From aek at spies.com  Sat Jun  7 11:20:25 2003
From: aek at spies.com (Al Kossow)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 18:20:25 -0700
Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al
Message-ID: <200306070120.h571KPRj019350@spies.com>


I've located the SOLO RK05 disc image. I tested it with
SIMH, and it appears to work. The command language is a
bit opaque; it would be a great help if you could find
out if they might still have the documentation, even if
they didn't have the code itself.

Hopefully, Bob Supnik can get permission to add this
to the SIMH software archive.

the image temporarily at www.spies.com/aek/solo.dsk

---

LIST(CATALOG,ALL,CONSOLE)
CONSOLE: 
SOLO SYSTEM FILES

AUTOLOAD     SCRATCH      PROTECTED         1 PAGES
BACKUP       SEQCODE      PROTECTED         4 PAGES
BACKUPMAN    ASCII        PROTECTED         3 PAGES
BACKUPTEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        14 PAGES
BUILDBATTEXT ASCII        UNPROTECTED       1 PAGES
BUILDTEXT    ASCII        UNPROTECTED       4 PAGES
CARDS        SEQCODE      PROTECTED         5 PAGES
CARDSMAN     ASCII        PROTECTED         2 PAGES
CARDSTEXT    ASCII        PROTECTED        12 PAGES
CATALOG      SCRATCH      PROTECTED        15 PAGES
CDISKTEXT    ASCII        UNPROTECTED      10 PAGES
COMMANDS     ASCII        UNPROTECTED       1 PAGES
CONSOLE      SEQCODE      PROTECTED         1 PAGES
CONSOLEMAN   ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
CONSOLETEXT  ASCII        PROTECTED         8 PAGES
COPY         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         4 PAGES
COPYMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         2 PAGES
COPYTEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        12 PAGES
CPASCAL      SEQCODE      PROTECTED         7 PAGES
CPASCALMAN   ASCII        PROTECTED         3 PAGES
CPASCALTEXT  ASCII        PROTECTED        18 PAGES
CPASS1       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        20 PAGES
CPASS1TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        54 PAGES
CPASS2       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        26 PAGES
CPASS2TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        72 PAGES
CPASS3       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        35 PAGES
CPASS3TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        90 PAGES
CPASS4       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        27 PAGES
CPASS4TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        71 PAGES
CPASS5       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        20 PAGES
CPASS5TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        56 PAGES
CPASS6       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        16 PAGES
CPASS6TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        53 PAGES
CPASS7       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        18 PAGES
CPASS7TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        56 PAGES
CPTEXT       ASCII        UNPROTECTED       2 PAGES
DISK         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         2 PAGES
DISKMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
DISKTEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED         9 PAGES
DO           SEQCODE      PROTECTED        11 PAGES
DOMAN        ASCII        PROTECTED         3 PAGES
DOTEXT       ASCII        PROTECTED        26 PAGES
EDIT         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         8 PAGES
EDITMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         5 PAGES
EDITTEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        20 PAGES
FILE         SEQCODE      PROTECTED        20 PAGES
FILEMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         3 PAGES
FILETEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        54 PAGES
IO           SEQCODE      PROTECTED         4 PAGES
IOTEXT       ASCII        PROTECTED        13 PAGES
JOB          SEQCODE      PROTECTED        40 PAGES
JOBBUFFER1   SCRATCH      PROTECTED        20 PAGES
JOBBUFFER2   SCRATCH      PROTECTED        20 PAGES
JOBINPUT     SEQCODE      PROTECTED         3 PAGES
JOBINPUTTEXT ASCII        PROTECTED         6 PAGES
JOBOUTPUT    SEQCODE      PROTECTED         2 PAGES
JOBOUTPUTTXT ASCII        PROTECTED         6 PAGES
JOBPREFIX    ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
JOBSERVICE   SEQCODE      PROTECTED         3 PAGES
JOBSERVICETX ASCII        PROTECTED         8 PAGES
JOBSTREAM    CONCODE      PROTECTED        17 PAGES
JOBSTREAMTXT ASCII        PROTECTED        50 PAGES
KERNELTEXT1  ASCII        UNPROTECTED     134 PAGES
KERNELTEXT2  ASCII        UNPROTECTED     129 PAGES
