TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

7 participants
6533 discussions

Start a nNew thread

[Fwd: Re: [TUHS] Borland's C++ BuilderX, Personal Edition]

by Andrzej Popielewicz

19 years, 11 months

[Fwd: Re: [TUHS] Borland's C++ BuilderX, Personal Edition]

by Andrzej Popielewicz

19 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] Borland's C++ BuilderX, Personal Edition

by Brantley Coile

> I do not know Plan9, but according to descriptions I have read, it looks > very interesting. Well it was developed by Bell Lab...(?)-AT/T, which > does not require recommendation.They offer also another interesting OS, > namely Inferno. This is my last email on this subject. Promise. I suggest using the Plan 9 compilers and start with the code for the 32V system. That's the code that first ran on the VAX. It'll be easier to move than the PDP version. It's just Seventh Edition moved to the VAX. I'm using Plan 9 to type this. It's the os I have used as my primary os for the last 10 years. I wrote the Cisco PIX Firewall and the LocalDirector using it. I first used Plan 9 15 years ago at Bell Labs. In a very real sense, it is the true decendent of a very noble line of timesharing systems, going all the way back to MIT's CTSS. You should try Plan 9 for free by downloading it from Bell Labs. It's all open source. Expect to learn a lot. It's UNIX like a Ford Mustang is a T-Model. Lot of the ideas of V7-10 are further developed in Plan 9. It's certainly the os perfered by a good number of UNIX purests. It was the result of a number of poeple, including Ken Thompson, who thought that a fresh code start would allow them to better exploit new technology like networking, hetergenious processors, and symmetrical multiple processors. http://plan9.bell-labs.com I really hope James does the port. I wish I had the time to do it myself. A native V7 port would be really useful in some situations, but more importantly it would help educate new generations of programmers. It would demonstrate the true power and synergy of the software tools approach that UNIX blessed us with. It doesn't need shared libraries, threads, gui's or even vi. The Seventh Edition is amazing technology in a form that can be understood, internalized, and the resulting education used to produce much better modern software. There should be at least a version in it's native form. There's just something special about running it native. Brantley Coile

19 years, 11 months

(no subject)

by Brantley Coile

>>> "vi". Editing with "cat" is possible but not very useful. I am not going >>> to learn "ed". >> >> Why? > > Simply because. Because I do not like ed. > I want to have useful and user friendly system. To use ed, only because > it is the oldest editor, does not make any sense for me. > I appreciate ed, because of sed, because sed has some similarity to ed > and is extremely useful as a tool. > Unix is not about ed, Unix is about unlimited possibilities of adding > new software , new applications or new editors, it makes Unix beautiful > that it can develop and not editor ed.If ed were all Unix has, it would > not survive. > I hope You accept that someone else can have different favourite > editors. I prefer vi, or even more vim, which is perfect editor.Of > course in the case of emulator missing user friendly editor is not a > problem, because I can edit under Coherent and then build under > emulator.It is good to have a choice, and Unix offers it. In 1983 I was using vi. I allowed a friend to use our system to typeset his companies UNIX manuals, and quickly found that I was having to share the machine with a dozen troff jobs. Vi, being a program that ran in raw mode, didn't respond very well on that 68010 10Mhz system. I was forced to switch to ed. Suddenly I discovered that I had hidden real UNIX behind all those vi commands. I now had plenty of mental capacity to use the rest of the tools available. To really say you understand the spirit of the software tools approach, you must spend a couple of months just using ed. Today I use acme mostly, but still find myself using ed for some edits. I would really encourage you to give it a try. Spend two months just using ed. You cerntainly should use the editor you feel most confortable with, but the growing experience will be well worth your while. Brantley

19 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] Borland's C++ BuilderX, Personal Edition

by Brantley Coile

> OK, so problem is solved.But I suspect it multitasks differently on > different hardware, unless You use existing V7 x86 implementation. I do > not know pdp architecture, I suspect it does differ from x86, I mean > TSS,GDT, TR etc. These details are hidden under the kernel. The idea of a process with address space and other contexts are what V7 provides. It's pretty easy to implement what V7 expects using Intel's paging. Brantley

19 years, 11 months

Re: [TUHS] Mark Williams Company Unix

by chronaut＠juno.com

Yes I know, my originals were stolen when my car was stolen. I just don't have the time to download a mountain of software right now ! Will U¿ytkownik chronaut(a)juno.com napisa³: Andrzej Popielewicz <vasco(a)icpnet.pl> You need 4 floppies anyway to install Coherent. ___________________________________________________________________ Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month! Unlimited Internet Access with 250MB of Email Storage. Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

