Re: low-end vaxen and unix - TUHS

30 Jan 1999

Alan F R Bain &lt;A.F.R.Bain(a)dpmms.cam.ac.uk&gt; wrote:

...
  I think this is being grossly unfair and irrelevant;
the information
 provided was that NetBSD was a viable alternative which is correct.
 All my modern machines run NetBSD and the only non supported hardware
 is a 9 track magtape drive on a sun -- I don't consider that 
 unreasonable as it's rather an unusal model. 
How is this relevant to NetBSD/vax? Remember, architectures other than VAX do
not exist as far as I am concerned, so when I say "NetBSD", I always always
always mean NetBSD/vax.

...
  I don't think PUPS
 is the place for OS favouritism arguments, so please desist. 
It is necessary, however, to protect the innocent novice users from falling
into the claws of that predator.

...
  To add a constructive comment, there's been a lot
written about the
 history and tree of development of early unix up to the SYSV
 and BSD split occured, but I'm pretty unsure about the rest.
 It seems that BSD2 and BSD4 developed pretty much in parallel,
 the former targetting the PDP and the latter the VAX;  Warren's
 graphing data provide an interesting view of what happened,
 but I'm unsure how closely related the two developments were
 (especially in time of releases, introduction of new features
 etc.).  I'd be grateful if someone more knowledgable could fill
 in some of the details. 
First of all, this is absolutely irrelevant to the question of binary
compatibility between 4.2BSD, 4.3BSD, and Ultrix.

Second, the development didn't "split" into PDP-11 and VAX. Instead, the
MAINSTREAM UNIX system _CONVERTED_ from PDP-11 to VAX, and did so at AT&T,
before the torch was turned over to UC Berkeley. 2BSD was not mainstream UNIX.
In fact, it was not UNIX at all, since it didn't contain a kernel, only a
patchkit of userland enhancements. Now if you are talking about 2.xBSD, as
opposed to the real 2BSD, it is a different story altogether, and it isn't
really Berkeley Software DIstribution, since it wasn't developed at Berkeley.
2.xBSD is an unauthorized, unapproved, and unblessed side branch, and as far as
I'm concerned, it doesn't exist.

Michael Sokolov
TUHS 4BSD Coordinator
4.3BSD-* Maintainer
Quasijarus Project Principal Architect & Developer
Phone: 440-449-0299 or 216-217-2579
ARPA Internet SMTP mail: mxs46(a)k2.scl.cwru.edu
TUHS WWW page: http://minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au/TUHS/
Quasijarus WWW page: http://minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au/Quasijarus/

Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA18377
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 11:50:52 +1100 (EST)
...
 From Thor Lancelot Simon &lt;tls(a)rek.tjls.com&gt; Sat
Jan 30 10:50:36 1999 
Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com
[166.84.0.212])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA18372
	for &lt;pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt;; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 11:50:42 +1100 (EST)
Received: from panix7.panix.com (root(a)panix7.nyc.access.net [166.84.0.232])
	by mail1.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with ESMTP id TAA07147
	for &lt;pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt;; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:50:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from tls@localhost) by panix7.panix.com (8.8.8/8.7.1/PanixN1.0) id TAA08049 for
pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au; Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:50:36 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:50:36 -0500
From: Thor Lancelot Simon &lt;tls(a)rek.tjls.com&gt;
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Subject: Re: low-end vaxen and unix
Message-ID: &lt;19990129195036.A7942(a)rek.tjls.com&gt;
Reply-To: tls(a)rek.tjls.com
References: &lt;199901292249.RAA04815(a)skybridge.scl.cwru.edu&gt;
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i
In-Reply-To: &lt;199901292249.RAA04815(a)skybridge.scl.cwru.edu&gt;; from Michael Sokolov on
Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 05:49:42PM -0500
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 05:49:42PM -0500, Michael Sokolov wrote:
...
  Thor Lancelot Simon &lt;tls(a)rek.tjls.com&gt; wrote:

  As far as I recall, stock 4.3 won't run on
the MV2000, 3100, etc.  
 4.3BSD-Quasijarus will eventually. For now if you want to run the
 4.3BSD-Quasijarus userland, run it atop of an Ultrix kernel. Will work
 beautifully.

  There is a reasonable alternative.  NetBSD runs
on the 2000, many 3100 models,
 and even the 4000/60, which Ultrix never ran on.  
 A warning for naive list readers. NetBSD's definition of "runs on" means
that
 you have to part with all of your mass storage devices and use the bare CPU as
 diskless peering-at toy. 
That's nonsense.  As I stated in the message to which you were purportedly
responding, NetBSD supports both SCSI and MFM (RD-series) disks on the machines
in question.  It also supports MSCP disks on most systems to which they
can be attached, and TMSCP tapes; and, for the truly masochistic, last
time I tried the RL02 on my '750 worked, too.

