26 Jun
2009
26 Jun
'09
1:44 a.m.
Can anybody explain why the 2BSDs that were distributed with kernel source
code are numbered 2.8BSD upwards. Why start numbering at 8?
P.S Actually I have a 2.79BSD in the archive which came out in 1979 just
before 2.8BSD, so could it be that the '2.79' means 1979, and numbering
followed incrementally after that?
Cheers,
Warren
26 Jun
26 Jun
2:27 a.m.
The FreeBSD (similar in the other BSDs) family tree file shows:
Sixth Edition (V6) -----*
\ |
\ |
\ |
Seventh Edition (V7) |
\ |
\ 1BSD
32V |
\ 2BSD---------------*
\ / |
\ / |
\/ |
3BSD |
| |
4.0BSD 2.7.9BSD
| |
4.1BSD --------------> 2.8BSD
| |
so if the 2.7.9 is really 2.79, I'd like to know about it.
And the chronology lists:
2BSD mid 1978 [QCU]
75 2BSD tapes shipped
2.7.9BSD ?? [SMS]
2.8BSD 1981-07-xx [KSJ]
2.8.1BSD 1982-01-xx [QCU]
set of performance improvements
[KSJ] Michael J. Karels, Carl F. Smith, and William F. Jolitz.
Changes in the Kernel in 2.9BSD. Second Berkeley Software
Distribution UNIX Version 2.9, July, 1983.
[QCU] Salus, Peter H. A quarter century of UNIX.
[SMS] Steven M. Schultz. 2.11BSD, UNIX for the PDP-11.
Googling for [KSJ] is beyond my humble abilities... The numbers from
[QCU] are about right for 2.7.9 to really be 2.79, eg the 79th tape
that left Berkeley before they switched... But that's wild
speculation based on little more than whimsy and knowing how geeks
sometimes think...
Warner
5739
days inactive
5739
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
M. Warner Losh -
Warren Toomey