TUHS October 2022

tuhs@tuhs.org

36 participants
20 discussions

by Warner Losh

Greetings, What's the canonical source for patches to 2.9BSD and 2.11BSD? I see we have 2.11BSD patch 469 dated last month in the archive. Where does it come from? Has anybody climbed the hill to import all the patches into a git repo? I've found some mirrors, but moe.2bsd.org has been down for me for ages... How does Warren keep things up to date? I also have a (maybe faulty) memory of a similar series of patches to 2.9BSD because it was the last BSD to support non-split I&D space machines. yet a quick google search turns up nothing other than a set of patches dated August 1985 (also in our archive) and some changes for variants of hardware (pro, mscp). Is that it? Warner

1 year

Release 5.0 Vs. System V

by segaloco

Good morning all, currently trying to sort out one matter that still bewilders me with this documentation I'm working on scanning. So I've got two copies of the "Release 5.0" User's Manual and one copy of the "System V" User's Manual. I haven't identified the exact differences, lots of pages...but they certainly are not identical, there are at least a few commands in one and not the other. Given this, and past discussion, it's obvious Release 5.0 is the internal UNIX version that became System V, but what I'm curious about is if it was ever released publicly as "Release 5.0" before being branded as System V or if the name was System V from the moment the first commercial license was issued. The reason I wonder this is some inconsistencies in the documentation I see out there. So both of my Release 5.0 User's Manuals have the Bell logo on the front and no mention of the court order to cease using it. Likewise, all but one of the System V related documents I received recently contain a Bell logo on the cover next to Western Electric save for the Opeartor's Guide which curiously doesn't exhibit the front page divestiture message that other documents missing the Bell logo include. Furthermore, the actual cover sheet says "Operator's Guide UNIX System Release 5.0" so technically not System V. In fact, only the User's Manual, Administrator's Manual, Error Message Manual, Transition Aids, and Release Description specifically say System V, all the rest don't have a version listed but some list Release 5.0 on their title page. Furthering that discrepancy is this which I just purchased: https://www.ebay.com/itm/314135813726?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110… Link lives as of this sending, but contains a closed auction for an Error Message Manual from the "Release 5.0" documentation line but no Bell logo. Until the Operator's Guide and this auction link, I haven't seen any "Release 5.0" branded stuff without a Bell logo, and before I bought the System V gold set, I hadn't seen System V branded stuff *with* the Bell logo. This shatters an assumption that I had made that at the same time the documentation branding shifted to System V was the same time the removal of the Bell logo happened, given that divestiture was what allowed them to aggressively market System V, but now this presents four distinct sets of System V gold documentation: Release 5.0 w/ Bell logo Release 5.0 w/o Bell logo System V w/ Bell logo System V w/o Bell logo I'm curious if anyone would happen to know what the significance here is. The covers are all printed, I can't see any indication that a bunch of 5.0 manuals were retroactively painted over nor that any System V manuals got stamped with a Bell post-production. What this means is "Release 5.0" documentation was being shipped post-divestiture and "System V" was being shipped pre-divestiture. If Release 5.0 was publicly sold as System V, then what explains the post-divestiture 5.0 manuals floating around in the wild, and vice versa, if USG couldn't effectively market and support UNIX until the divestiture, how is it so many "Release 5.0" documents are floating around in well produced commercial-quality binding, both pre and post-divestiture by the time the name "System V" would've been king. Were they still maintaining an internal 5.x branch past System V that warranted its own distinct documentation set even into the commercial period? This period right around '82-'83 is incredibly fascinating and I feel very under-documented. - Matt G.

1 year, 2 months

Re.: Princeton's "Unix: An Oral History": who was in the team in "The Attic"?

by Paul Ruizendaal

> Has anyone roughly calculated “man years” spent developing Unix to 1973 or 1974? > Under 25 "man-years”? (person years now) I cannot find the message at the moment (TUHS mail archive search is not working anymore?), but I recall that Doug McIlroy mentioned on this list that 1973 was a miracle year, where Ken & Dennis wrote and debugged over 100,000 lines of code between them. In software, “man year” is an elastic yardstick... There is also this anecdote by Andy Herzfeld: === Quickdraw, the amazing graphics package written entirely by Bill Atkinson, was at the heart of both Lisa and Macintosh. "How many man-years did it take to write QuickDraw?", the Byte magazine reporter asked Steve [Jobs]. Steve turned to look at Bill. "Bill, how long did you spend writing Quickdraw?" "Well, I worked on it on and off for four years", Bill replied. Steve paused for a beat and then turned back to the Byte reporter. "Twenty-four man-years. We invested twenty-four man-years in QuickDraw." Obviously, Steve figured that one Atkinson year equaled six man years, which may have been a modest estimate. === There is also another anecdote involving Atkinson. At some point all Apple programmers had to file a weekly report with how many lines of code they wrote that week. After a productive week of refactoring and optimising, he filed a report saying “minus 2,000 lines”.

