TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

28 participants
6556 discussions

Caldera release of awk, grep, and libregex from 2001

by arnold＠skeeve.com

Hi All. A while back I found the Caldera release of awk, grep and libregex from 2001. The tar file is dated 2012, but the actual code is from earlier. Warren has put it in the archive: > Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 08:07:12 +1000 > From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org> > To: Aharon Robbins <arnold(a)skeeve.com> > Cc: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org> > Subject: Re: Caldera release of awk, grep, and libregex from 2001 > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 06:42:50PM +0200, Aharon Robbins wrote: > > I'm looking through my Downloads directory to try to clean it up > > a bit. I found this: > > > > $ ls -l osutils.tar.gz > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 arnold arnold 101072 Nov 25 2012 osutils.tar.gz > > Thanks for this as well, it's now at: > https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/Awk_Grep/ > > Cheers, Warren Thanks Warren! Arnold

5 months, 1 week

Question about compiled programs on a newer machine type be usable ?

by babydr DBA James W. Laferriere

Hello all , Here I am again , Maybe my ? might be relative to the community . I grabbed an archive of precompiled gnu software , During the extraction I got a 'warning' from a gzip'd tar & decided to dig into the underlying tarball to see if it was trully corrupted or repairable . Tada , I did a silly and less'd one of the binary files and noticed that the underlying file was 'ar'd by /usr/local/alphaev6-dec-osf5.1b/bin/ar , well all said and done My ol' as100 ain't a ev6 . So my Question , Could I use these programs that were created on a ev6 cpu system on my ev4 ? Tia , JimL -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network & System Engineer | 3237 Holden Road | Give me Linux | | jiml(a)system-techniques.com | Fairbanks, AK. 99709 | only on AXP | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+

5 months, 1 week

a bit of Plan9 history

by Jan Schaumann

Hi, This was seen on Dave Farber's IP list; with many of the Dramatis Personae on this list it seems worthwhile to share it here, too: "What I Saw at the Evolution of Plan 9" by Geoff Collyer https://adi.onl/oral.pdf -Jan

5 months, 1 week

When/how did ctime change from inode "creation" to "change" time?

by Theodore Ts'o

As part of a discusion on the Linux kernel mailing list, there was an assertion that ctime was orginally "creation time". From the v7 sources in TUHS, we can see: struct dinode { unsigned short di_mode; /* mode and type of file */ short di_nlink; /* number of links to file */ short di_uid; /* owner's user id */ short di_gid; /* owner's group id */ off_t di_size; /* number of bytes in file */ char di_addr[40]; /* disk block addresses */ time_t di_atime; /* time last accessed */ time_t di_mtime; /* time last modified */ time_t di_ctime; /* time created */ }; ... although the v7 kernel sources does seem to update ctime when the inode metadata changes, regardless of what the coment in /usr/src/sys/h/ino.h might say. More interestingly, this comment seems to continue in newer versions up to 3BSD, and then the comments becomes "change time" in BSD 4.2, probably coincident with the File System Implementation? The best we can guess is that the change from "creation time" to "inode change time" happened sometime between 1979 and 1982. Does anyone who was around can give the story about how and when this happened? - Ted

5 months, 1 week

Sad news: we lost George Colouris

by H.J.Thomassen

In July 1974 I visited Bell Labs Murray Hill, and Ken & Dennis showed me around. I was very impressed because we (Univ of Nijmegen, NL) had a PDP-11/45 just like theirs and I knew that machine quite well. It was clear that their software kicked the machine much heavier than our (DEC-original) DOS-system did. But I was a naive student so I wanted more information and asked Ken: are there many UNIX users in Europe? Ken brought us to the library where a Ms. Irma B. Biren, librarian, kept the record of licenses. We found prof. Colouris in London... When I asked whether maybe somebody closer by our place was present, Ken found Gideon Yuval in Tel Aviv. Nobody closer.... Hendrik-Jan Thomassen

5 months, 1 week

Re: What would early alternatives to C have been?

by Douglas McIlroy

> everyone should write for their first compiler in Pascal for a > simple language and no cheating using YACC. You need to write the whole > thing if you want to understand how parsing really works. Yacc certainly makes it easier to write parsers for big grammars, but it's far from cheating. You need to know a lot more about parsing to use Yacc than you need to roll your own. Hand parsing of a tiny grammar is almost a necessary step on the way to understanding Yacc. But I think hand-building the whole parser for a compiler is unnecessary torture--like doing trigonometry with log tables. Doug

