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

Clem cole clemc at ccc.com
Wed Jan 11 05:21:46 AEST 2017

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 <lm at mcvoy.com> 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 <lm at mcvoy.com> 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 <schily at schily.net> wrote:
>>>>> Berny Goodheart <berny at berwynlodge.com> 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

More information about the TUHS mailing list