patv(a)monmouth.com wrote:
> Personally, I^Rd love to see OSF1 released open source.
Then why don't YOU release it as open source? Yes, you personally.
Pull out your personal copy of the source (I sure hope you've had enough
brains to smuggle one home with you when you left HP/Comfuq), put it on
a bunch of Free Software FTP sites (IFCTF would gladly host it), and
announce it to the world. And while you are at it, shoot a few cops and
hang their heads on a wall as war trophys (in the humanity's war for
liberation of all software, of course).
You've also mentioned in another post about good jobs in your area going
away. Why don't you offer your technical skills and expertise to Iran?
I'm sure your engineering expertise would be useful to their nuclear
weapons program, and you could thus put your skills to serve a good
cause, helping make missiles to annihilate evil copyrighting nations.
Space Falcon,
Programletarian Freedom Fighter,
Interplanetary Internationale
Just a personal commentary on that article from the local newspaper.
I live in Freehold, a few miles from the Holmdel facility, and I used to
work in Holmdel some time back. I worked on several 68K based boards used
in a product called DACS. I worked on both hardware and firmware,
maintained UNIX for several groups, struggled with nmake and software
manufacturing for several products (bugging both Glenn Fowler and David
Korn when new nmake releases broke builds), supported the pcc compiler as
a cross compiler, etc., for DACS and other products. I was also
responsible for the architecture of something called the Line Monitoring
Equipment (LME), used in some undersea cable systems, well before
Submarine Systems was sold off to Tyco. I can't tell you how many hours I
spent in that building. It was fun.
Another loss to the UNIX community that I can personally report was the
closing, one year ago this month, of the old DEC Manalpan facility (UNX).
This was the home of VAX System V, a large portion of Ultrix, and
everything that made up OSF1/Digital UNIX/Tru64 UNIX except for kernel,
drivers, and several other components (although I personally did some
kernel work on occasion). We did shell and utilities, about 1/2 of X,
Motif, CDE, installation, mail, and other parts of the OS that made it
useful. If you look at old uucp headers anywhere on usenet, any of the
traffic with headers that included systems with "unx" in the name was
routed through this facility. I was there from when it was Digital
through Compaq and finally HP, almost all the way through to the closing.
In general, the whole area is undergoing a massive transition. If I had
to guess, I'd say it is mostly due to the downswing in telecom, followed
closely by the closing of Fort Monmouth. The latter, I think, is the
death blow for technology in this region.
For hardware developers, not much left at all around the area, and
software people have to either go financial in NYC, or work for a
pharmaceutical or insurance company. Not much room left for innovation
here. Sad.
Pat
>
> http://app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060430/BUSINESS/604300358/1003
>
> Coming down
>
> The developer buying Lucent Technologies' 472-acre campus in Holmdel
> plans to tear down the massive 2-million-square-foot research center
> that has been home to Bell Labs for the past 44 years.
> Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 04/30/06
> BY DAVID P. WILLIS
> BUSINESS WRITER
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Monmouth Internet MI-Webmail.
http://www.monmouth.com/
http://app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060430/BUSINESS/604300358/1003
Coming down
The developer buying Lucent Technologies' 472-acre campus in Holmdel
plans to tear down the massive 2-million-square-foot research center
that has been home to Bell Labs for the past 44 years.
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 04/30/06
BY DAVID P. WILLIS
BUSINESS WRITER
As the sale of Lucent Technologies' behemoth Bell Labs research center
on Crawfords Corner Road in Holmdel moves forward, one thing seems certain.
Preferred Real Estate Investments Inc., a developer that specializes in
redeveloping obsolete buildings and properties, will knock down the 2
million-square-foot structure, one of the largest office buildings in
New Jersey.
"I have walked through that building a dozen times. It is a crime that
we can't figure out a way to reuse this building," said Michael G.
O'Neill, founder and chief executive officer of Preferred Real Estate
Investments. "There is just no way. It is just absolutely and utterly
unusable."
The way the building was designed, using concrete structural walls and
hallways that run along the outside of the building, makes it impossible
to redevelop, O'Neill said. "It was built for a single purpose that no
longer exists," he said.
The company has not yet determined how it will take down the building.
The large ponds on the property, as well as its road system, will be
used by the developer.
Lucent is selling the six-story building to Preferred for an undisclosed
price. On Thursday, Lucent spokesman John Skalko said a closing on the
deal is "imminent."
