TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

28 participants
6556 discussions

Re: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX")

by Arthur Krewat

Sorry, in this context, SunOS means 4.1.4 - not Solaris SVR4 I run Solaris myself, and love it. On 3/15/2017 11:48 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Arthur Krewat <krewat(a)kilonet.net> wrote: > >> You make a valid point, and re-reading what I wrote, I find that I >> pushed the example too far :) >> >> The subject was originally that SunOS at it's end-of-life did not have >> the features that Linux now does, and comparing their development >> lengths brings up an interesting question. What would SunOS have become > So you believe that SunOS-5.11 is no longer alive? > > There is an Oracle based version and a OpenSolarisd based version developed by > the community. > > Jörg >

8 years, 5 months

Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"?

by Josh Good

Hello all. I was perusing the list of officially branded UNIX systems, according to the "UNIX 03" specification and tests done by the Open Group, and I found there listed something called "Huawei EulerOS 2.0". https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/xy.htm Intriguing, ain't it? So I went to Wikipedia, to see what it has to say about such a beast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification#EulerOS And I quote: "EulerOS 2.0 for the x86-64 architecture were certified as UNIX 03 compliant. The UNIX 03 conformance statement shows that the standard C compiler is from the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), and that the system is a Linux distribution of the Red Hat family." So, Linux (some variety of it, very closely resembling Red Hat) is now a "officially branded" UNIX. I think Mr. Stallman can now say: mission accomplished. GNU *is* now UNIX. (Linux the kernel might not be a FSF project, but it certainly is under the GNU General Public License.) -- Josh Good

8 years, 5 months

Howdy Folks, and Internet Hall of Fame

by John S Quarterman

How are y'all? And greetings from the piney woods of south Georgia. If anybody wants to help get an Internet innovator into the Internet Hall of Fame, please drop me a note at jsqmobile(a)gmail.com. No rush; deadline is tomorrow. He's not a Unix person, but you'll recognize him. Hint: early ISP. -jsq

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX")

by Clem Cole

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Arthur Krewat <krewat(a)kilonet.net> wrote: > So what I'm hearing is Linux's timeline, which includes things that were > not developed just for Linux, extends further out than SunOS does. > Mumble... the problem of course is the under those rules, SunOS goes back to research which goes back to V0.... > > > ... > All I'm saying is comparing Linux's timeline to something like SunOS has > to include everything that went into both because they both relied on > precursors. > Except for any possible legal reasons....why differentiate ? Looks like a Duck, Quacks Like Duck or from a Turing Test.... I'm mostly can not tell the difference. > > Side note: I'm a bit of a bitch when it comes to Linux - which doesn't > mean I don't think Linux is "UNIX" - it just means I think it's the > Coherent of today's UNIX ;) > I guess it doesn't matter to me that much. Some of the changes are gratuitous and annoying, which brings out my inner curmudgeon as its make its tough to type to sometimes. But the fact is, UNIX, Linux, Macos are pretty much the same thing - much more so than winders. They are way more similar than different and I can be productive with all three. To me its like ethnicity in people. It says a little about some of how you might look at something, what some of you shared positions/starting points are, but we are way more alike than different and I would rather learn from the differences than fight them or try to inflict my wishes. We are better with diversity. Clem

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] System Economics (was is Linux "officially branded UNIX")

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Clem Cole > rms had access to Masscomp b= ox we gave him fairly early on. > ... > I'm sure the MC-500 was not the first 68000 he had access. I think he > was using HW in Steve Ward's lab that the Trix guys were developing > with TI and he might have had access to an Apollo system. > ... > Noel do you remember how that went down? Sorry, no. From the end of '82 to early '84 I was out of the US, waiting for my permanent residency to come through, so I missed a chunk of events in that time period. Maybe one of the DSSR/RTS (Steve Ward, or someone) could clarify what access RMS had to their 68K machines? Noel

8 years, 5 months

X, Suntools, and the like

by Ron Natalie

Nice thing about X was that it would talk to remote displays. I still remember sitting in the Pentagon demonstrating that the Suntools screen lock wasn't particularly secure. Then there was NeWS. This was Gosling's first attempt at a deployable language. However PostScript (even with Owen Densmore's class extensions), while a reasonable intermediary language is really sucky to actually develop. Java was a bit more refined. Of course, lots of things either implement X under the native window system or backdoor X with local extensions. We got around doing high frame rate image work on X via the SharedMemoryExtension and the ability to flip buffers on the retrace interval (both extensions, but commonly implemented by many servers).