5 months, 1 week

Sad news: we lost George Coulouris

by Arrigo Triulzi

Found out today that we lost George Coulouris about a month ago, he was at QMC (then QMW, now Queen Mary, University of London) in CompSci and an old Unix hand (but not only). Obituary from his PhD student (who wrote a Unix editor called “ded”): https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/jan/19/george-coulouris-obituary

5 months, 1 week

"Webster's Second on the Head of a Pin"?

by Royce Williams

Someone I know is seeking the original version of an internal Bell Labs memo from 1974 titled "Webster's Second on the Head of a Pin" by Morris and Thompson. The topic appears to be related to improving the speed of lookups or search. It's cited in a few papers as "Unpublished Technical Memo, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ 1974." All I can find online is citations. Any leads appreciated! -- Royce

5 months, 1 week

What would early alternatives to C have been?

by Dan Cross

As I mentioned in the discussion about C, it's easy to look back with a modern perspective and cast aspersions on C. But this got me thinking, what would possible alternatives have been? In the context of the very late 1960s heading into the early 70s, and given the constraints of the PDP-7 and early PDP-11s, what languages would one consider for implementing a system like early Unix? Dennis's history paper mentioned a very short-lived effort at Fortran, and I asked about that a few years ago, but no one really remembered much about it; I gather this was an experiment that lasted a few days or weeks and was quickly abandoned. But what else? My short list included PL/1, Algol/W, Fortran, and Pascal. Fortran was already mentioned. I don't think PL/1 (or PL/I) could have fit on those machines. Pascal was really targeted towards teaching and would have required pretty extensive work to be usable. The big question mark in my mind is Algol/W; how well known was it at the time? Was any consideration for it made? Obviously, the decision to go with BCPL (as the basis for B, which beget C) was made and the rest is history. But I'm really curious about how, in the research culture at the time, information about new programming languages made its way through the community. - Dan C.

5 months, 1 week

Re: uphill both ways, was Re: What would early alternatives to C have been?

by Bakul Shah

On Mar 10, 2025, at 7:26 PM, John Levine <johnl(a)taugh.com> wrote: > > In my 1971 compiler course at Yale, Alan Perlis made us try to write a compiler > that translated a subset of APL into Basic. He suggested we write it in APL, > which was a terrible idea, so I wrote it in Trac, for which I happened to have > written my own interpreter. > > I think my compiler was the only one that worked, and it was pretty clever, > turning the APL array expressions into structures with array boundaries and > example expressions, with no array temporaries. It only generated the loops to > evaluate the expressions when storing into another array. > > Someone got a PhD in 1978 for a similar compiling technique but in 1971 I was a > 17 year old twerp so what did I know? > > R's, > John Pretty impressive for a 17yo! Isn’t APL syntax rather context sensitive[1]? Neither yacc nor a RD parser would’ve helped! Unless the subset was limited to a context free subset. Tim Budd in his 1978 work made quite a few changes to APL to ease compilation and used yacc. [I have the book somewhere....] [1] I do not recall if Iverson's original APL had a context sensitive grammar but modern APLs do. Given an expression ‘x y z’, its parse depends on the types of x, y & z. Example: y(x,z) if y is a dyadic verb, x & z are values, x(y(z)) if x & y are monadic verbs, z a value etc.

5 months, 1 week

DCJ-11 processor with 20k FPGA

by Jason Stevens

I assume people have seen this? https://github.com/ryomuk/TangNanoDCJ11MEM/tree/main It's capable of running Unix v1 & some limited amount of v6 among other things. The FPGA in question the Tang Nano 20k is sub 30GBP delivered from AliExpress. Kind of neat to combine a real processor with a simple FPGA implementation of the hardware.