19 years, 12 months

Mark Williams Company Unix

by chronaut＠juno.com

Hello everyone, I noticed that there were other flavors of Unix (on CD)for sale on the main website. I wondered who I needed to talk with, or send the $10.00 donation to, so I could get the Coherent stuff burned to CD ? Here's the directory I need. http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Other/Coherent/ My floppies with MWC Unix\X Xindows was stolen along with my automobile when I went to Jackson, MS to replace a retiring systems engineer. Anyway, help from anyone to get this done, would be very much appreciated. I have the original manuals, but no MWC Unix to go with it :) Thanks for any help ! Will ___________________________________________________________________ Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month! Unlimited Internet Access with 250MB of Email Storage. Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

19 years, 12 months

Re: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals

by Carl Lowenstein

> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:11:43 +1000 > From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org> > To: Carl Lowenstein <cdl(a)mpl.ucsd.edu> > Subject: Re: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:32:20AM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote: > > While preparing to move out of the office that I have occupied for the > > past couple of decades, I came across an unused set of V7M-11 manuals. > > Three large binders, DEC Orange (Chinese Red?). Is this something that > > should be archived somewhere? Scanned and put on line? I don't have > > the resources to do that, but could ship them somewhere. > > > > Labels on the binders are: > > V7M-11 Volume 1 Programmer's Manual > > V7M-11 Volume 2A and 2B Programmer's Manual > > V7M-11 System Management and Operation Manuals > > Carl, we have v7m source + binaries in the Unix Archive, but I'm not sure > if this also includes the documentation that you have unearthed. I will > go through what's in the archive here and see if it corresponds with what > you have, and get back to you. > > Warren Fine. I didn't mention that I also came across a V7M-11 distribution tape, because I was pretty sure you already had that. I will be away for about three weeks starting Monday 27 June, so we might not connect until I get back. On the other hand, these books have been sitting around for a few years, another month won't hurt them. carl

20 years

DEC V7M-11 manuals

by Carl Lowenstein

While preparing to move out of the office that I have occupied for the past couple of decades, I came across an unused set of V7M-11 manuals. Three large binders, DEC Orange (Chinese Red?). Is this something that should be archived somewhere? Scanned and put on line? I don't have the resources to do that, but could ship them somewhere. Labels on the binders are: V7M-11 Volume 1 Programmer's Manual V7M-11 Volume 2A and 2B Programmer's Manual V7M-11 System Management and Operation Manuals carl -- carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego clowenst(a)ucsd.edu

20 years

Unix Tenth Edition ownership?

by James Falknor

To all Unix Officiando's, Who has ownership of Unix Tenth Edition? Has anybody tried contacting the current owner for it's release under an OSI approved license? Thank you, James Falknor

20 years

Re: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code

by James

Groklaw (http://www.groklaw.net/) has some VERY good discussion of the 'openness' of this code... -----Original Message----- From: "Gregg C Levine" <hansolofalcon(a)worldnet.att.net> Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:52:35 To:<tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org> Subject: RE: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code Hello from Gregg C Levine However, it happens that I spent some time talking with the folks at the company in question, during the boot camp sessions that launched Sol 10. It happens that the code is one hundred percent theirs. Now there might be some lingering strangeness that follows from the BSD evolved forms of Sol leading up to 10, that is all there will be. Although I suspect a good hacker would be able to sort out the differences and dummy up a working kit to support the assertions of yours James Falknor, I myself do not have those talents. However, Andrzej Popielewicz, I welcome your efforts. ---- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon(a)worldnet.att.net --- "The Force will be with you... Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > -----Original Message----- > From: tuhs-bounces(a)minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org] On > Behalf Of Andrzej Popielewicz > Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 12:39 PM > To: James Falknor > Cc: tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org > Subject: Re: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code > > Uz.ytkownik James Falknor napisa?: > > > To all the Unix Officiando's, > > > > Have any of you checked out the recent release of Sun's Solaris 10 > > source code known as OpenSolaris? > > > > What are your thoughts on the subject? > > > > Is the source code still considered to be based on SVR4? > > > > Any likely chance of using Solaris source code to bring 32V or Version > > 7 of Unix into the modern world of x86 usage? > > > > Thank you, > > James Falknor > > > <<<SNIP!>>> > I did not check sources of Solaris 10 yet, but as an owner of many > Solaris 8/9 licenses I will certainly do it. > As far as Unix Version 7 is concerned I see some chances . Let us > consider such idea . > For example Coherent is based on Unix version 7. It has also support for > DKI/DDI driver interface (but not complete implementation). Solaris > drivers as far as I know use DKI/DDI. So there is some chance that at > least drivers could be in some way portable . > Probably using NetBSD would be also an alternative. > > Andrzej _______________________________________________ TUHS mailing list TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.

