TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

28 participants
6556 discussions

by nao

Hi, I successfully made SIMH VAX-11/780 emulator run 32V, 3BSD and 4.0BSD. Details are on my web site (thogh rather tarse): http://zazie.tom-yam.or.jp/starunix/ Enjoy! Naoki Hamada nao(a)tom-yam.or.jp

9 years, 6 months

Links to relevant Unix Usenet newgroups?

by Warren Toomey

Hi all, does anybody know of on-line historical Usenet archives that I can link to, especially if they have unpacked articles (visible subject lines would be better)? What newsgroups are relevant? net.v7bugs, comp.sources.unix, comp.sources.misc, net.sources, mod.sources, comp.sources.bugs? What about platform or system-specific newsgroups? I'll put the links here: http://wiki.tuhs.org/doku.php?id=publications:newsgroups Thanks, Warren P.S A good history of the legal side of Unix is here: http://wiki.tuhs.org/doku.php?id=publications:theses

9 years, 6 months

Working e-mail for Henry Spencer?

by Warren Toomey

Does anybody have a working e-mail address for Henry Spencer? I've tried his "zoo.utoronto..." address but the box is refusing SMTP connections (from me, at least). Alternatively, could someone e-mail him and see if he would be interested in joining the TUHS list? And ditto for any other old Unix users! Cheers, Warren

9 years, 6 months

Fwd: [SIGCIS-Members] Need help identifying a photo

by Al Kossow

Can someone here ID the mystery person? Embarrassingly, CHM has the person misidentified as well. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Need help identifying a photo Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:46:45 +0000 From: Ceruzzi, Paul <CeruzziP(a)si.edu> To: members(a)lists.sigcis.org <members(a)lists.sigcis.org> There is a famous photo on Wikimedia commons, of what purports to be Ken Thompson & Dennis Ritchie in front of a PDP-11, presumably working on UNIX. The problem is that the seated person doesn’t look like either of them. And he is clean-shaven. Could it be Bjarne Stroustrup? Does anyone recall seeing T&R w/o facial hair? Any help in tracking this down would be much appreciated! The photo has been reprinted in many places, and I’d like to track this down before I inadvertently propagate an error. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ken_Thompson_(sitting)_and_Dennis_R… Paul E. Ceruzzi Curator, Division of Space History National Air and Space Museum MRC 311, PO Box 37012 Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC 20013-7012 www.ceruzzi.com <http://www.ceruzzi.com> ceruzzip(a)si.edu <mailto:ceruzzip@si.edu> 202-633-2414

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] Fwd: [SIGCIS-Members] Need help identifying a photo

by Doug McIlroy

No question about it. That is Ken Thompson. I saw him just like that dozens, perhaps hundreds, of times in that very seat. doug

9 years, 6 months

And, contacts in the UK or Europe?

by Warren Toomey

[I feel like I'm spamming my own list] I've tried to make contact with people in the UK that might have copies of the UKUUG and EUUG newsletters: Peter Collinson, Sunil Das, Bruce Anderson. No luck with this. There are newsletters back to 1992 at http://www.ukuug.org/newsletter/ but I'm after the ones in the 1970s and 1980s. The current secretary doesn't know about the earlier newsletters. Who else can I contact? Cheers, Warren

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] Scan of "Edition 0" manual

by Doug McIlroy

> we can probably substitute part of the db(1) man page from 1st > Edition Unix for the missing page A7 That would be appropriate--properly documented, of course. doug

9 years, 6 months

"Edition 0" manual

by Doug McIlroy

Among the papers of the late Bob Morris I have found a Unix manual that I don't remember at all--a draft by Dennis Ritchie, in the style of (but not designated as) a technical report with numbered sections and subsections. It does not resemble the familiar layout of the numbered editions. Besides the usual overview of kernel and shell, it describes system calls and some commands, in a layout unrelated to the familiar man-page style. Detailed reference/tutorial manuals for as, roff, db and ed are included as appendices. The famous and well-justified claim that "UNIX contains a numer of features very seldom offered even by larger systems" appears on page 1. A little poking around tuhs.org didn't reveal a copy of this document. Does anybody know of one somewhere else? Doug