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode

by Doug McIlroy

Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. But allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was dubious at best. Not only did it require recipients to obtain special software to read some messages; it also posed a security threat. I still use mailx precisely because it will only display plain text. With active text such as HTML, it is all too easy to mistakenly brush over a phishing link. Outfits like Constant Contact do their nonprofit clients a disservice by sending stuff that I won't even peek at. And it's an annoying chore when companies I actually want to deal with send receipts and the like in (godawful) HTML only. Doug

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode (fwd)

by Dave Horsfall

I think this was supposed to go public... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:39:45 +0000 From: Steve Simon <steve(a)quintile.net> To: dave(a)horsfall.org Subject: Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode I still actively fight office. I wrote docx2troff and xlsx2txt. The former can extract txt or troff source from modern (DOCX / OPC) document as can the latter though, by their nature excel tables don't map well to tbl(1). These are written for plan9 and so the libraries are a bit different, but they could be ported to unix without too much pain. Shout if anyone is interested. -Steve

8 years, 5 months

Quick question: earliest Unix system with mail, uucp and bangpaths?

by Warren Toomey

As I go to bed, I wonder. Which was the earliest system that used uucp to send mail through multiple systems to a remote user? I see V7 has uucp/sdmail.c, but the comment says: This is only implemented for local system mail at this time. Ditto 32V and 3BSD. 4BSD has delivermail. Its uucp has a README which says: The ``mail'' command has been modified, so that it may only be used to send mail, when it is invoked under a name beginning with 'r'. 3BSD has the same uucp. http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=3BSD/usr/src/cmd/uucp/README Ah, but 32V's mail.c checks for 'r': http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=32V/usr/src/cmd/mail.c and so does V7: http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/src/cmd/mail.c So I guess I've just answered my question. It also looks like delivermail from 4.1BSD could compile on V7, so it might be fun to try and bring a V7 system up on uucp+mail. But will it (delivermail?) do bang paths?! Cheers, Warren

8 years, 5 months

attachments: MIME and uuencode

by Mary Ann Horton

I just heard from a historian named Piotr Klaban with an interesting historical sidelight. Apparently today 3/11/17 is being publicized as the 25th anniversary of the email attachment, citing Nat Borenstein's MIME. Piotr points out that uuencode predates MIME, and he's right. I checked and, while I don't have any email archives from that time frame at Berkeley, I was able to find the 4BSD archive on minnie that dates the uuencode.1c man page at 6/1/80. We didn't call them attachments back then, just sending binary files by email. (Prior to then it was common to just include the text of the file raw in the email, which only worked for ASCII files.) It was a few years later when cc:Mail and Microsoft Mail started calling uuencoded files embedded in email "attachments". When MIME came out in 1992 I became a champion of SMTP/MIME as a standard - it was a big improvement. But uuencod predated MIME by 12 years. Mary Ann