5 months, 1 week

Re: What would early alternatives to C have been?

by Paul McJones

Ken, Was smalgol also known as BC Algol, as described here: https://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/ALGOL/algol60impl/#BC_ALGOL > On Mar 9, 2025, at 12:06 PM, Ken Thompson <kenbob(a)gmail.com <mailto:kenbob@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > how about smalgol? > > it was an algol-like language with just int and float types. > i dont know its history, but it came out of berkeley near > when Niklaus Wirth was there. it compiled for the ibm 7094 > in normal batch processing fashion. i converted it to a jit > into memory in order to skip the loading phase. i used > it for a lot of my fun-work. (1965-66) > > mainframe time, then, was a big factor in the computing process. > smalgol could compile, load, and run in about 1 cpu-second. > > smalgol was all ibm-cards, but it was on my mind through > the bcpl to b to nb phases. i would use the modern word > "influencer.” Paul McJones

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: BWK on possible alternative programming languages

by Douglas McIlroy

Adding to Brian's remarks. Both PL/I, which had been adopted by Multics, and BCPL/B were very familiar. PL/I , even gutted as it had been for Multics, was much too big to contemplate. BCPL's integration of subscripting and pointers was nice, as was its closeness to the machine. Typlessness was a drawback: how would one integrate floating point or characters? Another was the global vector, like Fortran COMMON. Algol W was known (to me, at least) only via its publication in CACM. I don't recall it having been considered. Because Algol W had more concepts than BCPL,was not as closely matched to machine-level coding, and (I believe) was equally lacking in separate-compilation facilities, I suspect it would not have made the cut. Doug

5 months, 2 weeks

BWK on possible alternative programming languages

by arnold＠skeeve.com

I asked BWK if he had any thoughts about possible alternative languages. Here is his response, forwarded by permission. Arnold > Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2025 08:27:57 -0400 (EDT) > From: Brian Kernighan <bwk(a)cs.princeton.edu> > To: arnold(a)skeeve.com > cc: crossd(a)gmail.com, Brian Kernighan <bwk(a)cs.princeton.edu> > Subject: Re: An interesting history question > > Dan raises an interesting question. I don't have a good answer, > but there are possibilities. > > Typeless languages like BCPL were in the air; Bliss, from CMU in > 1970, was a significant example, used mostly on the PDP-10 but it > could run on a PDP-11. It was definitely a contender for doing > systems work. > > I used MAD in the summer of 1966 at MIT and remembered it as being > much nicer than Fortran, though when I looked at a description a > while ago, it wasn't clear what the attraction was. > > Bell Labs (Doug McIlroy and Bob Morris, mostly) made a PL/I subset > called EPL that was at least compilable and a lot easier to manage > than the full language. I don't know whether that would have > worked, but it would seem that Ken didn't think so, since he went > off on his own direction. Doug would know more; he sent me some > corrective info a month ago, on the errata page here: > > https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~bwk/memoir.html > > Fortran would have needed major work to handle non-numeric data. > I wrote a text formatter in it by hacking with the Logical*1 type; > that let me handle one character at a time by basically lying, > though I've long since forgotten the details. > > Pascal was hopeless, as I have described elsewhere, though > variants that repaired some of the type system might have worked. > > The US military used Jovial; it sounds like it's still sort of in > use, since it handles the avionics in a lot of planes. It looks > like a direct descendant of Algol 58. > > I never used Algol/W, but of all the options, it seems like it > might have been the strongest contender. > > Xerox PARC had Mesa, but my dim memory is that it was big and > complicated, which is the opposite of what was needed at the time. > It also came along too late, mid to late 1970s. It did influence > Java and Modula-2, says Wikipedia. > > HOPL 1 includes papers on other languages of the time, most of > which would not have worked, and/or have died by now. There's a > lot of history, and I have no idea how to get on top of it all. > But still interesting to look at and speculate about. > > Brian > > > On Sat, 8 Mar 2025, arnold(a)skeeve.com wrote: > > > Hi Brian. > > > > Any thoughts on this? > > > > (cc-ing Dan, the original poster) > > > > Thanks, > > > > Arnold > > > >> From: Dan Cross <crossd(a)gmail.com> > >> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2025 22:46:58 -0500 > >> To: TUHS <tuhs(a)tuhs.org> > >> Subject: [TUHS] What would early alternatives to C have been? > >> > >> As I mentioned in the discussion about C, it's easy to look back with > >> a modern perspective and cast aspersions on C. But this got me > >> thinking, what would possible alternatives have been? In the context > >> of the very late 1960s heading into the early 70s, and given the > >> constraints of the PDP-7 and early PDP-11s, what languages would one > >> consider for implementing a system like early Unix? Dennis's history > >> paper mentioned a very short-lived effort at Fortran, and I asked > >> about that a few years ago, but no one really remembered much about > >> it; I gather this was an experiment that lasted a few days or weeks > >> and was quickly abandoned. But what else? > >> > >> My short list included PL/1, Algol/W, Fortran, and Pascal. Fortran was > >> already mentioned. I don't think PL/1 (or PL/I) could have fit on > >> those machines. Pascal was really targeted towards teaching and would > >> have required pretty extensive work to be usable. The big question > >> mark in my mind is Algol/W; how well known was it at the time? Was any > >> consideration for it made? > >> > >> Obviously, the decision to go with BCPL (as the basis for B, which > >> beget C) was made and the rest is history. But I'm really curious > >> about how, in the research culture at the time, information about new > >> programming languages made its way through the community. > >> > >> - Dan C. > >> > > >