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Doug McIlroy

> Dr. Wang invented the core memory at IBM BTW Wang did make a magnetic-core storage device (a 2-core-per-bit shift register) but Jay Forrester's core memory, first installed on MIT's Whirlwind computer in 1953, is the one that actually saw use and very quickly dominated the market. Doug

9 years, 6 months

PDP-11 questions

by Mark Longridge

Ok, I got a few questions about PDP-11. First, I was wondering when Bell Labs got that first PDP-11/20 what software (if any) came with it? I assume when one bought a PDP-11/20 you would get some type of OS with it. According to the folks at alt.sys.pdp11 the PDP-11 computer doesn't have anything equivalent to a PC's BIOS. But I know a bit about what a PC's BIOS does and that includes RAM Initialization. Wouldn't the DRAM on the PDP-11/something need to be initialized too? Perhaps an older PDP-11 doesn't have DRAM but surely the later models did? Now the last question has to do with what made the PDP-11 architecture so great. Part of that had to be the relatively affordablility of the PDP-11 and of course it was the machine that made Unix possible. It seems though that there should have been a PDP-11 based desktop and as far as I can tell that didn't happen. Instead we got a bunch of micros with 8080, z80 and 6502 cpus, but nothing that could run Unix, at least not a Unix v7 with source code. Mark

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Doug McIlroy

> First, I was wondering when Bell Labs got that first PDP-11/20 what software (if any) came with it? > I have this bit set that they didn't get anything, they wrote a cross-assembler on another machine. I know that when it came, it didn't have a disk (wasn't ready yet), so it ran a chess problem (memory only) for quite a while until the disk came. That is exactly right. Unix was up and running as a time-sharing system with remote access before a primitive DOS emerged from DEC. The chess problem was enumeration of closed knight tours. Doug

9 years, 6 months

PC-bootable PDP-11 Unix

by arnold＠skeeve.com

FYI folks: Sanos PDP-11 Simulator with UNIX V7 http://www.jbox.dk/sanos/pdp11.htm Arnold

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Norman Wilson

Noel Chiappa: I'd lay good money that the vast majority of PDP-11's never ran Unix. And UNIX might have happened on some other machine - it's not crucially tied to the PDP-11 - in fact, the ease with which it could be used on other machines was a huge part of its eventual success. ======= I have to disagree in part: the PDP-11 is a big part of what made UNIX so widespread, especially in university departments, in the latter part of the 1970s. That wasn't due so much to the PDP-11's technical details as to its pricing. The PDP-11 was a big sales success because it was such a powerful machine, with a price that individual departments could afford. Without a platform like that, I don't think UNIX would have spread nearly the way it did, even before it began to appear in a significant way on other architectures. Save for the VAX, which was really a PDP-11 in a gorilla suit, that didn't really happen until the early 1980s anyway, and I'm not convinced it would have happened had UNIX not already spread so much on the PDP-11. It worked both ways, of course. I too suspect that a majority (though I'm not so sure about `vast') of PDP-11s never ran UNIX. But I also suspect that a vast majority of those that did might not have been purchased without UNIX as a magnet. I don't think those who weren't around in the latter 1970s and early 1980s can appreciate the ways in which UNIX captured many programmers and sysadmins (the two were not so distinct back then!) as no other competing system could. It felt enormously more efficient and more pleasant to work on and with UNIX than with any of the competition, whether from DEC or elsewhere. At the very least, none of the other system vendors had anything to match UNIX; and by the same token, had UNIX not been there, other hardware vendors' systems would have had better sales. Sometime around 1981, the university department I worked at, which already had a VAX-11/780 and a PDP-11/45 running UNIX, wanted to get another system. Data General tried very hard to convince us to buy their VAX-competitor. I remember our visiting their local office to run some FORTRAN benchmarks. The code needed some tweaking to work under their OS, which DG claimed was better than UNIX. Us UNIX people had trouble restraining our chuckles as we watched the DG guys, who I truly believe were experts in their own OS, taking 15 or 20 minutes to do things that would have taken two or three with a few shell loops and ed commands. DG did not get the sale. We bought a second-hand VAX. Blame UNIX. Norman Wilson Toronto ON

