TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

16 participants
6536 discussions

by norman＠oclsc.org

Stuff Received: > In the U.S., certainly. Do Auzzies celebrate thanksgiving? Grog: Not really, but if we did, it would have been yesterday. But we do get exposed to Black Friday (today). === Why yesterday? In Canada we had ours a month and a half ago! Norman Wilson Toronto ON

1 year, 7 months

UNIX Release 3.0 vs System III Published Materials?

by segaloco

Hello everyone, I've just recently secured an item that has drawn some questions to mind. The item is a "UNIX System III Programmer's Manual Volume 2A" (image from auction listing: https://i.imgur.com/6blnqz3.jpeg) The cover is of a typical 70's Bell System motif, branded Western Electric, with blue and yellow lines and a Bell logo. The cover itself appears to be a typical report cover with a window for the title page of the document. First, I've only seen System III stuff still labeled "Release 3.0." Indeed the manual I have says Release 3.0 on the title page. Also, said manual is Bell Laboratories branded and has the blue and yellow lines near the top, above the cover text but below the Bell Laboratories logotype, an arrangement that can be seen on plenty of Bell Laboratories stuff even into the AT&T period (with the lines being replaced with the blue, red, and black, and death star instead of bell.) With this set, however, it is specifically labeled "System III". I've heard, anecdotally, that there were User's Manuals that specifically had the text "System III" on the title page, but I've never seen this myself. Are there System III branded manuals or am I misremembering. Additionally, this is labeled specifically Western Electric rather than Bell Labs. Western Electric would continue to be the name on the cover of UNIX documentation (for the most part) after this until divestiture. If such formal "System III" manuals exist, which branding did they happen to get? Another curious matter is the document is titled "Programmer's Manual...Volume 2A". This nomenclature is more commonly associated with research than stuff descending more from the PWB line like the commercial lineage. For instance, even PWB 1.0 listed its two main documents as "User's Manual" and "Documents for Use With". Research has always called the document the "Programmer's Manual" as far as I know, and the "Documents for Use With" nomenclature was only used with V6, V7 introduced treating the two sets as "Volumes" of the same larger work. What's interesting is in the sources for System III on the archive, in /usr/src/man/docs, the road_map (Documentation Roadmap) specifically uses the text "User's Manual" and "Documents for UNIX", which is still the case by 4.x (albeit the a_man/u_man split seems to have happened right about this time). In any case, I would be curious if anyone knows what was going on with the naming of documentation at this time. Would this imply that there is some variation on the 3.0/SysIII manual out there named "Programmer's Manual" instead of "User's Manual", or perhaps that for some reason when the Sys III variants of these docs had started being published, they had for some reason tried to cut over to the V7 documentation structure only to back out back to "Documents for UNIX" and a "User's Manual" as distinct things by the time of 4.0? In any case, once this gets here, I'll look it over for anything compelling that might set it apart from the document sources in the UNIX tree. I'm a bit bummed it's only Volume 2A, not both, but it'll be nice to have a physical example of the distributed, published documentation of the time. Maybe a 2B will pop up one of these days. Thanks for any insights or recollections! - Matt G. P.S. Long shot, very long shot, but if anyone on this mailing list has any empty, unused Bell System report covers of the era, Bell Laboratories especially, I would happily buy them from you. I've got my V6 documents and some BSD stuff just in random report covers I fished out of the university recycling, they'd look much nicer in proper covers, but I also recognize the bulk of those covers probably also wound up in some recycling/waste stream decades ago and no longer exist. Once I get this I could use the cover to produce a reasonable facsimile but I feel a tad uneasy regarding "breaking the seal" on that prospect, I don't want to cross the line from improving the aesthetics of my bookshelf to counterfeiting something.

1 year, 8 months

trusting trust code

by Russ Cox

Hi all, Ken mailed me the code for the compiler backdoor. I have annotated it and posted it at https://research.swtch.com/nih. As part of the post, I wrote a new simulator that can run V6 binaries. The simulator is a halfway point between the designs of simh and apout. It is running a translation of the V6 kernel to Go (with no hardware) and running user binaries on a simulated PDP11 CPU. The result combines apout's "easy to run" with simh's "v6-specific system calls work". In particular, it is good enough to run the backdoored login command, which apout simply cannot due to host OS tty handling not being like V6, and without having to fuss with disk pack images like in simh. If you have Go installed locally, you can run the new simulator with go run rsc.io/unix/v6run@latest You can also run it in your browser at https://research.swtch.com/v6. Finally, it turns out that the backdoor code was published this summer in the TUHS archive, but no one noticed. It is in dmr_tapes.tgz [1] in the file dmr_tapes/ken-sky/tp/nih.a. It is also visible in the dmr_tapes/ken/bits tape image, although not in the extracted files. Enjoy! Best, Russ [1] https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/Dennis_Tapes/