5 months, 2 weeks

Step Into the Real-Life Lumon Industries, the Breakout Star of ‘Severance’

by Rich Salz

Gift article about Holmdel facility... Bell Works, the setting of the hit serial for Apple TV+, is now a tourist attraction, drawing fans to the architectural wonder. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/realestate/severance-lumon-industries-bu… <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/realestate/s…>

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: Any UNIX With No C In Userland?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Larry McVoy > Not once did I think about packing, the structs somehow just worked on > the machines I was working on. Maybe the TCP/IP guys knew about spacing > in the structs. Not really! Of the first 6 TCP/IP implementations: https://gunkies.org/wiki/TCP_and_IP_bake_offs only 1 was in C - and it was a relatively late one. The earliest ones were mostly in assembler (PDP-10 and PDP-11). Noel

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: Any UNIX With No C In Userland?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> There may have been a better way to do it CLR R0 BISB (R1)+, R0 SWAB R0 BISB (R1)+, R0 That saved one instruction over the previous one. Noel

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: Any UNIX With No C In Userland?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Phil Budne > BUT, the basic TCP and IP protocols seem to have been created with a > general care that two byte fields should be aligned at multiples of two > bytes Yes, because dealing with a 16-bit field that spans two PDP-11 16-bit words is a pain (espcially because the PDP-11 does not have a 'load byte into register _without_ extending the sign bit into the high half' instruction). Do realize that in addition to the early TCP implementation, the _first_ TCP router (at that stage, TCP and IP were not separate protocols) was also a PDP-11 (albeit programmed in BCPL, not MACRO-11). I remember the extension being a real PITA. To load an un-aligned 16-bit quantity into R0, one would have had to do something like (assuming a pointer to the un-aligned 16-bit quantity was in R1): MOVB (R1)+, R0 SWAB R0 BIC #0377, R0 BISB (R1)+, R0 There may have been a better way to do it, but that's the best I can come up with now; I recall we had to do something like that. Yes, the 16-bit fields were 16-bit word aligned. Noel

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: DCJ-11 processor with 20k FPGA

by Jason Stevens

the code in the repo is for the FPGA, the processor that is strapped to the FPGA well it runs the real code. It's like the 'minimig' Amiga emulator platform, a real processor, and FPGA to do all the IO heavy lifting. So it's not 100% FPGA but you are executing code on a real processor so you aren't exactly full emulation either. And it doesn't cost a fortune, assuming you can find one of these ancient microprocessors. -----Original Message----- From: emanuel stiebler To: Jason Stevens; 'tuhs(a)tuhs.org' Sent: 3/5/25 2:50 PM Subject: Re: [TUHS] DCJ-11 processor with 20k FPGA On 2025-03-01 07:11, Jason Stevens via TUHS wrote: > I assume people have seen this? > > https://github.com/ryomuk/TangNanoDCJ11MEM/tree/main > > > It's capable of running Unix v1 & some limited amount of v6 among other > things. The FPGA in question the Tang Nano 20k is sub 30GBP delivered from > AliExpress. > > Kind of neat to combine a real processor with a simple FPGA implementation > of the hardware. I just had a look at it, but he doesn't show the code, which runs on the TangNano?

