> From: Will Senn
> I was thinking that Multics was a failed predecessor of unix
> ... straighten me out :)
I'd start with:
https://multicians.org/myths.html
> From: Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com>
> https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Unix-succeed-and-not-Multics/answer/Clem-Cole
Clem, I think that's too limited in scope.
Like a lot of 'big' 'failures' (defined in Multics' case as 'failure to grow
to significant market share, and continue in the long term'), I don't think
Multics 'failed' for a single reason.
In general, in large failures, there are a number of causes, all doing their
bit. Now, if there are M causes, ranked in priority, maybe the first N1 are
_each_ big enough that _any one_ of them could have led to that outcome. Or
maybe not; maybe it needed the first N2, all acting in concert.
My crystal ball isn't that accurate. But here's my take on _some_ of Multics'
main issues.
- Management: if you look at:
https://multicians.org/hill-mgt.html
it's clear that Honeywell top management didn't understand Multics, and
didn't understand that it had a long-term potential. They terminated
investment in new hardware, and that was what finally killed Multics.
- Non-portability: the system was too tied to a specific platform; it
couldn't really be moved elsewhere. (E.g. the code is riddled with 'fixed bin
18'; yes, that could be changed with a program to edit the source, but there
are lots of dependencies on the specifics of the machine's architecture.) It
would be possible to re-write it to run on, say, a 386, but you'd pretty much
have to start from scratch.
- Built for the wrong future: a key assumption was that people would continue
to get their computes from large centralized machines. Clearly, that was
wrong (and it played into the issues with Honeywell management)>. Multics
_could_ have made the transition to today's 'small' (physically) machines, in
which case it would have been really good to have - e.g. if we could run
browsers in AIM boxes a lot of malware simply would not be an issue. But the
point above prevented that.
Those are some of the big ones; I may come up with more. I've CC'd a couple
of Multicians - perhaps they can add additional insight.
Noel
So, it looks like someone has gone and started running a multics instance:
http://lists.nycbug.org/pipermail/semibug/2018-August/000288.html
That’s interesting, and y’all may even have been aware of it. But, I was thinking that Multics was a failed predecessor of unix and it’s craziness an inspiration for how unix isn’t multics... straighten me out :)
Will
Sent from my iPhone
So I just read this
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/usenix99/full_papers/cranor/cranor.pdf
and it looks encouraging. Apparently NetBSD is using it. Does anyone
know if they are happy with it?
Has FreeBSD considered this?
Has anyone benchmarked FreeBSD against NetBSD to see which is faster
for VM stuff?
Greetings,
Multics, while not a 'massive' sales success in retrospect, was certainly not the failure commonly believed and wasn't treated as one in the press of the time - at least not until after the decision was made by Honeywell-Bull to phase out the the Multics (and CP-6) products to focus on GCOS - GCOS7/GCOS8 is still a major player today.
"Honeywell is having considerable — and surprising — success with the ultra-secure Multics operating system … Besides 3-5 systems within Honeywell, Multics has been installed or committed within Nippon Electric, Rome Air Development Center, USAF Data Services Center, and Ford." from mid-1970's industry press.
See also https://multicians.org/myths.html
We have about 120 members on BAN - including many original and new Multicians who make the project possible. We're always working on new things and projects - see "pmotd -a" when logged in for some of the most recent activity.
I'd be happy to answer any questions on BAN.AI if anyone has particular questions - or just ssh to dps8(a)m.trnsz.com - feel free to use the guest account. I don't want to take the list too off-topic. We have many exclusive features that I hope makes BAN.AI a 'special' (and loved) system, a lot more coming.
--
https://ban.ai/multics
> From: jcs
> The real mystery is what it's running on. ... It's=20 probably a
> simulator but I've never heard of one for the H6000.
Per:
https://multicians.org/multics.htmlhttps://multicians.org/multics.html
"Harry Reed and Charles Anthony reached a major milestone on the Multics
simulator on Saturday 08 November, 2014. Their SIMH-based simulator booted
Multics MR 12.5, came to operator command level, entered admin mode, created a
small PL/I program, compiled and executed it, and shut down. Release 1.0 of
the simulator is now available."
Noel
> On 1 Sep 2018, at 19:18,Warner Losh <imp(a)bsdimp.com <mailto:imp@bsdimp.com>> wrote:
>
> I recall a more knowledgeable friend complaining about FreeBSD VM in 1994 or so.
>
> It used to be downright aweful.
>
That sounds like a GOOD thing: full of awe!
At least it wasn’t offal: decomposing animal flesh.
-Don
Hello,
against my plan to stay under my rock and learn from your messages I now
have to speak up, because I stumbled over this:
https://bsd.network/@sehnsucht/100635118831337239
which speaks of
gopher://ftp.icm.edu.pl/1/vol/rzm2/
(after some puzzled searching for a client I found out that lynx still
supports gopher)
This site has the following list in its root directory:
4.4BSD-Lite FreeBSD LSI NetBSD OpenBSD UnixArchive ancient-unix
desktopbsd dragonflybsd ghostbsd kde kde-applicationdata kś linux-alsa
linux-archlinux linux-atm linux-bipv6 linux-blackarch linux-bluehawk
linux-cbq.init linux-cryptoapi linux-documentation linux-dret
linux-e2compr linux-fido linux-gentoo linux-gentoo-portage linux-inner
linux-iproute linux-linos linux-net-tools linux-norlug linux-nvidia
linux-nvidia.old linux-nvidia.old2 linux-openvz linux-packware
linux-pcmcia linux-radvd linux-raspbian linux-reiserfs linux-rtlinux
linux-sgi linux-silo linux-slackware linux-sparc linux-superrescue
linux-tsx-11 linux-uk linux-usagi linux-uw-linux linux-vectorlinux
linuxberg nexenta openindiana opensolaris pcbsd solaris-10
solaris-cd-fsn solaris-cd-pm solaris_i86pc solaris_sparc sun-fixes
sun-patches www.tazenda.demon.co.uk
I descended into the OpenBSD directory, where things look quite
authentic, at a first glance.
Please keep the stories coming, Marcus
> From: Clem Cole
> The problem is finding some at Oracle that would care
Well, I've got a nephew who's been at Oracle for like 20+ years; he can
probably point us at the right person.
> and finding a proper distribution tape to officially release.
Why do we need that? Can't they say 'any and all versions of SunOS', and that
term ('SunOS') is sufficiently well defined in real-world documents (e.g. Sun
licenses) that that should be 'good enough'.
It sounds like the _actual code_ is reasonably available, we wouldn't need
Oracle to go looking around for it, would we?
Noel
Hi!
If I wanted to run 4.3BSD on an x86 box (VirtualBox? QEMM? other emu?)...
anybody has suggestions? Where can I find media for 4.3BSD (if any are
legitimately accessible)?
Or on a Raspberry Pi? :)
Thanks!
Gilles
--
*Gilles Gravier* - Gilles(a)Gravier.org
GSM : +33618347147 and +41794728437
Skype : ggravier | PGP Key : 0x8DE6D026
<http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x8DE6D026&op=index>