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Johnny Billquist

On 2016-01-25 02:11, John Cowan<cowan(a)mercury.ccil.org> wrote: > Ronald Natalie scripsit: > >> >There were the Dec Professional 325 and 350 desktops which had the >> >F-11 and the 380 had the J-11 (which should make a pretty snazzy little >> >retro UNIX system) > As well as the 310, which was not a desk*top* but a whole desk with a > PDP/8-A built into it. The first regular job I ever had was with a > company that sold these along with their accounting software. The 310 was not called a Professional, though. It was the EDUsystem if I remember right. There was also PDP-11 based EDUsystems, called 350. Not the same as the desktop thingy... Isn't it wonderful how DEC reused different designations sometimes. There was also a DECstation 88, if I remember right, which was a PDP-8 based thing. Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: bqt(a)softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] v6 debugging

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Clem Cole > to help debug the kernel, we even put adb into the core resident port of > V7 which was tricky - Noel I seem to remember we .. stole that from you > guys at MIT Well, I certainly don't remember doing such a thing - but I should point out that the Unix 'community' at MIT was not at all in good touch with each other. So perhaps someone else at MIT did it? Or perhaps it was done after I left for Proteon? Also, the group I was in - CSR - was, during my time with them, not well connected to other Unix users outside MIT. So even the things we _did_ do seem not to have made it to many (any?) people. I'm not sure why this was: probably, since we were working exclusively on early TCP/IP stuff, we were mostly in touch with other networking people. The disconnect to the rest of MIT may have been because, in our case, the technical community at Tech Square didn't have good contacts with the rest of campus; we were kind of self-sufficient. The AI Lab people had some contacts with the Plasma fusion group, and later the EE department on campus, but CSR (and maybe all of LCS - I'm not sure, the groups in LCS were pretty isolated from each other) didn't. Also, Tech Sq was mostly about PDP-10's - initially running ITS, later TWENEX - and only a couple of smaller groups ran Unix. The DSSR group had an 11/70, and we were quite close to them, but AFAIK we were the only two groups in Tech Sq running Unix. I don't think anyone else at MIT had a PDP-10, until the EE department on campus got an TWENEX machine, so there wasn't really anyone on campus for most of Tech Sq to interact with. Noel

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] v6 debugging

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Johnny Billquist

On 2016-01-25 02:11, jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) wrote: > > > The later M9301 (see disassembly of the contents here: > >http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/pdp11/M9301-YA.mac > > of one variant) didn't clear memory either > > OK, so_my_ memory is failing! That code does in fact test the memory. > > (Although, looking at it, I can't understand how it works; after writing the > contents of R3 into the memory section it it asked to test, it complements the > test value in R3, before comparing it with the memory it just wrote with R3, > to make sure they are the same. Maybe there's an error in the dis-assembly?) Read the code again, you missed it. :-) The code first writes one value into memory (R3), then complements R3, and for each location checks that the memory is *not* equal to R3, and then writes R3 and checks that it now matches. Essentially checking that it can be changed into a wanted value in time. And it does it two times. First zeroing, and then writing ones, and then back to zeroes again, so yes, the memory will be left containing all zeros, except for what memory isn't tested. > Anyway, it should have left the memory mostly containing all 0's. Indeed. Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: bqt(a)softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Norman Wilson > I have to disagree in part You make a number of good points. A few comments: > the PDP-11 is a big part of what made UNIX so widespread, especially in > university departments That last part was really a big factor, one not to be understated. That penetration led to production of a whole generation of people who i) were familiar with Unix, and ii) liked it, and were not about to put up with the OS's being turned out by various vendors. > I too suspect that a majority (though I'm not so sure about `vast') of > PDP-11s never ran UNIX. 'Embedded systems'. The number of PDP-11's running timesharing was a small share of the total number, I expect. > I don't think those who weren't around in the latter 1970s and early > 1980s can appreciate the ways in which UNIX captured many programmers > ... as no other competing system could. Very true. My jaw basically hit the floor when I first saw (ca. '75) what Unix was like. People who didn't live through that transition can't _really_ grok it, any more than my kids can really fully grok a world without mobile phones. It wasn't as powerful as Multics, but I was completely blown away that anyone could get that much capability into a PDP-11 OS. Noel