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: Any UNIX With No C In Userland?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Rob Pike > The notion that the struct layout must correspond to the hardware > device's layout is about as non-portable as thinking can get. I'm confused; I thought device register layout is inherently about as non-portable a thing as one could have, generally. (Exceptions: 1) the device is basically a single chip, so interfaces on two machines might be essentially identical, if they use the same chip; 2) someone made a 68K card that plugged into a QBUS, so drivers on a PDP-11 and that 68K could be identical.) Or did you mean that one could somehow disassociate the struct layout and the details of the device (assuming it has addressable registers, as became common)? How (I'm missing it)? Noel

5 months, 2 weeks

Re: Any UNIX With No C In Userland?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: "G. Brandn Robinson" > C was a language for people who wanted to get that crap out of the way > so they could think about binary representations. Huh? Sometimes C gets in the way of doing that; see below. > From: Dan Cross > They did indicate that alignment makes sharing _binary_ data between > VAX and PDP-11 harder, but that's truerepresentation of other aspects of product > types as well. Alignment is just one aspect of low-level binary representation; there's also length (in bits), which is critically important in several problem domains; device registers have already been mentioned, but more below. > From: Peter Yardley > Problems I have with C as a systems language is there is no certainty > about representation of a structure in memory and hence when it is > written to disk. That's yet another one. The area I'm thinking of (and which I saw a lot of) is code to implement network protocols (and I'm fairly astounded that nobody else has mentioned this yet). One has to have _absolute_ control over how the bits are laid out in the packet (which of course might wind up in any one of countless other machine types) - which generally means how they are laid out in memory. The whole concept of C declarations is not rich enough to really deal with this properly. For each field in the header, one absolutely needs to be able to separately specify the syntax (e.g. size in bits) and semantics (unsigned integer, etc). And if you want the code to be portable, so that one set of sources will compile to working code on several different architctures, it gets worse. Device registers, already mentioned, often only have to run on one type of machine, but having protocol implementions run on a number of different machine types is really common. I came up with a way to do this, without _any_ #ifdefs (which I don't like, for a reason I won't get into) in most source files. Dealing with byte order issues was similarly dealt with (one can't deal with it just in types, really, without making the type specification, and the language, somewhat complicated). I know later C's got better about richer variable semantics and syntax selection than the circa 1985 ones I was working with, but I don't think it was ever made completely simple and orthogonal (e.g. 'signed/unsigned/boolean/etc char/short/long/quad/word/etc') as it should have been. Noel

5 months, 2 weeks

Any UNIX With No C In Userland?

by segaloco

Given that anything that obeys the ABI and has assembler entries to the kernel can request services, it seems to me it would be possible to stand up a user-land without C being present. Have any UNIXen ever done this after the advent of C? - Matt G.

5 months, 2 weeks

Language-lawyers' field day (was Any UNIX With No C In Userland?)

by Douglas McIlroy

> Everything that can possibly be represented in a machine > register with all bits clear shows up as an integral zero literal. > '\0' == 0 == nullptr == struct { } == union { } Well, some things. 0.0f and other floating-point zero constants are represented by all-zero words (of various sizes) and are not integral constants. NULL does not "show up as an integral zero literal". 0==NULL is true only because 0 can be converted to NULL. Getting really lawyerly, one can cook up any number of bizarre "things that can possibly be represented" by an all-zero word, for example (char[4]){0,0,0,0}, and have no representation as an integral constant. Only 3 of the 5 examples fit the description of possibly being represented by an all-zero word. struct{} and union{} are gnu extensions with size zero. Even if you accept them as C, they have no machine representation and cannot be cast to int. The null pointer makes the list only thanks to the weasel-word "possibly". Although 0 can be cast to the null pointer, the result of casting a null pointer to int depends on its unspecified machine representation. Zero, of course, is a good choice because it's easy to test for, and is easy to omit from virtual address spaces. Doug

5 months, 3 weeks

Having dickens of a time compiling gcc-4.4.7 on tru64 .