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Doug McIlroy > Allowing more or less arbitrary attachments was a real convenience. But > allowing such stuff to serve as the message proper was dubious at > best. Sorry, I'm not sure I'm completely clear what you mean there? Do you mean 'non-ASCII-text objects were processed by the mail system without being told to do so explicitly, by the user'? That, combined with the below, is indeed a problem. > it also posed a security threat. The problem isn't really so much the ability to have attachments, as that people defined attachment types with open-ended capabilities, up to and including what I call 'active content' - i.e. content which includes code which is to be run. (Yes, yes, I know - even without that, it's possible to feed 'dumb' applications bad data, and do an intrusion; I seem to recall there was one of those with JPEG's, so even plain images were not perfectly safe. And someone just provided an example of an with plain ASCII. But those holes are much harder to find/use, whereas active content is a security hole the size of a trans-Atlantic liner.) Without an _incredibly_ secure OS (something on the order of late-stage Multics, when the security had been beefed up even over the original design [the jargon to search for is 'AIM', if you're interested], or better), bringing in 'active content' from _outside_ the system, and running it, is daylight madness - it's an invitation to disaster. This is true no matter _how_ such content comes in: via HTTP, with a Web browser; via SMTP, with e-mail, whatever. Dave Moon coined a phrase, based on an old anti-drug movie: 'TECO madness: A moment of convenience, a lifetime of regret.' These active contents all, to me, fall into that category. They _seem_ like a good idea, and provide interesting capabilities - until some cracker uses one to wipe your hard drive. > With active text such as HTML, it is all too easy to mistakenly brush > over a phishing link. HTML email is another of my pet peeves/hot buttons - it's just another vector for active conent. So, for the 'convenience' of being able to send email in multiple fonts ('eye candy', I derisively call it), we get to let malefactors send in viruses that can wipe a hard drive. To me, this kind of thing is professional malpractice, on a par with building cars that catch on fire, or buildings that collapse. People need to suffer incredibly severe penalties for propogating this kind of nonsense; maybe then software engineers will stop valuing convenience over regret. Noel

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD

by Clem Cole

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Dave Horsfall <dave(a)horsfall.org> wrote: > It's been ages since I delved into UUCP; first was the > > "original", then HoneyDanBer. > Actually this is a great question for this list .. how many implementations were created? 1.) The original 1978 version that shipped with V7 and 32/V (BSD 4.1 and 4.2) 2,) PC-UUCP for DOS came next -- I never knew how much was ripped off from the original, because at the time, the Chesson's G protocol was not well specified. The authors claimed to have reverse engineered it - I will say it worked. 3.) Honey-Dan-Ber rewrite - most popular for a long time 4.) Taylor UUCP first real clone that I know of that I do think was done with out looking at other's source. G protocol had been publicly documented by then and the Trailblazer in fact was shipping with the protocol imbedded in it. Any others that folks know about and how well were they used? Did things like Coherent have a UUCP? Linux and FreeBSD were able to use to Taylor UUCP because it became available by then. Whitesmith's Idris lacked anything like UUCP IIRC (but was based on V6). Same with Thoth originally at Waterloo, but by the time they shipped it as the QNX product it was V7 compliant but I do not remember a UUCP being included in it. Minux lacked a UUCP as I recall, but I'm hazy on that has Andy's crew wrote a lot of the user space. Coherent was a "full" V7 clone and include things like the dev tools including yacc/lex and was released much, much before the Taylor version came out -- so what do they use for uucp if at all? Does anyone remember any other implementations? Clem

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] Was 5ESS built on UNIX?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

On 10 March 2017 at 03:04, Erik E. Fair <fair-tuhs(a)netbsd.org> wrote: > See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Environment_Real-Time I'd love to get ahold of a copy of PDP-11 MERT (which surely holds no significant trade secrets by now) to play with, since it seems like a very historic, and possibly influential (given what was published about it in the BSTJ, and elsewhere), but so far I have not been able to find it. I had a lead to one of the authors (who's now in a very different line of work), but so far I have yet to find the time to try and run that one down, to see if anything came of it. If anyone knows of such, please let me know! Noel

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode

by Andy Valencia

> Back in the day plain ASCII wasn't really secure, either. No need to use the past tense. I had a need to assess how much damage one could do if allowed to feed arbitrary text into xterm. I came away sobered. Do not--ever--use a mail agent which will plumb unfiltered text through to an xterm. nmh, for one: http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?36056 Andy

8 years, 5 months

Was 5ESS built on UNIX?

by Nemo

I have looked at the papers published in the AT&T Technical J. in 1985 and found no mention of UNIX. N.