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

>> It seems though that there should have been a PDP-11 based desktop > Because DEC were a bunch of losers. OK, that was kind of harsh. (Trying to send email too fast...) DEC had a lot of really brilliant people, and they produced some awesome machines. But when it comes to desktops, I think there is a certain amount of bottom-line truth in that assessment: there was a huge market there (obviously), and DEC should have been in a pretty good place to capture it, but it completely failed to do so. Why not? I put it down to corporate cultural intertia - ironically, the same thing that allowed DEC to eat so much of IBM's lunch. Just as IBM took way too long to understand that there was a very large ecological niche for smaller machines _with customers who didn't want or need the whole IBM hand-holding routine_, DEC never (or, at least, until way too late to catch the wave) could change their mentality from producing really, really well built computers for people who were all technical, to commodity computers which needed to be made as absolutely cheaply as possible, and for people who were non-technical. The company as a whole just couldn't change its mindset that radically, that quickly. (And a lot of the blame for that has to go to Ken Olsen, of course. He just didn't grok how the world was changing.) > There's some DEC history book which talks about DEC's multiple failures > (on a variety of platforms, not just PDP-11 based ones) to get into the > desktop market, if the title comes to me, I'll post it. The best one on this topis, probably, is "Ultimate Entrepreneur", by Glenn Rifkin and George Harrar, which gives a lot of detail on DEC's attempts to build personal computers; also good is "DEC is Dead, Long Live DEC", by Edgar Schein. Noel

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Norman Wilson

Clem Cole: Also by the time DEC did try to build a workstation (after Masscomp, Apollo, Sun et al had taken many of their engineers) it was too little too late. The ship had sailed and they never recovered that market. ====== There was a window in the early 1990s when I think they could have recovered. DEC had some pretty good MIPS-based workstations, and Alpha was just coming out and was even better. Ultrix was a good, solid system, and DEC OSF/1 (later Digital UNIX) was getting there. In 1994 or so, the group I worked in needed a new workgroup-sized central server. Our existing stuff was mostly DECstations running Ultrix (with a few SGI IRIX systems for specialized graphics). We looked at the price and performance of various options: everything SGI had was too pricey; Sun's was well behind in performance (this was before UltraSPARC), and their OS was primitive and required a lot of retrofitting to be usable (this was also before Solaris 2 even came out, let alone became stable; also before Sun grew up enough to ship a decent X11 as part of the system). So we bought a third-party system with an Alpha motherboard in a PC-style case. In burn-in testing I discovered a bug in the motherboard; the vendor were happy to fix it once they could reproduce it in their lab (which took some doing, but that was another story). We were quite happy with that system, and would have bought more had our entire department not been shut down in a mostly-political fuss a couple of years later (that too is another story). DEC's desktop MIPS systems were quite good, and the Alpha followons even better. Had the company's upper management not by then lost all sense of how to run a company or to sell anything ... but that was not to be. Old-fart footnote: when our department shut down, I bought some of our DECstations cheap from the university. I still have them on a shelf downstairs; I've never done much with them. Norman Wilson Toronto ON