20 years

Solaris 10 source code

by James Falknor

To all the Unix Officiando's, Have any of you checked out the recent release of Sun's Solaris 10 source code known as OpenSolaris? What are your thoughts on the subject? Is the source code still considered to be based on SVR4? Any likely chance of using Solaris source code to bring 32V or Version 7 of Unix into the modern world of x86 usage? Thank you, James Falknor

20 years

[pups] Looking for PDP-11 Newsweek ad circa 1981

by Ryan Doherty

Hello, I am looking for a copy (electronic or paper) of the digital PDP-11 advertisement that appeared in Newsweek in the early 1980s. The ad states "Who needs a computer with thousands of software programs?", with sketches of people explaining how the computer can be used in their field (ie. "I need it for word processing", "designing bridges", "collecting the bills", etc). Do you know where I can find a copy of it? Sincerely, Ryan Doherty --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site!

20 years

Re: [pups] Hardware Upgrade to Minnie

by Robertdkeys＠aol.com

Although a /70 might be fun, or even a /93, but.... nay, an update to a VAX would be fun.....(:+}}..... Call her MinnieVAX@tuhs.org.....(:+}}..... gasp! (Sorry Warren) Bob Keys

20 years

Re: Sad news from IBM...

by James Falknor

> > >I was reading Groklaw yesterday night when I came across this. It is a >very sad thought to know that possibly tons of old/ancient code is being >dumped in the trash bin. > >More so now since the advent of software patents: it may become very >difficult to avoid a patent on a re-invention of the wheel if previous >knowledge has been dumped. > >OK, the quote. It is from "the Todd Shaughnessy affidavit [PDF] from IBM >that Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells requested they file when they turned >over all the code and paperwork to SCO": > > 28. As I have noted above, IBM does not maintain revision control > information for AIX source code pre-dating 1991. To the extent that > any code for the AIX operating system (that did not duplicate the > code already being produced in CMVC) was found during the search > described in Paragraph 26-27 above, it was produced. Paragraphs > 29-31 below describe additional search efforts IBM undertook to > locate pre-1991 versions of AIX code. No versions of AIX pre-dating > 1991 were found. > > 29. In the 1980s and early 1990s, IBM prepared vital records backups > of AIX source code and transferred them to a remote storage location. > At some point in the 1990s, the AIX vital records tapes were transferred > to Austin, Texas. In late 2000, the tapes were determined to be obsolete, > and were not retained. > > 30. The AIX development organization contacted other IBM employees who > were known or believed to have been involved with the development or > product release of AIX versions prior to 1991. In addition, IBM > managers and attorneys asked current members of the AIX development > organization whether they were aware of the location of pre-1991 > releases of AIX source code. No one asked was aware of any remaining > copies of pre-1991 AIX source code. > >Perhaps we should do something to raise awareness about the relevance of >legacy (not only UNIX) source code. And in any case, it is a pity that all >that historical information had been lost forever. > >I have always complained about this, and consider it the biggest drawback of >closed proprietary source code: it is OK that law protects developer interests >with the goal of promoting innovation and the public benefit at large. But it >is a lose for everybody whenever any such "protected" code is dumped into the >bin banning anyone else from further benefitting from or exploiting it, and >opening the road for opportunists to claim they "newly invented" it. > >Sic. Sigh. > j > All may not be lost. As it appears to me, TUHS has connections with Universities / Colleges and other types schools, as well as programmers, software engineers and the like. All we need to do is put the word out that TUHS is seeking pre-1991 AIX source code and it's bound to surface. If all else fails, I'm sure someone has a pre-1991 AIX binary distribution that could be disassembled (that is if a binary distribution can be disassembled back to a rough source code). To all TUHS members, As a part of the heritage of Unix, please search any and all your archives for pre-1991 AIX Source Code. Maybe, just maybe, a pre-1991 AIX Binary Distribution will suffice. Help IBM, TUHS, and in the end, the heritage of Unix. Thank you, James Falknor

20 years, 1 month

Re: Re: Plan 9 port license (was: licence of ditroff?)

