Warren et al:
> Does anybody know of a distribution of Mark William's Coherent
> available on-line, or if someone has a distribution could they make a
> copy for me. Ditto for Idris. I'm particularly interested in their
> header files, and how closely they match the contemporary Unix headers.
ftp.mayn.de used to serve the stuff, but it they switched servers,
and it looks as if their archives are still high&dry. Planetmirror
pleads amnesia.I grabbed a copy of mayn's coherent tree last April,
some 2GB tgz'd. This is the complete Coherent installation, in form
of a copy of .dd floppy images, and some additional pieces.
Unfortunately I don't have any FTP server set up anywhere, so do you,
by chance, have a place where I can drop it off?
BTW.. should anyboy's response get nuked by my smtpd, please respond
to usenet54(a)keck.us.
Cornelius
--
Cornelius Keck
cornelius(a)keck.cx / ckeck(a)texoma.net
Hi all,
Does anybody know of a distribution of Mark William's Coherent
available on-line, or if someone has a distribution could they make a
copy for me. Ditto for Idris. I'm particularly interested in their
header files, and how closely they match the contemporary Unix headers.
Thanks,
Warren
Fred N. van Kempen wrote:
> Well, those programs emulate both the CPU (which *is* the same as
> those found in the PRO systems), but *also* the surrounding stuff
> like disk controllers, serial controllers and so on.
>
> It would not be (that) hard to add "PRO" emulation to SimH, if some
> sort of hardware specs are still available.
>
> cheers,
> Fred
This is actually exactly what I have done. The emulator is
available here:
http://xhomer.isani.org/
Tarik
I just thought of a reason _why_ Caldera was unable to clarify the status of
System III - if you look at the documents on Groklaw.net,
http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=legal-docs
one of them's a document between Novell and SCO Original, where the System V
releases are enumerated. Another is a similar document which mentions the
Ancient Unix and their manuals as being part of the deal.
Neither document that I can recall, mentions anything about System III - and
apparently Warren Toomey had to supply them with that, so it would appear
that System III is - quite literally - unclaimed by anyone, apart from its
copyright notices, and thus - since neither The SCO Group nor Novell has laid
claim to it in their copyright battle - it could well be considered Public
Domain.
Just a thought, and don't take my word for it.
--
Wesley Parish
* * *
Clinersterton beademung - in all of love. RIP James Blish
* * *
Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?"
You ask, "What is the most important thing?"
Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata."
I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people."
Jochen Kunz wrote:
...
>I see two problems:
>1. Bus transciever chips.
Yes, this is the big one. It turns out to be solvable, but not using
IC's. National DS3862 would be good, but it just went out of production...
I'm looking into making a "trapzoidal driver" (i.e. controlled edges)
using a FET and RC on the gate. Someone else suggested it and it
sounded like a good idea. Certainly easy to model/simulate first.
-brad
Hi,
I asked this on the classic computer list and I thought I'd ask here
also...
Does anyone have any thoughts on how hard it would be to make a unibus
board which is an IDE controller?
I have 4-6 layer boards fabbed regularly and use modern CPLD's & VHDL on
a regular basis, so the building part looks easy.
I've never looked at unibus controlleqr schematic, but plan to. I'm
assuming much of the old ttl can be sucked into something like a Xilinx
coolrunner CPLD...
I also assume it's reasonably straightforward TTL, and at (by today's
standards) slow speed... true?
Any hints, or gotcha's as far as fabrication or interface? Has anyone
done this (in the modern day, that is :-)
My plan would be to build a 4 layer board of suitable thickness with
gold fingers, using an existing board for reference (any physical size
specs I could read?)
I'm well aware of the foolishness of this on one level, but there's a
side of me that really enjoys this sort of thing... perhaps medication
would help :-)
-brad
medialab.dyndns.org blocked - medialab.freaknet.org is the solution!
dyndns.org blocked our domain "medialab.dyndns.org" for a not
well specified "account violation" problem. we're trying to solve
that, but the real problems is the large amount of google indexes
pointing to medialab.dyndns.org
this free domain was born when we was not able to register a "real"
domain. now we have freaknet.org and medialab.freaknet.org, but there's
nothing to do for all the old links resting into the net :)
this address is used from many users around the world, to telnet,
ssh, rlogin and surf our free computer network!
so, here i announce that medialab.dyndns.org now is not working
anymore, and people can use medialab.freaknet.org instead.
Hope this message will be soon indexed by google :)))
sorry for this - more details and all the story background can be
read at our main site, http://www.freaknet.org in the news section.
tnx all and god bless all PDP/11 in the world.
--
[asbesto : freaknet medialab : radio#cybernet : GPG key on keyservers]
[ MAIL ATTACH, SPAM, HTML, WORD, and msgs larger than 95K > /dev/null ]
[http://www.freaknet.org/asbesto IW9HGS http://kyuzz.org/radiocybernet]
This one was too good to not pass around.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/srs/srsmain.asp?Symbol=SCOX
The sites says (and I quote)
<< The SCO Group, Inc., a small-cap growth company in the technology sector, is
expected to significantly underperform the market over the next six months with
very high risk. >>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
norman(a)nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson) wrote:
> You mean you've restored the original version of cat that had only one option,
> [...]
Notice my use of the words "nearly" and "almost" in the part you responded to.
Seriously though, you gotta agree that until 4.3BSD inclusive, Berkeley was
basically adding to and extending V7. Sure they added a *lot* and extended
many of the existing facilities, but with very few exceptions, it was all
additive, virtually no V7 facility (except the mpx you mentioned) was removed.
Yes, they added fsck, but icheck is still there! (No one uses it of course,
but knowing that nobody removed it gives a warm fuzzy feeling.) The same goes
for almost everything else.
Here is the acid test: time-teleport a V7 user from 1979 to a VAX running
4.3BSD, set PATH=/bin:/usr/bin (no /usr/ucb), do stty old (old tty driver) and
stty ek (erase # kill @) and see if he feels at home or not.
Of course I never use my systems in this way, I make extensive use of Berkeley
UNIX facilities, but I like it much better to use a system that is additive
rather than substitutive with respect to Original UNIX.
MS