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] Links to relevant Unix Usenet newgroups?

by Norman Wilson

Diomidis Spinellis: The articles go way back. ==== They certainly do. For example, the 1981 origin of a certain USENET-culture sideshow is there: https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/net.suicide/9hh3JbbZm-U Norman Wilson Toronto ON

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> The later M9301 (see disassembly of the contents here: > http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/pdp11/M9301-YA.mac > of one variant) didn't clear memory either OK, so _my_ memory is failing! That code does in fact test the memory. (Although, looking at it, I can't understand how it works; after writing the contents of R3 into the memory section it it asked to test, it complements the test value in R3, before comparing it with the memory it just wrote with R3, to make sure they are the same. Maybe there's an error in the dis-assembly?) Anyway, it should have left the memory mostly containing all 0's. Noel

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by Johnny Billquist

On 2016-01-24 19:01, Mark Longridge<cubexyz(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, I got a few questions about PDP-11. > > First, I was wondering when Bell Labs got that first PDP-11/20 what > software (if any) came with it? I assume when one bought a PDP-11/20 > you would get some type of OS with it. No. You might get diagnostics, but any kind of OS you would have to buy separately, and there were several to choose from, depending on your needs. > According to the folks at alt.sys.pdp11 the PDP-11 computer doesn't > have anything equivalent to a PC's BIOS. But I know a bit about what a > PC's BIOS does and that includes RAM Initialization. Wouldn't the DRAM > on the PDP-11/something need to be initialized too? Perhaps an older > PDP-11 doesn't have DRAM but surely the later models did? RAM don't need to be initialized. Maybe you mean clearing it, so it don't contain random information? ECC memory, on the other hand needs to be initialized, but for those PDP-11s who has that, the initialization is done in hardware. > Now the last question has to do with what made the PDP-11 architecture > so great. Part of that had to be the relatively affordablility of the > PDP-11 and of course it was the machine that made Unix possible. It > seems though that there should have been a PDP-11 based desktop and as > far as I can tell that didn't happen. Instead we got a bunch of micros > with 8080, z80 and 6502 cpus, but nothing that could run Unix, at > least not a Unix v7 with source code. The architecture is very easy to program on, and rather intuitive. You have general registers, an orthogonal instruction set, and the machine can be programmed as a stack based, a register based, or just plain memory-to-memory style equally well. In addition, I/O is pretty simple, as there are no special I/O instructions. Same instructions as for anything else are also used for I/O. Also, the memory model on the PDP-11 is pretty nice, with a proper MMU which allows you to write reasonable OSes. There were in fact desktop based PDP-11s, but DEC shot themselves in the foot there. They were afraid of eating into their own business, so they made the desktop PDP-11 incompatible in some ways with all other PDP-11s, so you could in general not run much PDP-11 software on the desktop, but had to develop specific programs for that platform. That, and the fact that it took DEC too long to enter the market, meant that the IBM PC had already become the standard by the time DEC came with the Professional (the PDP-11 desktop). DEC also made a couple of other PDP-11 based systems that were sortof desktop, such as the VT-103, which was a VT100 with a PDP-11 inside. Interesting idea, but the VT103 didn't have good mass storage, and had a very slow and limited PDP-11 CPU. The PDT-11 was another attempt, with similar issues as the VT-103. If we were to examine prototype things, DEC did a lot more as well, including a portable PDP-11 with an LCD display. Never became a product. Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: bqt(a)softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