by Greg 'groggy' Lehey

Somehow this message got stuck at the wrong end of my inbox. It relates to a thread on this list a few months back. The content speaks for itself, so I'll just forward it here. Greg ----- Forwarded message from Russ Cox <russcox(a)gmail.com> ----- > Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:33:17 -0500 > From: Russ Cox <russcox(a)gmail.com> > Reply-To: Russ Cox <russcox(a)gmail.com> > To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> > Subject: Re: Plan 9 port license (was: licence of ditroff?) > > [Feel free to forward this response to the appropriate lists.] > > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:39:32 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> wrote: >> As you can see, there's a certain amount of confusion about the >> license of this software. I took a cursory look and couldn't find >> anything. In this day of predatory companies, it would be good to >> have clarity. Could you please clarify, both to the list and on the >> web site? > > The license is the Lucent Public License. There are some exceptions > with MIT-like licensing, but troff is not one of them. This is made clear > if you look in the tar file -- there is a LICENSE file in the root that > explains the situation. I've added a link to this file on the web site > next to the download link. > > I hate haggling over licensing so I try to draw as little attention as > possible to such issues. I do appreciate their importance. > > The Lucent Public License is the IBM Public License made optionally non-viral. > If you want to contribute changes back to the Plan 9 project, then > those changes must be made available under the LPL. But (and > this is where the difference is) if you don't want to contribute your > changes back, then you don't have to. > >>>> Instead of starting with 27 year old code, you'd be better >>>> off taking the troff from http://www.swtch.com/plan9port. >>> >>> Thanks, that's a nice idea, but from what I experienced, >>> the portability of recent AT&T/Bell/Lucent/whatever code >>> is worse than the bugs in old code (eg. I could not get >>> ksh93 to compile, something in there just dumped core; >>> but then that's Unix, not Plan 9). > > Confusing Plan 9 with ksh is sure to offend both sets of authors. > > Plan9port builds and runs fine on Linux, FreeBSD, SunOS, and Mac OS X, > and I'm sure it would be easy to get running on other Unix-like systems, > but I haven't had the need and no one has mailed me diffs. > >>>> This is a port of many Plan 9 utilities to Unix. The troff there >>>> (a) has an explicit license that will probably do for the BSD people >>> >>> If it's the same licence as for 8c, then no, unfortunately. > > It's the LucentPL as mentioned earlier. I'm sure the BSD guys > won't love it (it's not the BSD license), but at least it's not viral. > > Russ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- The virus contained in this message was not detected. Finger grog(a)lemis.com for PGP public key. See complete headers for address and phone numbers.

20 years, 1 month

[pups] Hardware Upgrade to Minnie

by wkt＠minnie.tuhs.org

All, sometime around noon localtime on Tuesday 7th June, I will be upgrading the hardware which is minnie.tuhs.org from a 500MHz P3 to a 2.4GHz P4. This will include an operating system upgrade (FreeBSD 4.8 to FreebSD 5.3) and upgrades to the major subsystems (web, e-mail, mailing lists, twiki etc.). Although I have had the new system running standalone for a few weeks, I expect that there will be some breakages once it takes over from the old system. Therefore, please be patient while I resolve any issues. If you do notice some problems with the new system, then e-mail me at wkt(a)tuhs.org. Thanks, Warren

20 years, 1 month

Hardware Upgrade to Minnie

by wkt＠minnie.tuhs.org

20 years, 1 month

Re: [pups] S.R.Bourne and the shell

by Pete Turnbull

On May 19 2005, 12:11, Andrew Lynch wrote: > On May 19, 11:16pm, Pete Turnbull wrote: > > > > I've found a copy of the book "The Unix System" and I've had the > > paper "An Introduction to the UNIX Shell" for 20 years, but I thought > > I'd seen a slim book by S.R.Bourne called "The UNIX Shell" or something > > of the sort. However, Google, Bibliofind, etc have turned up nothing; > > has anyone seen this, or is my memory at fault once more? > > Are you possibly thinking of an article that appeared in the 1978 Bell System > Technical Journal? I probably am... > This article is supposed to have also appeared in Volume 2 of the UNIX > Programmer's Manual - which would imply that it is the same as "An Introduction > to the UNIX Shell" (which is what my 7th Ed Manual contains). Yes, that's in mine too. I just thought the "slim book" had slightly more in it, but perhaps that's because it has smaller pages, and therefore the artice is spread over more of them. I think our library has a copy of the BSTJ, so I can check. Someone emailed me off-list with a URL for an HTML-ised version; thanks, but I have a real 7th Edition Manual with that paper, as well as the troff source on my (original) 7th Edition distro. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Network Manager University of York

