I am trying out apout using the "1972_stuff" binaries. When using
"as" to assemble "ux" (e10-01 through e10-02) it gives an error
"m 0024" (multiply-defined label) for the line:
mount: .=.+1024.
I assume this is because the assembler has predefined the "mount"
system call (I ran across this earlier when using my system call
table sys.s with ux with the v7 assembler).
We can work around this (ie. use the v7 assembler without the definition
for "mount"), but it worries me a little -- why does the listing
have such an obvious and large flaw? The symbol "mount" is used
in several places, so this isn't likely to be a small typo. I can't
think of a good explanation as to why this error would exist in the
listing other than possibly pointing to another assembler being used.
Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:53:30AM -0700, James A. Markevitch wrote:
> I have been referring to this as version "1.5" since the date is later
> than the first edition manual, but before the second edition manual.
> Does anyone know if it's truly V1 of the kernel, or something between
> V1 and V2?
The date on the first page of the memo (PDF) is September 1972. That puts
the memo after 2nd Edition (June 1972) and 3rd Edition (Feb 1973).
The s2 tape in the Unix Archive has binaries which are dated mainly in
1972, spread from January thru to December, so they should be
contemporaneous with the kernel in the PDF.
The 1st Edition manuals are on-line on Dennis Ritchie's web page at:
http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/1stEdman.html
I have a photocopy of the 2nd Edition manuals from Norman Wilson; I will
scan them in as a bunch of tiffs. The 3rd Edition manuals are at
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Dennis_v3/v3man.t…
but they refer to the C version, so they may not be as useful here.
> Does anyone have utilities earlier than the "1972" stuff from TUHS?
No, the s1 and s2 tapes are the earliest machine readable files that
we have.
I'm assuming that some of you are keen to see it running. It's going to
take a lot of work, especially on the debugging side. The existing 1972
binaries are already executable using my Apout emulator, so that will
help in two ways: we can run the old assembler, and we can tell if a bug
was in a userland binary and not in the kernel.
If I get a chance, I should try to compare the 1e and 2e manuals, to
outline the kernel API differences, as this might help us to determine
which binaries we have that will run on the PDF kernel.
Cheers,
Warren
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:53:30AM -0700, James A. Markevitch wrote:
> > I have been referring to this as version "1.5" since the date is later
> > than the first edition manual, but before the second edition manual.
> > Does anyone know if it's truly V1 of the kernel, or something between
> > V1 and V2?
>
> The date on the first page of the memo (PDF) is September 1972. That puts
> the memo after 2nd Edition (June 1972) and 3rd Edition (Feb 1973).
However, the date at the bottom of each page of the source listing
is 3/17/72. My assumption is that the code was from that date, but that
the author of the memo spent a few months writing up the text that goes
along with it.
That's why I've been assuming that it was code somewhere between Version 1
and Version 2.
> I have a photocopy of the 2nd Edition manuals from Norman Wilson; I will
> scan them in as a bunch of tiffs.
If possible, can you scan them at 400dpi or 600dpi? Those are much
more amenable to OCR than 300dpi.
Alternatively, if you can send me a hardcopy, I will scan it at 600dpi
and pass it along to bitsavers.
> I'm assuming that some of you are keen to see it running. It's going to
> take a lot of work, especially on the debugging side.
I have already noticed quite a few errors in the listing, so it's not
clear that the PDF was something that actually ran, or whether it had
been re-typed by somebody. So far, many of the errors I have found are
in the "cold" portion of it, so it may be that the "warm" code will
run properly.
James Markevitch
It occurs to me that next year will the the 40th Anniversary of UNIX.
Is anyone planning any type of celebration? Perhaps the Vintage
Computer Festival?
- Derrik
Derrik Walker v2.0, RHCE
lorddoomicus(a)mac.com
http://www.doomd.net
The twenty first century is when it all changes, and Torchwood is ready!
- Captain Jack Harkness, Torchwood Three.
All,
I'm sure I saw a PDF document a few years ago which was an early
UNIX kernel written in assembly code. I thought I had saved the document,
but alas I can't find it. Can anybody remind me where to get it, or
perhaps I was hallucinating!
Thanks,
Warren
I've started an SVN for the OCR'd results:
http://code.google.com/p/unix-jun72/
if anyone needs commit access email me your account name. I've already
assigned some blocks to people. If you want a block either claim it in
the notes.txt file or email me and I'll add it. Also if you have plans to
perform raw OCRs of large sections of the original doc, please let me know
or make a note of it in the notes.txt file.
Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
I was researching various windowing systems for various reasons and I found
the mention of the V distributed sytem on the W article stub on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_Window_System
"W was originally developed at Stanford University by Paul Asente and Brian
Reid for the V operating system."
A few questions here: is V close enough to Unix to warrant winding up in
an "Other" category in the TUHS repository? Does anyone have a copy of it
(plus source if possible)? If so, who should I contact?
Thanks
Wesley Parish
--
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Gaul is quartered into three halves. Things which are
impossible are equal to each other. Guerrilla
warfare means up to their monkey tricks.
Extracts from "Schoolboy Howlers" - the collective wisdom
of the foolish.
-----
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.
