Re: [TUHS] the guy who brought up SVr4 on Sun machines

On Jan 10, 2017, at 11:21 AM, Clem cole &lt;clemc(a)ccc.com&gt; wrote: Correct- that was the path as I know it. i.e. ITS gave Unix more and job control. Which is my point. When some one starts pontificating about how SYS/BSD/Linux this that or the other thing - often the idea came elsewhere. Wide distribution and use was supplied by the XXX Channel but there were many many fathers and mothers Sent from my PDP-7 Running UNIX V0 expect things to be almost but not quite. >> On Jan 10, 2017, at 10:42 AM, Larry McVoy &lt;lm(a)mcvoy.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:33:59AM -0800, Warner Losh wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Larry McVoy &lt;lm(a)mcvoy.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 09:47:28AM -0800, Warner Losh wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Joerg Schilling &lt;schily(a)schily.net&gt; wrote: >>>>> Berny Goodheart &lt;berny(a)berwynlodge.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Here???s the breakdown of SVR4 kernel lineage as I recall it. I am pretty sure this is correct. But I am sure many of you will put me right if I am wrong ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> From BSD: >>>>>> TCP/IP <=== NO, Svr4 uses a STREAMS based TCP/IP stack >>>> >>>> svr4's stack is derived from BSD with a STREAMS packaging. These files >>>> were listed as "in AT&T's code w/o BSD headers" in the countersuit for >>>> the infamous AT&T lawsuit. >>> >>> Yeah, I think Convergent did the STREAMS packaging, then Lachman bought >>> the stack, I ported it twice (ETA & SCO), then I believe it was Bill >>> Coleman (not positive on the name, it was the VP of networking) at Sun >>> that bought rights to the stack from Lachman under pretty unfavorable >>> terms, then Sun got unhappy with the terms (and the performance), >>> contracted with Mentat to do a new stack and I think that stack is what >>> remains in Solaris. >> >> I did some work on the Lachman stack for sysvr4 machines at Wollongong >> in 89 or so as well... It was very BSDish code that had been involved >> in a horrific traffic accident and rebuilt in a STREAMS framework. I'm >> not at all surprised that it didn't scale, because at the time it >> barely worked... > > Yup, been there, lived that. Until Mentat came along it was the only game > in town. I don't normally tell people I'm the guy that gave SCO networking > because it "barely worked" as you say. > > I did get SCO to ship sw (STREAMS watch) that was sort of like a top for > STREAMS - it was useful to run this while beating on the stack and then > go tune the internal limits for better performance. I can't imagine > anyone wants this any more, or if it even runs, but it's my copyright > and I stuck a copy in http://mcvoy.com/lm/sw.shar >