by babydr DBA James W. Laferriere

Hello Anyone interested in this silliness , I am just recently trying to reacquaint myself with this os . Which I had a decent passing knowledge of at one time . Not any real OS level or driver coding , But was least decently acquainted . Now on with the preliminaries ... Any good software items to update on this ol'thing that give me a better chance of completing this task , Greatly welcome . I have folowed , ths article which is a copy from (imo) several places , tho all of them are using a axp-Emulator . <https://gist.github.com/jamesy0ung/eeac82997ebeae92873d1f2844a14ac3> I am using (I'll admit) a REAL AlphaStation 200 (4/100) with 384MB main memory & three disks all are U160's 2x4G+1x72G , OS is installed on the 72G(now) & has a /home dir for users rather that the default location . See info & error during make of gcc . Those numbers for the allocation & total have been exactly the same accross many iterations of attempts in that exact file . # sizer -v HP Tru64 UNIX V5.1B (Rev. 2650); Sun Feb 23 19:43:32 AKST 2025 It is at patch level 008 . and had successfully compiled & installed all the prerequisites shown in the article mentioned above . It Seems the OS doesn't know how to access the swap properly . root@as200:/home/buildnfs/gcc-4.4.7# env PATH=/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/usr/ccs/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/dt/bin:~/bin:. make ... many lines snipped ... /home/buildnfs/gcc-4.4.7/host-alpha-dec-osf5.1b/prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/buildnfs/gcc-4.4.7/host-alpha-dec-osf5.1b/prev-gcc/ -B/usr/local/alpha-dec-osf5.1b/bin/ -c -g -$ cc1: out of memory allocating 135816 bytes after a total of 796519376 bytes make[3]: *** [fold-const.o] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/buildnfs/gcc-4.4.7/host-alpha-dec-osf5.1b/gcc' make[2]: *** [all-stage2-gcc] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/buildnfs/gcc-4.4.7' make[1]: *** [stage2-bubble] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/buildnfs/gcc-4.4.7' make: *** [all] Error 2 # swapon -s Swap partition /dev/disk/dsk2g: Allocated space: 249774 pages (1.91GB) In-use space: 1520 pages ( 0%) Free space: 248254 pages ( 99%) Swap partition /dev/disk/dsk1b: Allocated space: 49152 pages (384MB) In-use space: 1630 pages ( 3%) Free space: 47522 pages ( 96%) Swap partition /dev/disk/dsk0b: Allocated space: 49152 pages (384MB) In-use space: 1618 pages ( 3%) Free space: 47534 pages ( 96%) Total swap allocation: Allocated space: 348078 pages (2.66GB) In-use space: 4768 pages ( 1%) Available space: 343310 pages ( 98%) # hwmgr show scsi SCSI DEVICE DEVICE DRIVER NUM DEVICE FIRST HWID: DEVICEID HOSTNAME TYPE SUBTYPE OWNER PATH FILE VALID PATH ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42: 0 as200 cdrom none 0 1 cdrom0 [0/4/0] 43: 1 as200 disk none 2 1 dsk0 [1/0/0] 44: 2 as200 disk none 2 1 dsk1 [1/1/0] 45: 3 as200 disk none 2 1 dsk2 [1/2/0] # hwmgr -view dev HWID: Device Name Mfg Model Location ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3: /dev/dmapi/dmapi 4: /dev/scp_scsi 5: /dev/kevm 29: /dev/disk/floppy0c 3.5in floppy fdi0-unit-0 42: /dev/disk/cdrom0c TOSHIBA DVD-ROM SD-M1401 bus-0-targ-4-lun-0 43: /dev/disk/dsk0c IBM DDRS-34560D bus-1-targ-0-lun-0 44: /dev/disk/dsk1c COMPAQ BD07286224 bus-1-targ-1-lun-0 45: /dev/disk/dsk2c COMPAQ ST34371W bus-1-targ-2-lun-0 46: /dev/random 47: /dev/urandom Tia , JimL -- +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network & System Engineer | 3237 Holden Road | Give me Linux | | jiml(a)system-techniques.com | Fairbanks, AK. 99709 | only on AXP | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+

5 months, 3 weeks

Re: Pre-Struct C Compiler with Funny Syntax Resurrected

by Douglas McIlroy

Yufeng, > I've recently brought the "prestruct-c" compiler back to "life" Great archeology! It seems you've unearthed a snapshot from the brief period when Dennis was struggling to reconcile byte addressing with BCPL pointers--the seminal innovation of C. In characteristic Unix fashion, he was trying out his ideas as they developed. I had forgotten that product types were under con-struct-ion at the same time. That really was a big bang. Doug

6 months

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
263
Older →

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