1 year, 4 months

Four windowing systems on SunOS

by Kevin Bowling

Cameron Kaiser has written up a nice survey on some windowing systems that can run under OS/MP or SunOS https://oldvcr.blogspot.com/2022/10/if-one-guis-not-enough-for-your-sparc.h…

1 year, 5 months

Re: Four windowing systems on SunOS

by Nelson H. F. Beebe

Larry McVoy reports today: >> People like Sunview's api enough that there was an Xview toolkit which >> was Sunview ported to X10/X11. The interface was nicely documented in three editions of a book (I have no entry for the second edition): @String{pub-ORA = "O'Reilly \& {Associates, Inc.}"} @String{pub-ORA:adr = "981 Chestnut Street, Newton, MA 02164, USA"} @Book{Heller:1990:XPM, author = "Dan Heller", title = "{XView} Programming Manual", volume = "7", publisher = pub-ORA, address = pub-ORA:adr, pages = "xxviii + 557", year = "1990", ISBN = "0-937175-38-2", ISBN-13 = "978-0-937175-38-5", LCCN = "QA76.76.W56 D44 v.7 1990", bibdate = "Tue Dec 14 22:55:18 1993", bibsource = "http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/master.bib", acknowledgement = ack-nhfb, } @Book{Heller:1991:XPM, author = "Dan Heller", title = "{XView} Programming Manual", volume = "7A", publisher = pub-ORA, address = pub-ORA:adr, edition = "Third", pages = "xxxvii + 729", month = sep, year = "1991", ISBN = "0-937175-87-0", ISBN-13 = "978-0-937175-87-3", LCCN = "QA76.76.W56 H447 1990", bibdate = "Mon Jan 3 17:55:53 1994", bibsource = "http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/master.bib", series = "The Definitive guides to the X Window System", acknowledgement = ack-nhfb, } I have the first edition on a shelf near my campus office chair, and continue to use olvwm as my window manager on multiple O/Ses, for 30+ years. Every window manager designed since seems to fail to understand the importance of user customizable, and pinnable, menus, which I exploit to the hilt. The menu customization goes into a single, easy to edit, text file, $HOME/.openwin-menu. Compare that to the Gnome desktop, with hundreds of files, many of them binary, stored in hidden directories under $HOME, and for which any corruption breaks the window system, and prevents login (except via a GUI console). Also. olvwm does not litter a default desktop with icons for applications that many of use would never use: just a simple blank desktop, with menu popups bound to mouse buttons. With olvwm, you can have any number of virtual desktops, not just the 2 or 4 offered by more modern window manaugers, and unlike some of those, windows can be dragged between desktops. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Nelson H. F. Beebe Tel: +1 801 581 5254 - - University of Utah - - Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB Internet e-mail: beebe(a)math.utah.edu - - 155 S 1400 E RM 233 beebe(a)acm.org beebe(a)computer.org - - Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090, USA URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 year, 5 months

Memoir Marks the 25th Anniversary of First Transgender Employment Policy

by Mary Ann Horton

This may be a bit off-topic, so please forgive me. Lucent is central to the book. I want to let you know I had a memoir published today, on the 25th anniversary of Lucent's historic policy. Here's the main part of the press release. > Before 1997, transgender workers were routinely fired when their > employers found out they were changing their sex. That changed on Oct. > 28, 1997, when Lucent Technologies became the first Fortune 500 > company to formally commit that it would not discriminate based on > "gender identity, characteristics, or expression". Dr. Mary Ann > Horton, who instigated the change, has written a memoir, Trailblazer: > Lighting the Path for Transgender Inclusion in Corporate America. > "When I led transgender-101 workshops, my personal story was people's > favorite part. They wanted more, and Trailblazer is the result," said > Horton. "It will be released on the 25th anniversary, Oct. 28." > > Horton was a software technology worker at Lucent in Columbus, Ohio, > when Lucent added the language. It allowed Mary Ann, then known as > Mark, to come out in the workplace without fear of reprisal. When she > didn't need to spend energy hiding part of herself, her productivity > soared, and she was promoted. Three years later, she persuaded Lucent > to cover gender-confirming medical care in their health insurance. She > blazed the trail for Apple, Avaya, Xerox, IBM, Chase, and other > companies to follow. Nokia blogged about it today. https://www.nokia.com/about-us/careers/life-at-nokia/employee-blogs/25th-an… You can find the book at https://www.amazon.com/Trailblazer-Lighting-Transgender-Equality-Corporate-… If you read it, please post a review to Amazon. -- Thanks, /Mary Ann Horton/ (she/her/ma'am) maryannhorton.com <https://maryannhorton.com> "This is a great book" - Monica Helms "Brave and Important" - Laura L. Engel Available on Amazon and bn.com! <https://www.amazon.com/Trailblazer-Lighting-Transgender-Equality-Corporate-…>

