollers moved the paper vertically. Both of these were managed by us (including the hardware connection, via DR11-C; it stood in for the paper tape that the manufacturers had intended). These used chemical processing to develop the paper. This was messy and (especially for the C/A/T version) smelly, so we were glad when the local Comp Center began offering service on an Autologic APS-5, a machine similar in design to the 202, but better engineered, and the comp center managed the chemistry. This was used for the second edition of K&R, for example. I think what we sent was troff output which the CC converted to Postscript. Later this service was outsourced, then dropped. In recent years laser printers have become good enough that decent camera-ready copy can be generated using them (e.g. for Kernighan and Pike, The Practice of Programming). As for the system aspects: K&R 1 (1978) was done on what would soon be 7th edition Unix, on 11/70; K&R 2 (1988) using 9th edition on VAX 8550. Kernighan and Pike's Unix Programming Evironment (1984) used 8th edition on VAX 11/750. About the releases (or pseudo releases) that Norman mentions: actually 8th edition was somewhat real, in that a consistent tape and captured, probably corresponds fairly well with its manual, and was educationally licensed for real, though not in large quantity. 9th and 10th were indeed more conceptual in that we sent stuff to people (e.g. Norman) who asked, but they weren't collected in complete and coherent form. Dennis From macbiesz at optonline.net Sat Jun 28 01:20:45 2003 From: macbiesz at optonline.net (Maciek Bieszczad) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:20:45 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] Comparing UNIX/Linux Code Message-ID: <000001c33cbf$b07b3330$06fea8c0@maciek> An interesting attempt at finding shared code: http://www.rickbradley.com/chron/20030619/ -- Maciek (macbiesz at optonline.net)