Let me ask you once again: why do you become so combative when others simply
express technical opinions (or, in this case, state facts) with which you
happen to disagree?

Are you actively _trying_ to disrupt this list just so that nobody can
mention the word "NetBSD" on it for fear of being flamed?

Thor

Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA18413
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:07:48 +1100 (EST)
...
 From Warren Toomey &lt;wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt; Sat
Jan 30 11:09:36 1999 Received: from henry.cs.adfa.edu.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au
[131.236.21.158])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA18408
	for &lt;pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au&gt;; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:07:40 +1100 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost)
	by henry.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA09808
	for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:09:36 +1100 (EST)
	(envelope-from wkt)
From: Warren Toomey &lt;wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt;
Message-Id: &lt;199901300109.MAA09808(a)henry.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt;
Subject: Re: low-end vaxen and unix
In-Reply-To: &lt;19990129195036.A7942(a)rek.tjls.com&gt; from Thor Lancelot Simon at
"Jan 29, 1999  7:50:36 pm"
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (Unix Heritage Society)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:09:36 +1100 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Thor Lancelot Simon:
...
  On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 05:49:42PM -0500, Michael
Sokolov wrote:
  A warning for naive list readers. NetBSD's
definition of "runs on" means that
you have to part with all of your mass storage devices and use the bare CPU as
 diskless peering-at toy.  
 That's nonsense.  As I stated in the message to which you were purportedly
 responding, NetBSD supports both SCSI and MFM (RD-series) disks on the machines
 in question.  It also supports MSCP disks on most systems to which they
 can be attached, and TMSCP tapes; and, for the truly masochistic, last
 time I tried the RL02 on my '750 worked, too.

 Let me ask you once again: why do you become so combative when others simply
 express technical opinions (or, in this case, state facts) with which you
 happen to disagree?

 Are you actively _trying_ to disrupt this list just so that nobody can
 mention the word "NetBSD" on it for fear of being flamed?
 Thor 
Ok, this is a warning to anybody who posts a reply to the thread above
in the mailing list. If you say something which is religious, zealous
or inflammatory, then I will issue a warning to you in the list. 2nd
time I issue a warning, I will start to moderate your postings.

This whole issue is like Linux vs. FreeBSD. The BEST answer to the
question: which is the best? is to get the user to try both out, and
they can make their own choice. As several people have explained, the
choice is a combination of technical issues AND aesthetics. And we all
have different tastes.

So respect each others tastes, and don't hassle them.

	Warren

Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA18468
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:19:40 +1100 (EST)
...
 From Warren Toomey &lt;wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt; Sat
Jan 30 11:21:28 1999 Received: from henry.cs.adfa.edu.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au
[131.236.21.158])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA18463
	for &lt;pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au&gt;; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:19:32 +1100 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost)
	by henry.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA09827
	for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:21:28 +1100 (EST)
	(envelope-from wkt)
From: Warren Toomey &lt;wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt;
Message-Id: &lt;199901300121.MAA09827(a)henry.cs.adfa.edu.au&gt;
Subject: Is 2.xBSD `approved'?
In-Reply-To: &lt;199901300010.TAA04883(a)skybridge.scl.cwru.edu&gt; from Michael Sokolov at
"Jan 29, 1999  7:10:23 pm"
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (Unix Heritage Society)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 12:21:28 +1100 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

In article by Michael Sokolov:
...
  Now if you are talking about 2.xBSD, as
 opposed to the real 2BSD, it is a different story altogether, and it isn't
 really Berkeley Software DIstribution, since it wasn't developed at Berkeley.
2.xBSD is an unauthorized, unapproved, and unblessed side branch, and as far as
 I'm concerned, it doesn't exist. 
I hate to say this, but 2.xBSD, where x was 8, 9 and 10, was developed with
the involvement of several people at the CSRG, e.g Keith Bostic, Mike Karels,
Kirk McKusick. I'm sure Steven Schultz could give me some more names.

Although 2.xBSD is definitely not the branch which got the most attention,
I wouldn't say it was unauthorised, unapproved nor unblessed.

Actually, given that the CSRG is now disbanded, it is fair to say that
both 2.11BSD and 4.3-Quasijarus are in exactly the same boat: side branches
of the main BSD development, maintained by individuals who were not members
of the original CSRG.

Now, let us return to the more important issue of helping each other out,
rather than getting at each other. All UNIXes are worthy topics, and do
not deserve ridicule.

	Warren

Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA20270
	for pups-liszt; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 02:39:33 +1100 (EST)