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] attachments: MIME and uuencode

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Dan Cross > why did you consider it such a step forward? I'm really curious about > the reasoning from folks involved with such things at the time. This was N layers up from my zone of responsibility when I was on the IESG (which was the internetwork layer), and I don't recall any discussion about it on the IESG (although if you really care, there might be minutes - I don't recall when IESG minutes started, though, perhaps this was before that). That lack of any memory may be nothing more than a sign of my fading memory, but it could mean it wasn't a very contentious topic. FWIW, here's my current analysis of the issues; I doubt my analysis then would have been substantially different. The fundamental thing that email does is send something - originally a section of text - from party A to party B in a way that requires no previous setup or interaction: party B can be anyone in the entire universe of entities which support that service. MIME is an extension of this model to carry other types of data: images, etc. There is a very good analogy to the pre-existing real-world mail system: that too allows one to send things to anyone without prior special arrangement, and it supports not only transferring text, but also sending more than that - physical objects. This pre-existing system argues that this model of operation is i) useful, and ii) issues raised by it have probably mostly been worked through. So the extension of email to carry more than just text seems like a very plausible extension. For the 'average' user, the ability to include images in email is a huge improvement over any alternative. Any kind of 'pull' model (in which the receiver has to do something to retrieve the data later from some sort of server) requires access to such a server on the part of the sender; use of a 'push' model (in which data is sent in the same way as text, as part of a single transfer) is clearly better. Security issues raised by sending binary data through email are a separate question, but I note that those issues will mostly still exist no matter how the binary data is transferred. (E.g. the binary might contain a virus no matter whether it's transferred via SMTP or FTP.) The ability of email to send to anyone does raise issues in this context, but this margin is not big enough to fully explore them. I also do get a little uncomfortable when email is used instead of a file transfer system, for very large files, etc, etc. The thing is that the email system was not designed to transfer really huge objects (although the size allowed has been going up over time). The store-and-forward model of the email system is not really ideal for huge objects, etc, etc. But having said all that, the extension of the email model to send content other than pure text - images, etc - still seems like a good idea to me. Noel

8 years, 5 months

Move the uucp/news stuff off-list?

by Warren Toomey

All, there might be a flurry of e-mails as the uucp/news stuff gets set up. I think we should move the actual setup messages off-list and keep TUHS for anecdotes & questions about the old systems. Sound OK? If so, I can set up another list. I noticed that seismo is not as well connected (historically) as decvax, so I've turned seismo into decvax, and I now have three systems on three physically different boxes: munnari ----------- decvax ---------- inhp4 at home simh.tuhs.org minnie.tuhs.org behind NAT 5000 5000 I'm happy to pass either decvax or inhp4 onto someone if someone else really wants one of them. Cheers, Warren

8 years, 5 months

MacOS X is Unix (tm)

by David

> On Dec 31, 2016, at 8:58 AM, tuhs-request(a)minnie.tuhs.org wrote: > > From: Michael Kjörling <michael(a)kjorling.se> > To: tuhs(a)tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Historic Linux versions not on kernel.org > Message-ID: <20161231111339.GK576(a)yeono.kjorling.se> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > I might be colored by the fact that I'm running Linux myself, but I'd > say that those are almost certainly worth preserving somehow, > somewhere. Linux and OS X are the Unix-like systems people are most > likely to come in contact with these days MacOS X is a certified Unix (tm) OS. Not Unix-Like. http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/apple.htm It has been so since 10.0. Since 10.5 (Leopard) it has been so noted on the above Open Group page. The Open Group only lists the most recent release however. The Tech Brief for 10.7 (http://images.apple.com/media/us/osx/2012/docs/OSX_for_UNIX_Users_TB_July20…) also notes the compliance. David