KERNELTEXT3  ASCII        UNPROTECTED     147 PAGES
KERNELTEXT4  ASCII        UNPROTECTED     171 PAGES
LIST         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         7 PAGES
LISTMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         2 PAGES
LISTTEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        19 PAGES
MAKETEMP     SEQCODE      PROTECTED         4 PAGES
MAKETEMPMAN  ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
MAKETEMPTEXT ASCII        PROTECTED        12 PAGES
MOVE         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         2 PAGES
MOVEMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
MOVETEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        10 PAGES
MTOPTEXT     ASCII        UNPROTECTED       4 PAGES
NEXT         SCRATCH      PROTECTED       255 PAGES
PIPELINE     CONCODE      PROTECTED         4 PAGES
PIPELINETEXT ASCII        PROTECTED         8 PAGES
PREFIX       ASCII        PROTECTED         6 PAGES
PRINTER      SEQCODE      PROTECTED         3 PAGES
PRINTERMAN   ASCII        PROTECTED         2 PAGES
PRINTERTEXT  ASCII        PROTECTED        11 PAGES
READ         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         4 PAGES
READMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         2 PAGES
READTEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        12 PAGES
REALTIME     CONCODE      PROTECTED        11 PAGES
REALTIMETEXT ASCII        PROTECTED        23 PAGES
RKBOOTTEXT   ASCII        UNPROTECTED       6 PAGES
SOLO         CONCODE      PROTECTED        18 PAGES
SOLOBATTEXT  ASCII        UNPROTECTED       4 PAGES
SOLOCOPY     ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
SOLOFILES    ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
SOLOTEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        52 PAGES
SPASCAL      SEQCODE      PROTECTED         7 PAGES
SPASCALMAN   ASCII        PROTECTED         3 PAGES
SPASCALTEXT  ASCII        PROTECTED        18 PAGES
SPASS1       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        20 PAGES
SPASS1TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        53 PAGES
SPASS2       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        26 PAGES
SPASS2TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        73 PAGES
SPASS3       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        35 PAGES
SPASS3TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        91 PAGES
SPASS4       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        26 PAGES
SPASS4TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        65 PAGES
SPASS5       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        19 PAGES
SPASS5TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        54 PAGES
SPASS6       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        16 PAGES
SPASS6TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        53 PAGES
SPASS7       SEQCODE      PROTECTED        18 PAGES
SPASS7TEXT   ASCII        PROTECTED        56 PAGES
START        SEQCODE      PROTECTED         3 PAGES
STARTMAN     ASCII        PROTECTED         3 PAGES
STARTTEXT    ASCII        PROTECTED        11 PAGES
SUPERMAC     ASCII        UNPROTECTED      30 PAGES
TAPE         SEQCODE      PROTECTED         3 PAGES
TAPEMAN      ASCII        PROTECTED         2 PAGES
TAPETEXT     ASCII        PROTECTED        14 PAGES
TEMP1        SCRATCH      PROTECTED       255 PAGES
TEMP2        SCRATCH      PROTECTED       255 PAGES
TOTAPETEXT   ASCII        UNPROTECTED       4 PAGES
WRITE        SEQCODE      PROTECTED         2 PAGES
WRITEMAN     ASCII        PROTECTED         1 PAGES
WRITETEXT    ASCII        PROTECTED         9 PAGES
XMAC         ASCII        UNPROTECTED       1 PAGES
   125 ENTRIES
  3391 PAGES


From aek at spies.com  Sat Jun  7 11:39:12 2003
From: aek at spies.com (Al Kossow)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 18:39:12 -0700
Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al
Message-ID: <200306070139.h571dCPG020890@spies.com>


I've located a paper which describes the system, which I've put
up along with the disc image in www.spies.com/aek/solo

I'll see about extracting all of the files.

From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Sat Jun  7 19:55:11 2003
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 21:55:11 +1200
Subject: [pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al
In-Reply-To: <200306070120.h571KPRj019350@spies.com>
References: <200306070120.h571KPRj019350@spies.com>
Message-ID: <200306072155.11912.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

Firstly, many thanks.  I've downloaded it, and will get on to it right away.

