TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

34 participants
6476 discussions

by norman＠oclsc.org

John Cowan: Unfortunately, approximately nobody except you has access to [the 10/e sh] man page. Can you post or email it? === I am happy to remind you that you're a few years out of date: https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V10/man/man1/sh.1 Norman Wilson Toronto ON

3 years, 4 months

Faces of Open Source (and NFTs)

by Dan Cross

So a number of Unix luminaries were photographed as part of the "Faces of Open Source" project. I have to admit, the photos themselves are quite good: https://www.facesofopensource.com/collect/ It seems that the photographer is now selling NFTs based on those photos, which is...a thing. - Dan C.

3 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] PDP 11/23 running UNIX version 6 at VCF Midwest!

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Paul Ruizendaal > Does anyone remember, was this a real life bug back in 6th edition The 'V6' at MIT (actually, PWB1) never had an issue, but then again, its TTY driver (here: http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/unix/mit/dmr/tty.c if anyone wants to see it) was heavily re-written. But from the below, it's almost certainlynothing to do with the TTY code... > From: Dave Plonka > one experiment we did was to redirection the bas(1)ic program's output > to a file and what we found was that (a) characters would still > sometimes be lost Good test. If you all want to chase this down (I can lend V6 expertise, if needed), I'd say the first step is to work out whether it's the application, or the system, losing the characters. To do that, I'd put a little bit of code in write() to store a copy of data sent through that in a circular buffer, along with tagging it with the writing process, etc. Once you figure out where it's getting lost, then you can move on to how/why. > From: Clem Cole > First Sixth Edition does not have support for either the 11/23 Yeah, but it's super-trivial to add /23 support to V6: http://gunkies.org/wiki/Running_UNIX_V6_on_an_-11/23 The only places where change is needed (no LKS register, no switch register, and support for more than 256KB of main memory - and that one one can get by without), it's hard to see how they could cause this problem. > One other thought, I'm pretty sure that Noel's V6+ system from MIT can > support a 23 No, we never ran than on a /23 BITD (no need, no mass storage); and I have yet to bring the V6+ system up (although I have all the bits, and intend to, at some point, to get its TCP/IP running). I've been using stock (well, hacked a bit, in a number of ways - e.g. 8-bit serial line output) V6. Noel

3 years, 4 months

32V with virtual memory

by Paul Ruizendaal

I am making some slow progress on the topic of Tom Reiser’s 32V with virtual memory. Two more names popped up of folks who worked with his virtual memory code base at Bell Labs / USG in the early 80’s: Robert (Bob) Baron and Jim McCormick. Bob Barron was later working on Mach at CMU. If anybody on this list has contact suggestions for these two folks, please send a private message. Paul

3 years, 4 months

PDP 11/23 running UNIX version 6 at VCF Midwest!

by Paul Ruizendaal

> While doing some end of year retrocomputing revisiting, I thought some > of you might enjoy this - there is hope for the next generation(s)! ;) > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zyng5Ob-e8 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zyng5Ob-e8> Thanks for that video link! I noticed the bit at the end about V6 and the occasional dropped character and that this was not a serial line issue. I have the same issue in my V6 port to the TI-990 and always assumed that it was a bug I introduced myself when hacking the tty driver. Does anyone remember, was this a real life bug back in 6th edition back in the 1970’s? Maybe only showing at higher baud rates? Paul

3 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] {TUHS} efl

by Douglas McIlroy

> there was a commercial package called Spag i which claimed to un-spagatti-ify your code which i always wanted but, could never afford. You needed struct(1) in v7. It did precisely that, converting Fortran to Ratfor. Amazingly (to me, anyway) it embodied a theorem: a Fortran program has a canonical form. People found the converted code to be easier to understand--even when they had written the original code themselves. Doug

3 years, 4 months

efl

by Steve Simon

hi, having supported Pafec and then in a different job flow3d, i was most interested in anything that could make large fortran packages more manageable. there was a commercial package called Spag i which claimed to un-spagatti-ify your code which i always wanted but, could never afford. the best i managed was sed and awk scripts to split huge fortran files into one file per function and build a makefile. this at least made rebuilds quicker. i do not miss maintaining fortran code hacked by dozens of people over many decades. -Steve

3 years, 4 months

PDP 11/23 running UNIX version 6 at VCF Midwest!

by Dave Plonka

Hi folks! While doing some end of year retrocomputing revisiting, I thought some of you might enjoy this - there is hope for the next generation(s)! ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zyng5Ob-e8 In this video I share my personal pick for "best" demo at VCF Midwest: Gavin's PDP 11/23 running UNIX Version 6! We write and run a simple BASIC program in Ken Thompson's bas(1), finding some quirks with this (currently) entirely floppy-based system, possible having to do with a glitch in disk I/O. (We discovered bas(1) uses a temporary file as backing store.) Filmed at the Vintage Computer Festival Midwest: VCF Midwest 16, September 11, 2021 http://vcfmw.org/ Here's the source code to the simple program we wrote; you can also run it on modern machines if you install a Research UNIX version using SimH (pdp-11 simulator). 5 goto 30 10 for col = 1 arg(1) 12 prompt " " 14 next 20 print "Welcome to VCF Midwest!" 25 return 30 for x = 0 55 40 10(x) 50 next 60 for x = _56 _1 70 10(_x) 80 next -- dave(a)plonka.us http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~plonka/

3 years, 4 months

efl(1) anyone?

by arnold＠skeeve.com

Hi TUHS folks! After having reincarnated ratfor, I am wondering about Stuart Feldman's efl (extended fortran language). It was a real compiler that let you define structs, and generated more or less readable Fortran code. I have the impression that it was pretty cool, but that it just didn't catch on. So: - Did anyone here ever use it personally? - Is my impression that it didn't catch on correct? Or am I ignorant? Thoughts etc. welcome. :-) Thanks, Arnold

3 years, 4 months

Belated Introduction

by Alexander Jacocks

Spurred on by Bryan, I thought I should properly introduce myself: I am a fairly young Unix devotee, having gotten my start with System V on a Wang word processing system (believe it or not, they made one!), at my mother’s office, in the late 1980s. My first personal system, which ran SLS Linux, came about in 1992. I am a member of the Vintage Computing Federation, and have given talks and made exhibits on Unix history at VCF’s museum, in Wall, New Jersey. I have also had the pleasure to show Brian Kernighan and Ken Thompson, who are two of my computing heroes, my exhibit on the origins of BSD Unix on the Intel 386. I learned C from Brian’s book, as probably did many others here. I have spent my entire professional career supporting Unix, in some form or another. I started with SunOS at the National Institutes of Health, in Bethesda, Maryland, and moved on to Solaris, HP-UX, SCO, and finally Linux. I worked for AT&T, in Virginia, in the early 2000s, but there were few vestiges of Unix present, other than some 3b1 and 3b2 monitors and keyboards. I current work for Red Hat, in Tyson’s Corner, Virginia, as a principal sales engineer, where I spend most of my time teaching and presenting at conferences, both in person and virtual. Thank you to everyone here who created the tools that have enabled my career and love of computing! - Alexander Jacocks

3 years, 4 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