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] B-news source code

by Doug McIlroy

> Wouldn't [> in quoted mail] have happened first in email, like Mail or mailx? Mailx doesn't do it now, so it probably didn't do it then. doug

8 years, 5 months

Linux displacing UnixWare on the PC architecture

by Josh Good

On 2017 Mar 9, 21:26, Josh Good wrote: > > And by the way, the two user limit in the "Personal Edition" of UnixWare > 2.1 seems to be real: > > $ telnet 172.27.101.128 > Trying 172.27.101.128... > Connected to 172.27.101.128. > Escape character is '^]'. > > > UnixWare 2.1 (gollum1) (pts/2) > > login: jgood > Password: > UnixWare 2.1 > gollum1 > Copyright 1996 The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. All Rights > Reserved. > Copyright 1984-1995 Novell, Inc. All Rights Reserved. > Copyright 1987, 1988 Microsoft Corp. All Rights Reserved. > U.S. Pat. No. 5,349,642 > Last login: Tue Mar 9 20:57:05 1999 on pts000 > telnetd: set_id() failed: Too many users > . > Connection closed by foreign host. > > > This thing was released in 1996. Obviously, with this limitation it could > not hold a candle to the emerging Linux tsunammi full of free source code. On the subject of Linux displacing UnixWare on the PC architecture in the mid-90's, I've found this most illuminating Usenet thread from 1994, whose participants include Alan Cox, Theo Tso, and some Novell Product Managers: http://tech-insider.org/linux/research/1994/1025.html And what came after that, as they say, is history. -- Josh Good

8 years, 5 months

Help request: uucp, mail on 4.2BSD

by Warren Toomey

Hi all, as part of my effort to recreate part of a simulated Usenet, I'm trying to bring up uucp, then mail, then C-news on 4.2BSD boxes. I've got a hardwired serial port between them, and I can see a basic uucp conversation when I do this: munnari.oz# /usr/lib/uucp/uucico -r1 -sseismo -x7 uucp seismo (3/6-8:04-132) DEBUG (ENABLED) . . . uucp seismo (3/6-8:04-132) SUCCEEDED (call to seismo ) imsg >\015\012\020< Shere\000imsg >\020< ROK\000msg-ROK Rmtname seismo, Role MASTER, Ifn - 5, Loginuser - uucp . . . I tried e-mail to seismo!wkt and wkt(a)seismo.UUCP but it's been deferred. I now need some help with the sendmail config. I did play around with sendmail.cf/mc way back, but it never involved uucp so I'm stuck. Anybody want to help (and dust out those cobwebs at the same time)? Thanks, Warren

8 years, 5 months

C-news is built

by Warren Toomey

OK, Geoff Collyer has built the C-News binaries for the 4.2 emulated systems. They are temporarily at http://minnie.tuhs.org/Y5/Cnews/ Does someone want to try and get them up and running on an emulated system? Also, I've build a 4.3BSD version of the emulated uucp systems. It's a separate branch at https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp. You can get it by doing: git clone https://github.com/DoctorWkt/4bsd-uucp.git \ --branch 4.3BSD --single-branch Once it's solid enough I will make this the default branch, but I'll leave the 4.2BSD branch there as well. Thanks Geoff! Warren

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] "Open" Stanford University Network System, et al [was RT/PC-centric AIX history]