Re: Command laguage - judging from what the book "The Architecture of 
Concurrent Programs" says, I always assumed that the job control language was 
pascal itself,  eg, pg 70, 71:

"if the user forgets which programs are available, he may for example type:
	help
(or anything else).  The system responds by writing
	not executable, try
	list(catalog, seqcode, console)
The suggested command lists the names of all sequential programs on the 
console."

"Still more information about a program can be gained by reading its manual
	copy(readman, console)
"
and, pg 75:

"The program does not know whether it is being called by another program or 
directly from the console."

Thus like the LispMachine, the operating system is user-extensible.

If it's any help, I've got the book, and it does contain a brief section on 
usage - I'm sure I could make a valid case for Fair Use if I copied the user 
HOWTO out and posted it on my web site as a HOWTO for anyone as interested as 
me in Concurrent Pascal and Solo - understanding that the section is only 9 
pages long, and about 4 of those are half-pages.  Thus it is obvious I am not 
intending to copy the entire book and thus bilk Prentice-Hall out of sales.

Only thing is, I need to get in touch with Prentice-Hall, the publishers, to 
put my case to them.

Anyone know the name of the person I should get in touch with?

Wesley Parish



On Sat, 07 Jun 2003 13:20, Al Kossow wrote:
> I've located the SOLO RK05 disc image. I tested it with
> SIMH, and it appears to work. The command language is a
> bit opaque; it would be a great help if you could find
> out if they might still have the documentation, even if
> they didn't have the code itself.
>
> Hopefully, Bob Supnik can get permission to add this
> to the SIMH software archive.
>
> the image temporarily at www.spies.com/aek/solo.dsk
>
> ---
>
> LIST(CATALOG,ALL,CONSOLE)
> CONSOLE:
> SOLO SYSTEM FILES
>
<snip>

> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups

-- 
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."

From ggs at shiresoft.com  Sun Jun 22 16:07:02 2003
From: ggs at shiresoft.com (Guy Sotomayor)
Date: 21 Jun 2003 23:07:02 -0700
Subject: [pups] Bootstrap for TS11 (or TU80)
Message-ID: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com>

Hi,

I'm trying to locate a PDP-11 bootstrap for a TS11 or TU80.

I've created a unix v7m distribution tape and want to try and install
from it.

Thanks.
-- 

TTFN - Guy


From robinb at ruffnready.co.uk  Sun Jun 22 19:53:58 2003
From: robinb at ruffnready.co.uk (Robin Birch)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 10:53:58 +0100
Subject: [pups] Bootstrap for TS11 (or TU80)
In-Reply-To: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com>
References: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com>
Message-ID: <Ai1LKiA2yX9+Ewbm@falstaf.demon.co.uk>

In message <1056262021.5111.11.camel at nazgul.shiresoft.com>, Guy 
Sotomayor <ggs at shiresoft.com> writes
>Hi,
>
>I'm trying to locate a PDP-11 bootstrap for a TS11 or TU80.
>
>I've created a unix v7m distribution tape and want to try and install
>from it.
>
>Thanks.
It should be easy to find.  If no-one immediately sends you one down 
load the BSD2.11 installation docs as there is a copy in there.

Robin
-- 
Robin Birch


From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Sun Jun 22 20:41:33 2003
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:41:33 +1200
Subject: [pups] About early Un*x clones
Message-ID: <200306222241.33385.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

Whitesmith under the capable guidance of Plauger - who else - came up with 
Idris.  And a number of other Un*x clones were duly written at about the same 
time, according to:
http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html

The question is, is it possible to get ahold of those for the early Un*x  
hobbyist?  Does anyone have any knowledge of their whereabouts, and 
(potential) legal statii?

Wesley Parish
-- 
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."