9 years, 6 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 questions

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Mark Longridge > when Bell Labs got that first PDP-11/20 what software (if any) came > with it? I have this bit set that they didn't get anything, they wrote a cross-assembler on another machine. I know that when it came, it didn't have a disk (wasn't ready yet), so it ran a chess problem (memory only) for quite a while until the disk came. I think that's in the ACM paper, or if not, one of the BSTJ Unix history papers. > Perhaps an older PDP-11 doesn't have DRAM but surely the later models > did? MOS memory came in starting roughly around the time of the 11/04 and /34. (Well, that's not quire right - there were bipolar and MOS memory options for the 11/45, the second PDP-11 model, but they were kind of special.) But the earliest ROM bootstraps were too small to have space for code to clear memory, or anything like that. The diode-array BM792 ROM certainly didn't. The later M9301 (see disassembly of the contents here: http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/pdp11/M9301-YA.mac of one variant) didn't clear memory either, although there was probably room in the ROMs by that point. I suspect it didn't because nobody bothered with stuff like that back then - you just wrote over whatever was already there. Properly written code would never have referenced a location which had not been loaded or written to, that way you couldn't get a parity error from random gubbish in semi-conductor at power up (and of course core always had old data in it). > Now the last question has to do with what made the PDP-11 architecture > so great. Bang/buck (in the metaphorical sense) ratio. For a machine with a 16-bit word size (i.e. limited instruction size), it had remarkable programming capability. Data could be in registers, pushed or popped with a stack, at fixed addresses, PC-relative, indexed into a table, etc, etc. And _all_ the instructions (basically) had acceess to _all_ those modes. As a result, the code density was probably higher than any similar sized machine, and back when memory was core (i.e. expensive/limited), code density was important. The bus was also extremely flexible, given how simple it was: memory and devices were all on the same (simple) bus. > of course it was the machine that made Unix possible I'd lay good money that the vast majority of PDP-11's never ran Unix. And UNIX might have happened on some other machine - it's not crucially tied to the PDP-11 - in fact, the ease with which it could be used on other machines was a huge part of its eventual success. > It seems though that there should have been a PDP-11 based desktop and > as far as I can tell that didn't happen. Because DEC were a bunch of losers. There's some DEC history book which talks about DEC's multiple failures (on a variety of platforms, not just PDP-11 based ones) to get into the desktop market, if the title comes to me, I'll post it. Noel

9 years, 6 months

Fwd: Missing Documents for use with the Unix Time-Sharing System, Sixth Edition

by Clem Cole

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> Date: Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 3:00 PM Subject: Re: [TUHS] Missing Documents for use with the Unix Time-Sharing System, Sixth Edition To: Will Senn <will.senn(a)gmail.com> below.... On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Will Senn <will.senn(a)gmail.com> wrote: > All, > > The Unix Sixth edition programmer's manual and other documents for use > with Unix time-sharing system are available online, in html and postscript > form from Wolfgang Helbig's site: > > http://wwwlehre.dhbw-stuttgart.de/~helbig/os/v6/doc/index.html > > There are papers some missing from the "Documents for use with the Unix > Time-Sharing System": > Hmm - these should be with the v6 distribution - some of them are coming with later editions... and except for updates to said system will be go'nuf That said you are asking about the versions from v6. I do not seem to have hardcopies easy to find. I'll keep looking there is some stuff in my attic. > RATFOR - A Preprocessor for Rational Fortran > NROFF User's Manual > A Manual for Tmg Compiler-writing Language > This is the doc that you might not find in other places, as I think tmg stopped being distributed at some point. Doug as one of the authors I believe may know the story. > On the Security of UNIX > The M6 Macro Processor > I think you mean m4 not m6 > A System for Typesetting Mathematics > DC - An Interactive Desk Calculator > BC - An Arbitrary Precision Desk-Calculator Language > The Portable C Library (on UNIX) > UNIX Summary > > Some of these are more interesting to me than others, but I tend towards > shiny objects, so there is no telling when they will be of critical > interest in the future. I have done quite a bit of searching for the NROFF > document and the portable C library document and while I have found related > works, I haven't come across the originals for sixth edition. Do any of > y'all know where any or all of these documents are archived in their > original/reproduced form? Warren's V6 seems have many of them in: http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Dennis_v6/v6doc.t…

9 years, 7 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