1 year, 8 months

Re: Dave Cutler recollection about Xenix

by Paul Ruizendaal

An interesting set of videos indeed, although I wish they were not all chopped up in 5 minute segments. > I consistently hear from folks the same about Bill Gates pushing for volume over anything else with Xenix. That was his business model. His Basic for the 8080 was copied a lot (the famous 1976 open letter to hobbyists) and he shifted to selling bulk licenses to manufacturers. These could then make a bundled hw/sw sale and sidestep the copying. If I understood correctly, in the early days he sold the bulk licenses for a fixed amount, without per copy fees. I suppose this matched his cost structure, so it worked; the leverage and profit came from selling the same to all manufacturers in the market. He also used it in his deal with IBM, beating out Digital Research that wanted per copy fees. Retaining the rights to DOS also matched the business model that had been pioneered for his Basic. It would seem that the same thinking was at play in the deal for Xenix (which I think preceded the IBM deal). He would spend money once on porting Unix to each of the various next-gen microprocessors of the time (x86, Z8000, 68K, NS32K) and sell (sub-)licenses to hardware manufacturers, who in turn had a right to sub-license binaries to end-users. The deal that he had to negotiate with Bell had to match that business model. Beyond this, I’m sure that Bill Gates understood the strong network effects in software and the "winner takes all” dynamic that results from it -- hence his focus on volume and market share. However, I don’t think this drove the structure of his 1979 [?] Unix license deal with Bell. > Something this brings back to mind that I always wonder about with Microsoft and their OS choices: So they went with Windows NT for their kernel, scraped the Windows environment off the top of DOS and dolloped it on top. Has there been any explanation over the years why they also decided to keep the MSDOS CLI interface? The below site has a very nice summary of Xenix at Microsoft (I’ve linked it a couple of times before): http://seefigure1.com/2014/04/15/xenixtime.html About blending Xenix and DOS it says: "As late as the beginning of 1985, there was some debate inside of Microsoft whether Xenix should be the 16-bit “successor” to DOS; for a variety of reasons – mostly having to do with licensing, royalties, and ownership of the code, but also involving a certain amount of ego and politics – MS and IBM decided to pursue OS/2 instead. That marked the end of any further Xenix investment at Microsoft, and the group was left to slowly atrophy.” Probably that same dynamic was in play for the CLI of Windows NT. Moreover, as you already point out, by the time of NT there were tens of millions of users of DOS, and numerous books, magazines, etc. explaining it. Throwing away that familiarity for unclear benefits (in the eyes of those users) would serve no business purpose. In a way it is the same dynamic that kept C89 and Bash in place for so long: people know it, it is good enough and it works everywhere. === Seeing the Cutler interviews reminded me of the old joke that there are only two operating systems left: Unix and VMS (Linux being Unix-family and Windows being VMS-family). I wonder if we will see it narrow down to just one before the hardware changes so much that the concept of an OS changes beyond recognition. My hypothesis would be that an entirely new approach will come first.

1 year, 8 months

UNIX NEWS July 16, 1975 Special Issue

by Jonathan Gray

The scans of UNIX NEWS John Gilmore provided are appreciated but the July 16 1975 "special issue" is very difficult to read: tuhs/Documentation/Usenix/Early_Newsletters/19750716-unix-news-special-issue.pdf tuhs/Documentation/Usenix/Early_Newsletters/19750716-unix-news-special-issue-darker.pdf Hendrik Jan Thomassen shows the copy sent to Nijmegen in: From UNIX to Linux, a time lapse of 45 years T-Dose 2016 https://youtu.be/boahlBmc-NY?t=2434 A transcription from the video: * * * * ***** * * * * ***** * * **** * * ** * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** * * * *** * * * ** * * * * ** * ** ** * *** * * ***** * * * * ***** * * **** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Circulation 49 July 16, 1975 Special Issue -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The contents of this "special issue" will be repeated in the normal July issue to be mailed the last week of July. NEW SYSTEM AVAILABLE The Sixth Edition - June 1975 of the UNIX system is now available for distribution to licensees. Commercial users should contact Western Electric for details. Academics can receive the new system for a service fee of $150.00. Normal distribution is on 800 bpi - 9 track tape. You need not send a tape. Just a check for $150.00 addressed to: C. W. Christ, Jr. Room 6A312 Murray Hill, NJ 07974 The tape contains a single file which extracts to 3 RK-packs or equivalent. These contain: pack0) The system except for /usr/source pack1) /usr/source pack2) Documentation in machine readable form Those who require distribution on RK-packs should send two or three packs along with their checks. The package also includes one hard-copy of each of the 19 documents. Among the new "goodies" are: 1) Separate I and D space for the resident monitor on 11/45s and 11/70s 2) Huge files (up to 16 megabytes) 3) A preprocessor for structured Fortran 4) TMG 5) A preprocessor for DC, with arbitrary precision 6) Many fixes and rewrites of system programs from "as" to "c" 7) Much improved comments embedded in system source 8) More graceful death on running out of resources and other crashes UNIX NEWS At the users' meeting in New York on June 18 it was decided that the UNIX NEWS will be irregular in format but regular in mailing. We will try to be in the mails by the last day of each odd month. Where, as in this case, a special issue is warranted we will mail it and include the contents also in the regular mailing. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Address Correspondence to Prof. M. Ferentz Physics Dept. Brooklyn College of CUNY Brooklyn, NY 11210 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 year, 8 months