20 years, 1 month

Coherent 128 MB RAM

by Andrzej Popielewicz

Hi, I have added test version of binary kernel for Coherent 4.2.10 with support for fixed 128 MB RAM(tested on 300 MHZ system). Check http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~apopiele/embed.html. I have approval of the owner of Coherent, so it is legal to download and use this kernel. Andrzej

20 years, 1 month

[pups] S.R.Bourne and the shell

by Pete Turnbull

I've found a copy of the book "The Unix System" and I've had the paper "An Introduction to the UNIX Shell" for 20 years, but I thought I'd seen a slim book by S.R.Bourne called "The UNIX Shell" or something of the sort. However, Google, Bibliofind, etc have turned up nothing; has anyone seen this, or is my memory at fault once more? -- Pete Peter Turnbull Network Manager University of York

20 years, 1 month

Re: [pups] S.R.Bourne and the shell

by Andrew Lynch

On May 19, 11:16pm, Pete Turnbull wrote: > > I've found a copy of the book "The Unix System" and I've had the > paper "An Introduction to the UNIX Shell" for 20 years, but I thought > I'd seen a slim book by S.R.Bourne called "The UNIX Shell" or something > of the sort. However, Google, Bibliofind, etc have turned up nothing; > has anyone seen this, or is my memory at fault once more? Are you possibly thinking of an article that appeared in the 1978 Bell System Technical Journal? >From the bibliography in "The UNIX System": Bourne, S. R. 1978. "UNIX Time-Sharing System: The UNIX Shell". Bell Sys. Tech. J. 57(6) 1971-90. The issues of BSTJ that I have seen could be described as slim books - roughly A5 paperback, around 200 pages. This article is supposed to have also appeared in Volume 2 of the UNIX Programmer's Manual - which would imply that it is the same as "An Introduction to the UNIX Shell" (which is what my 7th Ed Manual contains). Andrew.

20 years, 1 month

Location of a Coherent distribution?

by Andrzej Popielewicz

Hi Paul, I have seen in the tuhs list, that You are going to upload 4.2.10 sources . Can You tell me , where did You get if from ? Or You mean sources of 4.2.14 once available at demon or mayn ? Or Did You get it from MWC ? Regards Andrzej P.S It does not mean I am interested . I have authoried sources of 4.2.10.

20 years, 1 month

Re: [TUHS] Mention TUHS in Linux Magazine (US)?

by Carl Lowenstein

> From: Jerry Peek <jpeek(a)jpeek.com> > To: tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org > Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:50:21 -0700 > Subject: [TUHS] Mention TUHS in Linux Magazine (US)? > Hi everyone. I'm a short-time UNIX user (I started in 1981 :) > and also a columnist for Linux Magazine (in the US: not the UK > flavour). I just came across TUHS while I was searching for a > V7 cp(1) manpage. (I found it, BTW, via Warren Toomey's page > http://mirror.cc.vt.edu/pub/projects/Ancient_Unix/Documentation/PUPS/manpag….) > > I'm writing a series of columns on "What's GNU in Old Utilities". > It describes new features of GNU utilities like cat(1) and > contrasts them to "how we used to do it." I'd like to mention > TUHS in the third column, which should be out in August. It > seems that TUHS is alive and well. If any of you have comments > or complaints about that idea, though, would you please let me > know before May 1 -- which is when the column is due? Thanks. More power to you. Just keep a sharp eye out for things that are touted as "new improved GNU features" that have been around since the days of 6th Edition or 7th Edition Unix. carl -- carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego clowenst(a)ucsd.edu

20 years, 2 months

Mention TUHS in Linux Magazine (US)?

by Jerry Peek

Hi everyone. I'm a short-time UNIX user (I started in 1981 :) and also a columnist for Linux Magazine (in the US: not the UK flavour). I just came across TUHS while I was searching for a V7 cp(1) manpage. (I found it, BTW, via Warren Toomey's page http://mirror.cc.vt.edu/pub/projects/Ancient_Unix/Documentation/PUPS/manpag….) I'm writing a series of columns on "What's GNU in Old Utilities". It describes new features of GNU utilities like cat(1) and contrasts them to "how we used to do it." I'd like to mention TUHS in the third column, which should be out in August. It seems that TUHS is alive and well. If any of you have comments or complaints about that idea, though, would you please let me know before May 1 -- which is when the column is due? Thanks. Jerry -- Jerry Peek, jpeek(a)jpeek.com, http://www.jpeek.com/

20 years, 2 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