by Clem Cole

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Jason Stevens < jsteve(a)superglobalmegacorp.com> wrote: > > That almost reminds me to ask about the whole "open" Stanford 68000 board > that became the Cisco AGS, and SUN 100.. and I think SGi 1000 > Jason -- I'm not sure what you are trying to say. It was a different time, different culture, different rules. Note: Please I'm not accusing you of this, but I worry you are getting dangerous close to an error that I see made by a lot of folks that grew in the time of the GPL and the "Open Source Culture." My apologies in advance if you think I'm going a little too far, but I want to make something clear that seems to have been lost in time and culture. I do not want to be see as harassing or "shaming" in anyway way. I want to make a point for everyone since the words we use do matter (and I realize I screw them up myself often enough).. I am fairly certain that the "SUN board" - aka the Stanford University Network 68000 board, like UNIX itself was licensed IP. You are correct that the schematics (like the UNIX sources) were well known at the time and "open" in the sense that all of the licenses had them. It was not hard to find papers with a much of the design described. In fact Andy had worked on a similar set of boards when he was a CMU a few years earlier for what we called the "distributed front-end" project (the earlier version was much weaker and had started as Intel chip of sometime which I have forgotten and switched to the 68000 at some point - Phil Karn might remember and even have a copy, I think my copy has been lost to time). Anyway, to build and sell a Multibus board based on Andy's design that he did at Stanford as a grad student, you needed a license from Stanford. You are correct a lot of firms, particularly Cisco, later VLSI Technology - ney Sun Micro Systems, Imagen, and host of took out licenses to build that board. Thus a lot of companies built "JAWS" (just another workstation - so called "3M systems" with a disk), or sometimes diskless terminals as Andy had imagined it in his papers, or purpose built boxes such the AGS router and the Imagen printers. But I flinch a little when I see people call the "SUN" an "open" design. It was "well know" but it was not what we might call "Free and Open" today. I admit you just said "open" in your reply to Charlie and may have meant something different; but so many people today leave the "free" off when they say "open." *i.e.* People often incorrect deny that Unix was open as it actually always was from the beginning -- if you had a license, it just was not "free" to get same. My point is that I believe a license for the "SUN" was from Stanford was not "free" either. Same with the the "MIPS" chip technology of a few years later also from Stanford. So, I would have been happier if you had said something that had included the words "licensed from Stanford." Anyway, Research Universities, such as MIT, Stanford and frankly my own CMU, have long been known for charging for licenses (not always mind you). In fact, I laud my other institution, because I have always said the real father of "free and open source" is my old thesis advisor, the late Don Pederson. In the late 1960s, he founded the UCB EE "Industrial Liaison Program" which was the auspicious institution that original "BSD" tape would be released years later. When he first released the first version of "Simulation Program for Integrate Circuit Evaluation" - aka SPICE, in approx 67 time frame "dop" said: *"I always have given away our work. It means we get to go in the back door and talk to the engineers. My colleagues at some of the other places license there work and they have go in the front door like any other salesman."* When the CS group was added to EE a few years later, their was history, mechanism, etc. Berkeley had been release source code for a lots of different project. The Berkeley Software Distribution for Unix V6 was just the the drop for UNIX - who knew at the time the life it wold spawn (although I note SPICE is still being used, so even with UNIX's success, SPICE still hold the record for the "longest" used" BSD release code). Anyway, " do p" used to love to remind the students of that mantra. And he came up with it 20-25 years before Eric Raymond ever wrote his book and started equating "open" with "Stallmanism." ;-) I hope have a great one, and I hope I did not offend. Clem

8 years, 5 months

uucp setup

by William Pechter

One note for those who've been away from 4.x for a while... If you're using a console window for editing and you just wonder why the full screen of the VT100 doesn't show up -- it's because the getty is set down at 1200 baud for the good old LA120 DECwriter III. Set /etc/ttys to 18console or 12console and it's expects 9600baud and then vi will let you use full screen to edit. Been a while since I ran a fake Vax under Unix. Bill

8 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] RT/PC-centric AIX history

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Jason Stevens > it also appears that AOS was the router backbone of the NSFNet once > they started to migrate off of the IMPs Say what? IMPs were only every used in the ARPANET (and networks built by BBN for private clients using that technology). The first routers used in the NSFNET were things called Fuzzballs - PDP-11's running software from Dave Mills, driving 56KB lines. They eventually decided they needed to step up a level, and a consortium involving IBM won, with IBM RT PC's running AIX driving T1 lines. Noel

8 years, 5 months

Jump to page:

2025

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