All,
Seems my SysVR2 simulation instance has at one point or another lost its
/dev/mt/* and /dev/rmt/* device entries.
Is there a script anywhere to regenerate these, or does anyone know the
major/minor off hand for the SIMH TS device?
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
> Many of the gnu tools started life as BSD code that was hacked on and
> rebranded with the GPL.
I have seen Gnu code likewise adopted from AT&T.
Doug
I know it's a long shot. Does anybody remember how to use the output
of pathalias in sendmail.cf? Specifically, we have set up 4.3BSD with
uucp-only e-mail, and we have a map file which pathalias digests and
outputs fine.
I can't find any useful documentation on putting this output into
sendmail. There's part of a book in Google books, but two pages
are hidden. I also threw out my old bat book ages ago. I have a
PDF of Sendmail_4th_Edition_Oct_2007.pdf but it doesn't mention
pathalias.
Thanks in advance! Warren
> From: "Ron Natalie"
>>> I think most people will attribute the desktop metaphor to Xerox.
>> Strictly speaking, to Smalltalk (from PARC)
^^^^
> I beg to differ. The Star not only pioneered the WISIWYG application
> presentation
PARC _was_ Xerox. The Star was a product based on the Alto, but much of the
Star stuff was pioneered on the Alto.
For instance, WYSIWYG was one of the modes that the Alto's Bravo editor could
be run in; it definitely pre-dates the Star.
> also the concept of the desktop.
Depending on exactly what you mean by 'desktop', that also pre-dated the Star.
I heard the multiple overlapping windows of Smalltalk (an Alto application)
likened to a collection of sheets of paper on a desktop (which is where the
term came from); clicking on one with the mouse brought it to the top, just
like pulling a particular sheet of paper out from the ones on a physical
desktop.
> The whole conscept of dropping documents as icons on the desktop appears
> to have orginated there.
Yes, as I mentioned:
>> things like Bravo, and the basic user command interface on the Alto
>> [the Exec, my brain finally coughed up the name - can't find my Alto
>> manual at the moment] didn't have any concept of windows/desktop
The concept of having a graphical front end as the main user interface was not
from the Alto, and the Alto didn't have icons either; both came later (I'll
let the Lisa people and Star people argue that one out).
Noel
> From: "Ron Natalie"
> I think most people will attribute the desktop metaphor to Xerox.
Strictly speaking, to Smalltalk (from PARC); things like Bravo, and the basic
user command interface on the Alto (I forget what its name was), didn't have
any concept of windows/desktop (although Bravo did use the bitmap screen).
Noel
"Open" was certainly not a work heard in the Unix lab,
where our lawyers made sure we knew it was a "trade secret".
John Lions was brought into the lab both because we admired
his work and because the lawyers wanted to reel that work
back in-house.
Out in the field, the trade secret was treated in many
different ways. Perhaps the most extreme was MIT, whose
lawyers believed it could not be adequately protected in
academia and forbade its use there. I don't know what eventually broke the logjam.
Doug
William Pechter:
VMS source fiche was very common of sites owned by large corporations.
Their IT staff used it to research bugs... and as sample code for
writing their own drivers etc...
=====
Indeed, I used the VMS source microfiche to learn how to
handle various sorts of errors (machine checks, memory
errors) better in UNIX. Stock VAX systems at the time
just crashed on any error, but it turned out that many of
them admitted recovery: some errors were transient,
others could be ridden over by disabling some piece of the
hardware.
This led to an amusing event on the VAX-11/750 that at the
time handled e-mail as uucp node research!. (Its internal
name on our datakit node was grigg.) People noticed that
the system was running slowly. I checked and discovered
that the CPU itself seemed to be a bit slower. Then I
checked logs and discovered that a week earlier, there had
been a cache error; my new recovery code had turned off
the failing half of the cache, logged the error, and forged
ahead.
At the next convenient time, we took the system down and ran
DEC's standalone diagnostics. (Contrary to the rude stories
one hears, those diags were in fact pretty thorough.) The
problem didn't show up, so we booted grigg back up again,
secure in the knowledge that if the problem was persistent,
my code would let us know without crashing. (I don't think
it ever showed up again.)
We also learned to pay more attention to console messages!
Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
> From: Clem Cole
> Do you know the time frame of the banishment? Noel any memories of what
> allowed it be used?
Sorry, this is something I know nothing of; it must have happened while I was
still an early undergrad.
The first Unix I knew of at MIT was the one in the DSSR/RTS group in LCS,
which arrived (I think) roughly around the start of my sophmore year (so
early '76 or so) - I have a memory of one of my friends (who was an undergrad
working in that group) telling me about it, and showing it to me. (I remember
being totally blown away with the way you could write a command 'foo',
compile it, and jut say 'foo' to run it...)
Actually, it may have shown up well before that - perhaps they had it well
before I first saw it.
Certainly by the time I showed up at LCS (fall of '77) it had already spread
to CSR; they had an 11/40 with Unix on it, cloned from the DSSR system.
Again, I don't know if there was any paperwork that had to happen, or if that
system was already covered under whatever license the DSSR machine was under.
Of course, this was all DARPA-funded work, and there may have been something
there that allowed it. We certainly passed Unix source around with other
DARPA projects (e.g. at BBN) without, AFAICR, worrying much about paperwork.
> we had a sign a document with the university stating something that we
> understood it was AT&Ts IP
I don't recall anything like that at MIT; maybe in the very early days, there
was something, but certainly not by '77.
If it's important to know what happened, I can ask (e.g. Prof. Ward, head of
DSSR).
Noel
> From: Random832
> I think he means the fact that MIME specifies the type of the main
> message body (not just attachments), so you can have a message with *no*
> text parts.
Right, that I could discern; what I couldn't get with an definitiveness was
_why_ that was particularly a problem.
(Another possibility, other than the one I previously gave, is perhaps that
there simply is no text part, which one can peruse, ignoring the rest?)
Noel
Hello.
Perhaps you haven't been made aware yet of these series of --IMHO--
very interesting articles about Xenix 386, entitled "Xenix 2.2.3c
Restoration", by Michael Casadevall, a.k.a. NCommander at the geek site
https://soylentnews.org (of which he is one of the founders):
Part 1: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/03/1620222
Part 2: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/07/1632251
Part 3: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/03/11/2014253
I wish Bela Lubkin, ex- kernel engineer at "classic" SCO, would have
joined the list to comment on those articles and pour some light into
the more obscure points. I sent an email to Bela some time ago telling
him about the TUHS mailing list, but I didn't hear back from him.
--
Josh Good