From ggs at shiresoft.com  Mon Jun 23 01:51:12 2003
From: ggs at shiresoft.com (Guy Sotomayor)
Date: 22 Jun 2003 08:51:12 -0700
Subject: [pups] Bootstrap for TS11 (or TU80)
In-Reply-To: <Ai1LKiA2yX9+Ewbm@falstaf.demon.co.uk>
References: <1056262021.5111.11.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com>
	 <Ai1LKiA2yX9+Ewbm@falstaf.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <1056297071.4005.13.camel@nazgul.shiresoft.com>

On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 02:53, Robin Birch wrote:
> In message <1056262021.5111.11.camel at nazgul.shiresoft.com>, Guy 
> Sotomayor <ggs at shiresoft.com> writes
> >Hi,
> >
> >I'm trying to locate a PDP-11 bootstrap for a TS11 or TU80.
> >
> >I've created a unix v7m distribution tape and want to try and install
> >from it.
> >
> >Thanks.
> It should be easy to find.  If no-one immediately sends you one down 
> load the BSD2.11 installation docs as there is a copy in there.
> 

Thanks.  I found it in the BSD2.11 docs.
-- 

TTFN - Guy


From robin.birch at royalmail.com  Tue Jun 24 19:25:28 2003
From: robin.birch at royalmail.com (robin.birch at royalmail.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:25:28 +0000
Subject: [pups] PDP11 C
Message-ID: <00256D4F.0033E462.00@postoffice.co.uk>



Hi Everyone,
This is slightly off topic I know but does anyone have a PDP11 C run time library
reference manual that they can either scan for me or send me so that I can
photocopy it.

Regards

Robin

This  email  and  any  attachments  are confidential and intended for the addressee
only.   If  you are not the named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce,
copy  or  distribute the contents of this communication.  If you have received this
in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system.



From robin.birch at royalmail.com  Tue Jun 24 20:26:21 2003
From: robin.birch at royalmail.com (robin.birch at royalmail.com)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:26:21 +0000
Subject: [pups] PDP11 C
Message-ID: <00256D4F.003981C4.00@postoffice.co.uk>



Panic over, I've found a copy that I didn't realise I had :-)

Regards

Robin

This  email  and  any  attachments  are confidential and intended for the addressee
only.   If  you are not the named recipient, you must not use, disclose, reproduce,
copy  or  distribute the contents of this communication.  If you have received this
in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system.



From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Wed Jun 25 01:45:57 2003
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:45:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [pups] PDP11 C
Message-ID: <200306241545.h5OFjvc28962@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:26:21 +0000
> Subject: [pups] PDP11 C
> 
> Panic over, I've found a copy that I didn't realise I had :-)

Just out of curiousity, which operating system did you have in
mind?  A run-time library is rather OS-dependent.

    carl

-- 
    carl lowenstein         marine physical lab     u.c. san diego
                                                 clowenst at ucsd.edu

From Fred.van.Kempen at microwalt.nl  Wed Jun 25 02:01:14 2003
From: Fred.van.Kempen at microwalt.nl (Fred N. van Kempen)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:01:14 +0200
Subject: [pups] PDP11 C
Message-ID: <7AD18F04B62B7440BE22E190A3F7721409DF0C@mwsrv04.microwalt.nl>

He's using RSX :)

--f

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Lowenstein [mailto:cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 5:46 PM
> To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org; robin.birch at royalmail.com
> Subject: Re: [pups] PDP11 C
> 
> 
> > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:26:21 +0000
> > Subject: [pups] PDP11 C
> > 
> > Panic over, I've found a copy that I didn't realise I had :-)
> 
> Just out of curiousity, which operating system did you have in
> mind?  A run-time library is rather OS-dependent.
> 
>     carl
> 
> -- 
>     carl lowenstein         marine physical lab     u.c. san diego
>                                                  clowenst at ucsd.edu
> _______________________________________________
> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups
> 

From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG  Mon Jun  2 11:53:18 2003
From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 03 18:53:18 PDT
Subject: [TUHS] The REEL reasons for the SCO vs. IBM affair
Message-ID: <0306020153.AA19677@ivan.Harhan.ORG>

Hello folks.