1 year, 5 months

SunOS4.1.3, etc., on GitHub

by Rich Salz

Sorry if this is a repost. No idea of the legality, and therefore no idea how long it will stay: https://twitter.com/nixcraft/status/1586276475614818305 is the tweet and https://github.com/Arquivotheca/SunOS-4.1.3 is the repository with this README, below. Many other OS's there too. README <https://github.com/Arquivotheca/SunOS-4.1.3#readme> This is the SunOS 4.1.3 SUNSRC CD-ROM. It contains the source in 3 forms. 1. plain text source, as a ufs tree, rooted at the top level of this filesystem. Symlinks to the SCCS hierarchy are in place. 2. SCCS hierarchy, rooted at SCCS_DIRECTORIES. 3. a tar image of the SCCS hierarchy, in a file named 4.1.3_SUNSRC.tar. This is rooted at ./SCCS_DIRECTORIES. Please see the SunOS 4.1.3 Source Installation Guide for further details.

1 year, 5 months

Version 3.1 of Installing and Using Research Unix Version 7 note is up the blog

by Will Senn

Following up on my v6 udpate a couple of weeks ago, I've updated my v7 note to use OpenSIMH and bring it up to date. In addition, I've switched the multi-session notes over to DZ-11 from DC-11 cuz it supports 9600 over telnet. Here's the link: http://decuser.blogspot.com/2022/10/installing-and-using-research-unix_29.h… Changes since revision 2.1 (2/3/2022) Revision 3.1 (10/29/2022) - minor revision: Changed over to DZ-11 vs DC-11 for serial connections which allows for 9600 baud connections. Revision 3.0 (10/28/2022) - major revision: Started using OpenSIMH Restored the learn notes which went missing between 2.0 and 2.1 Updated host notes for Macos Monterey Cleaned up a number of lingering issues This note covers building a working v7 instance from tape files that will run in the OpenSImH emulator. First, the reader is led through the restoration of a pristine v7 instance from tape to disk. Next, the reader is led through adding a regular user and making the system multi-user capable. Then, the reader is shown how to make the system multi-session cable to allow multiple simultaneous sessions. Finally, the system is put to use with hello world, DMR style, and the learn system is enabled. The note explains each step of the process in detail.

1 year, 5 months

who invented the link register

by ron minnich

I know branch and link was in the 360; was it earlier? And ... anybody know who invented it? This came up in a risc-v meeting just now :-) My claim is that if anybody knows, they will be in this group.

1 year, 5 months

Re: who invented the link register

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: ron minnich > I know branch and link was in the 360; was it earlier? Well, as I understand it, branch and link (BAL and BALR) did a couple of different things (if I have this wrong, I hope someone will correct me). It was a subroutine call, but it also loaded a base register. (Those were used to deal with the /360's bizarro memory management, which was not 'base and bounds, with a user's virtual address space starting at zero', like a lot of contemporary machines. Rather, a process saw its actual physical memory location, so depending on where in memoty a process was loaded, it would be executing at different addresses visible to it; the base registers were used to deal with that. This made swapping complicated, since it had to be swapped back in to the same location.) Which function of BALR are you enquiring about? The subroutine call part? > From: Angelo Papenhoff > The Whirlwind used the A register for this purpose. ... > Might be earlier than this, I just happen to know the Whirlwind > somewhat well. It's late 40s machine, so you probably won't find > anything *much* older. The only machines older than Whirlwind I know of are the ACE (design; not implemented until later) and EDVAC. I have ACE stuff, but i) the documentation is really wierd, and hard to read, and ii) it's really bizarre (it didn't have opcodes; different registers did different things). There were subroutines written for it, but it's not clear how they were called. The EDVAC, the only thing I have on it is von Neumann's draft, and it's even harder to read than Turing's ACE Report! Noel

1 year, 5 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

TUHS October 2022