The original building opened in 1962 and was expanded in 1964 and 1982.
It was once home to as many as 5,600 employees. But only 1,054 work
there now as Lucent has cut jobs and spun off businesses. The company
plans to move the remaining workers to offices in Murray Hill and
Whippany by the end of August 2007 as it seeks to make the most use of
its real estate holdings.
Meanwhile, Preferred Real Estate Investments, a developer based in
Conshohocken, Pa., said it will involve township officials and residents
to come up with a plan for the 472-acre property.
Neighbor Barbara Daly said she would like to see any future development
limited to the building's current location on the large property.
She also worried about traffic. Even at its height, Lucent's staggered
work hours kept traffic down, said Daly, who has lived in Holmdel for 14
years.
"Part of the charm of Holmdel is the rural feeling," said Daly. "I don't
think we need structures visible from Crawfords Corner Road or Roberts
Road."
Holmdel resident Teresa M. Graw said the property should continue to be
used for office and laboratory space by high-tech companies.
"Any new construction should go forward with an understanding and
respect for the beautiful open spaces, panoramic views and high
environmental quality that the property offers, for these attributes are
truly what will continue to bring the most added value to the property
in the long run," Graw said in an e-mail.
The design of the new buildings could take into account the
architectural significance of the original, she said. It was designed by
Finnish architect Eero Saarinen, the designer of the Gateway Arch in St.
Louis, and is encased in a shell of reflective glass.
"It seems to me that they have to somehow capture that, the history, the
flavor of the property's past," Graw said.
O'Neill said there is no formal plan yet for the property. The company
does not contemplate any industrial, retail or high-density residential
housing development there.
"This property is a magnificent setting for corporate users," O'Neill
said. "While the buildings are antiquated, the site should be very, very
attractive."
Preferred also would keep the property's water tower, designed by
Saarinen, which people say looks like a giant transistor.
"We think that is really neat," O'Neill said. "The significance of
telecommunications shouldn't be forgotten."
He believes any design for the property would include several buildings,
which would total less than 2 million square feet of office space.
He also said they will have to try to explore some other "low density
use," such as age-restricted housing, that may be appropriate for the
site. The property is currently zoned for office and laboratory use. Any
other type of development may require a zoning change, said Christopher
Shultz, the township administrator.
"We know the sensitivity of the open space along the road and the view,"
O'Neill said. "The challenge we have on this site is to maintain that
bucolic feeling, but create something that is economic."
Founded in 1992, Preferred specializes in buying closed properties, such
as manufacturing plants and corporate offices or headquarters, which
were central locations in a town. The company owns properties from
Connecticut to Georgia worth more than $1.5 billion.
"We go in and look at these things that have clearly become antiquated
from what they were," O'Neill said. "We figure out how to design and
envision a new life for those sites."
In Hamilton in Mercer County, Preferred is redeveloping an old toilet
factory formerly owned by American Standard Cos., converting the
World-War-I-era building into 450,000 square feet of office space.
Hamilton Mayor Glen Gilmore said Preferred worked with the township,
creating a building that is filling with tenants.
"They are people who keep their word and are able to take a challenging
project and do something unique with it," Gilmore said of the developer.
In Holmdel, Preferred executives have already introduced themselves to
officials and plan on having a public meeting with residents as well.
Mayor Serena DiMaso said the town is looking forward to working with
Preferred.
The township wants to protect its tax base, DiMaso said. Lucent, the
township's largest taxpayer, paid $3.19 million in taxes last year on
the property, which is assessed at $98.5 million.
"We made them understand that we need the ratable base to remain as
constant as it can be," DiMaso said. "They (residents) understand that
it cannot be Lucent anymore. They are willing to make the compromise for
something else."
The mayor said she would like to see it continue to be a development
with office or laboratory space. Preferred is aware of the township's
commitment to open space, she said.
Township Committeeman Terence Wall said he envisions a corporate campus
that does not include housing. The property also could include space for
a library and offices for the board of education, which are now located
in town hall, he said.
"They can achieve the return on the investment that they require without
a housing component," Wall said.
Before the sale was announced last month, Holdmel's elected officials
had asked the township's planner to look at the best uses for the
property, including those that may require a zoning change, said
Schultz. The planner also will look at whether the state's redevelopment
law applies to the property.