Dave Cutler recollection about Xenix

by Skip Tavakkolian

This might be interesting to some. It is a piece of a longer conversation between Dave Plummer and Dave Cutler (RSX11, VMS, WinNT) https://youtu.be/9K3eMzF6x28?feature=shared

1 year, 8 months

Found: 4.1BSD User's Manual Volume 2C Comb-Bound

by segaloco

Spotted this and ordered it on eBay https://www.ebay.com/itm/235246689392 After the link is a pretty nondescript comb-bound 4.1BSD User's Manual Volume 2C. I don't think I've seen comb-bound issues prior to the USENIX 4.2BSD set that introduced the Beastie cover. Does anyone know if there was a limited run produced by the Berkeley folks themselves or if this is more likely a one-off someone printed for themselves? Either way, this is an exciting find for the completeness of my library, this would leave 3BSD as the only VAX BSD version I don't have any Volume 2C papers in my bookshelf from. If this does prove to be issue from Berkeley or someone directly adjacent to them, the next thing I hope to figure out is if this has Volume 1 and Volume 2A/2B companions. I find myself curious because the 4BSD Volume 2C I have was following a plain Jane Version 7 Volume 2A/2B rather than also 4BSD 2A/2B, so whoever curated that set either got them that way or clobbered V7 and 4BSD docs together themselves. - Matt G. P.S. Would anyone be interested in some V7 binders? I'm not keen on acquiring too many duplicates so would happily ship them to anyone wanting an original set of the papers from back when. As a bonus, the binders have some nice numbered tabs separating the papers/sections. I actually have three such binders, two that seem to be stock V7 Volume 2A/2B and one that is V7 Volume 1 but slightly tweaked with some "local" pages (to my knowledge, local to MIT Lincoln Labs, they added stuff like the RAND editor). Just let me know, if I don't hear anyone speak for them in a month or so they're going to the CS department at the local uni, they've got a shelf with some 4.3BSD binders that could use some elder influence :)

1 year, 8 months

Re: Found: 4.1BSD User's Manual Volume 2C Comb-Bound

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Clem Cole > Stakrting with V6, Ken/Dennis masters a tape in research, and the IBM > shop is imaging that for people licensing the IP -- *i.e.,* everyone is > getting the same bits on their tape. Although with V6, the famous > "patch tape" leaks independently Actually, TUHS contains two microscopically different V6 distros: Dennis_v6 --------- v6root.gz, v6src.gz and v6doc.gz are a set of three RK05 images of Sixth Edition with root, /usr and documentation, from Dennis Ritchie. Ken_Wellsch_v6 -------------- v6.tape.gz is a copy of the Sixth Edition distribution tape which was sent in by Ken Wellsch. It notes that there are differences between the two, but hadn't investigated what they are. Here are some details: the source files for the kernel are identical, except for sys/ken/main.c, which has the following added in the Wellsch version: printf("RESTRICTED RIGHTS\n\n"); printf("Use, duplication or disclosure is subject to\n"); printf("restrictions stated in Contract with Western\n"); printf("Electric Company, Inc.\n"); (What clearly happened is that after they'd done some distribution, the AT+T lawyers made them add that.) Anyway, as a result, the binary system images 'rkunix', etc are slightly different between the two. Everything else seems to be identical: everything in /bin, /etc, /lib, /usr/bin and /usr/lib are all identical. Noel