> in particular - I've seen RFS be mentioned. This was
> AT&T's implementattion of transparent real-time (for
> contrast with UUCP, FTP, etc.) remote file access.
It wasn't real time, it was "remote file system" == RFS.
It was different than NFS in that it was stateful and that it knew that the
other side knew what it knew (think ioctls, yuck).
My officemate worked on it, it was problematic. Don't go there. NFS is
bad enough, but it works.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.comhttp://www.bitkeeper.com
From: "A. Wik" <aw(a)aw.gs>
>
> In the context of non-local file systems - Sun's NFS
> in particular - I've seen RFS be mentioned. This was
> AT&T's implementattion of transparent real-time (for
> contrast with UUCP, FTP, etc.) remote file access.
>
> But that's all I know. Does anyone know of useful
> sources of information (or just anecdotes, for that
> matter)?
>
> -aw
There's an entire section devoted to RFS in the USL SVR4 Network
User's And Administrator's Guide. What is it you after
Exactly?
-Berny
Hi,
in the end of May i'm going to recover a PDP11/23, a
MicroPDP11/23 (maybe? i've not seen it) and some other stuff for
our computer museum.
Does someone have an idea about what flavour of Unix can be run,
if this is possible, on 11/23? :)
greets from sicilia, italy!
--
[ asbesto : IW9HGS : freaknet medialab : radiocybernet : poetry ]
[ http://freaknet.org/asbestohttp://papuasia.org/radiocybernet ]
[ NON SCRIVERMI USANDO LETTERE ACCENTATE, NON MANDARMI ALLEGATI ]
[ *I DELETE* EMAIL > 100K, ATTACHMENTS, HTML, M$-WORD DOC, SPAM ]
In the context of non-local file systems - Sun's NFS
in particular - I've seen RFS be mentioned. This was
AT&T's implementattion of transparent real-time (for
contrast with UUCP, FTP, etc.) remote file access.
But that's all I know. Does anyone know of useful
sources of information (or just anecdotes, for that
matter)?
-aw
If this helps at all, I've been working (very, very slowly) on a port of
v32 to Intel platforms. At first I used gcc for some kernel work, but
quickly realized that it would be overwhelming to the final v7 system.
Since I don't want to do the work twice, I looked for a different compiler
suite. I switched to the ACK compiler suite and just finished the WinXP
cross compiler work. It has a pdp11 back end, which I have yet to try,
that may be useful.
It isn't gcc, but ir does do ANSI C and the i386 assembler seems to be
pretty complete. Let me know if there's any interest and I'll put it up
on my site for download.
Pat
> Toby Thain napisał(a):
>
> >On 24-Apr-06, at 9:05 AM, Wesley Parish wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Quoting Andrzej Popielewicz <vasco(a)icpnet.pl>:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Wesley Parish napisał(a):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >It can't be done.
> >
> >As others point out, the program is many times (100x or more?) too
> >big -- likely even gcc 1.x is far too big, but gcc {2,3,4}.x are all
> >meant for large 32-bit systems.
> >
> >However, cross-compilation can certainly be easily done. I have made
> >a PDP-11 back-end for lcc[1] (not quite complete but shows that it
> >can be done), which is an ANSI (c89) compiler[2]. lcc is a much
> >smaller and simpler compiler than gcc, but its executables are still
> >massively outsize for PDP-11 systems.
> >
> >
> Yes, even running vi or csh in Ultrix (in simh pdp11) produced message :
> too big. After setting cpu to 3072K it worked(setting to 4096 K hanged
> the system BTW).
> Cross compilation has also this advantage , that You have better editors
> to Your disposal and You can work faster.
> Well native cc seems to be good enough, using pdp11 in emulator we have
> anyway only hobbyst license .
>
> Andrzej
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Monmouth Internet MI-Webmail.
http://www.monmouth.com/
On Apr 29, 2006, at 7:00 PM, tuhs-request(a)minnie.tuhs.org wrote:
>
> I don't *think* that was it - I remember seeing those boxes at some
> trade show later, but this was a different animal - it was really a
> piece of test equipment for embedded processors (actually it might
> have been a socket-level simulator, that you used to replace an 1802
> or something so you could see what it was doing) I think.
It was the Tek 8560 multi-user development system.
Different models had either an 11/23 or 11/73 processor
with their own peripheral interfaces.
Manuals on bitsavers.com under tektronix/85xx