1 year, 9 months

Another Find: UNIX Release 5.0 BTL Administrators Manual

by segaloco

Just got this one today, UNIX Release 5.0 Administrator's Manual, BTL version: https://i.imgur.com/hZW1C01.jpg (the one on the right, companion to the one on the left I've documented a bit already). First, an amusing anecdote of how I happened across this one. I hate Amazon. Like despise Amazon. I could go on for hours on the why, but the point is, I do not like Amazon. As such, I rarely, if ever, find myself looking at anything for sale on their site. At some point the past few years I did happen across an auction for the WECo equivalent of this manual on Amazon and nearly broke my anti-Amazon-ness to register and purchase it, but I resisted. It stuck in my mind but wasn't enough to change my opinion. Well, fast-forward to a few weeks ago, I'm recanting this tale to a friend of mine as we're loitering in the lobby of our music space. He's on his laptop so decides to search up UNIX manuals on Amazon to be like see all this stuff you could be getting, you should just get an Amazon account. We look through auctions for a while and it's mostly a chorus of "I have that already" or "That's not relevant" or "I could buy that for pennies on the dollar elsewhere" but then he comes across an auction with no picture saying UNIX 5.0 Manual or something pretty generic like that. No pictures on the main posting, but there is a link saying two copies available. That was the first I learned that a pictureless Amazon posting can then lead to specific auctions or sales that do have pictures, that stuff just apparently doesn't always show up in the search results? In any case, he clicks down into them and this baby pops up. Luckily I was able to avoid registering as he offered to just buy it for me and I hand him the cash. So the result is this document is in my hands due to a deal with Amazon a brokered through a friend so I didn't have to join their site. I still feel like I've done a deal with the devil but hey, uncovered one more obscure thing in the process. Now for some analysis: Only difference on the cover page, like the BTL User's Manual, is additional text indicating "Including BTL Computer Center Standard and Local Commands". Like the User's Manual (and the Release 3.0 manual and other internal/pre-commercial manuals) there is an acknowledgements and preface page prior to the introduction. Added commands compared with a standard issue WECo 5.0 Administrator's Manual include: Section 1: Holmdel: archadmin - archlist, archsched, archque, archinit, archshut - archive administrative commands Indian Hill: bsnap - bsnap - snap baud rate usage findi - findi - find file names corresponding to inode numbers linesnap - linesnap - monitor activity on DH11 or DZ11 lines newids - newids - descend a directory changing owner and group id on files pisnap - pisnap - monitor performance of the operating system snap - snap - monitor activity within the operating system tabsnap - tabsnap - snap system tables vault - vault - save/restore a file system to/from tape Piscataway: archsys - archsys - archive system ds - ds - directory scanner filesave.py - filesave - perform daily filesave procedure fsea - fsea - file system entropy analyzer fss - fss - file system scanner fwall - fwall - write to all users by pathname lacctcms - lacctcms - command summary from per-process accounting records xchng - xchng - exchanges ownership of files Section 8: Div 452 STD: atd - atd - a batch monitor atf - atf - make a job file atr - atr - run a batch job att - att - parse time specification The TOC additionally lists a "trouble.div" page, presumably Div 452-specific trouble reporting stuff, but the manual contains no such page. Based on front-back pages available it doesn't look like the page would've been ripped out or anything, so probably just not actually in the print run. The trouble(8) page in this manual matches one from a standard 5.0 manual. So takeaways here, looks like Holmdel, Indian Hill, and PIscataway may have all had their own backup/archival systems between archadmin(1M)(HO), archsys(1M)(PY), and vault(1M)(IH). There were quite a few enhanced performance snapshot tools in Indian Hill while Piscataway appeared to have some particular filesystem analysis tools. The section 8 at administration tools are interesting in that at(1) itself is also Div 452 as of 5.0, is not in the System V manuals at all. While at(1) then pops up in standard SVR2 manuals, these administrative pieces do not (at least what I've got on hand, they're neither in the comb bound red covered AT&T UNIX User's Manual nor the 5 volume set with the metallic looking alphabet blocks on the cover.) I don't have any SVR3 manuals to check, and my blue wall of SVR4 books I already moved to my new place, so I can't look in those right this second. I can't seem to find either Administrators Manual volume on bitsavers either, so can't check to see if these exist in later versions yet. Anywho, as usual, reach out if there's something in particular you'd like to know about one of these pages, otherwise this is going on the pile I plan on starting work on again once this move is out of the way (and hopefully the last one for a few years at least...) - Matt G.

1 year, 9 months

Re: HCR FOOBAR

by norman＠oclsc.org

Ron Natalie: Really doesn't look like much, just a bar. THey had put `HCR FOOBAR' on the thing with letraset or something but that all flaked off over the years. ==== Pfui, or as some spell it, foo. Norman Wilson Toronto ON PS: Lunchtime. Time to visit the pfuid bar.

1 year, 9 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