I've been watching this whole SCO vs. IBM assault on Linux thing and here are
my thoughts. I would not surprised a bit if it turns out that this idea was
conceived somewhere inside Microsoft, or in the White House, in the Pentagon,
or even at Area 51. This is about world control. A certain group of enormous
power has been ruling this planet and holding it in slavery for the past 4000
years. They are the ones in control today. They control the world through their
control of globalised imperial capitalism, total control of all media, and mind
control achieved by controlling all information input into human minds.

Control of computing and information resources is obviously of vital importance
to them in this day and age. It is they who invented M$ Weendoze, probably the
most effective brainwashing device since the Bible. It is really Weendoze that
keeps them in power. There are many activists fighting against this shadow
government, but their efforts are in vain for as long as they use Weendoze.
Fighting the shadow government while using their OS is like going on a duel and
having your opponent load your gun for you.

This is precisely why the shadow government is acting so arrogantly and
seemingly naively. Many conspiracy researchers have wondered how come if this
shadow govt is so powerful and obviously wants to remain in control, why aren't
they assassinating us or something to stop our efforts to defeat them. And I
think I know the answer now. They government is not assassinating conspiracy
researchers en masse because the vast majority of them use Weendoze and praise
Bill Gates. Thus while thinking that they are fighting the shadow government,
they actually support it.

And now it seems like the shadowy powers have begun to *really* fear Linux.
Because Linux more than anything poses the greatest threat to their power. It
does because if all those conspiracy researchers and anti-shadow govt freedom
fighters who are already out there happen to switch to Windows to Linux, the
probability of which rises proportionally as Linux gains more and more use,
then bye-bye shadow government. *That* is what they fear. And that is why they
have undertaken this ultrasecret covert anti-Linux operation.

Just my thoughts.

MS

P.S. Too bad that you've just missed Conspiracy Con 2003 last weekend, but they
have them every year. But there is also the companion conference, Bay Area UFO
Expo held in September, where they also talk a lot about conspiracies, as these
conspiracies are ultimately extraterrestrial. If anyone is interested in this I
strongly recommend going to the Expo this September. I'll be there if anyone
wants to meet me.

From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Mon Jun  2 12:05:15 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 12:05:15 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] The REEL reasons for the SCO vs. IBM affair
In-Reply-To: <0306020153.AA19677@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
References: <0306020153.AA19677@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
Message-ID: <20030602020515.GA2122@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 06:53:18PM -0700, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> Hello folks.
> 
> I've been watching this whole SCO vs. IBM assault on Linux thing and here are
> my thoughts. I would not surprised a bit if it turns out that this idea was
> conceived somewhere inside Microsoft, or in the White House, in the Pentagon.

All, please post followups to this e-mail directly to Michael.

	Warren

From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Mon Jun  2 12:51:01 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 22:51:01 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs
Message-ID: <20030602025128.89BFA1E4D@minnie.tuhs.org>

Greg Lehey:

  For
  example, last year Caldera released "ancient UNIX" under a BSD-style
  license, but now they're claiming it never happened.  Maybe they don't
  know about the company history.  And if the code in dispute is derived
  from ancient UNIX, there'll be egg on their face.

=====

If the code in dispute is derived from an ancient UNIX covered by
the Jan 2002 free license, and it doesn't clearly say so somewhere,
there is certainly egg and chips on someone's face.  Said license
imposes few conditions, but one is that Caldera's copyright must
be maintained and the notice `This product includes software developed
or owned by Caldera International, Inc.' placed in `any advertising
materials.'

Of course, if the code comes from V6 and those notices are present
and Caldera still claims it's stolen, that's another basket of eggs.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON

From ckeck at texoma.net  Mon Jun  2 14:05:22 2003
From: ckeck at texoma.net (Cornelius Keck)
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 23:05:22 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs
In-Reply-To: <20030530033124.GB39668@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10306012252140.18452-100000@ppp-151-110-2.texoma.net>

> As far as I can see (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong), most of
> the key players at SCO have changed over the last 12 months.  They
> ppear to have few engineers left, which is presumably one reason wh
> they gave the UnixWare and Linux code to outsiders to compare.  I'm

I'm not surprised. Considering SCO's pricing policy (ever looked at
that? They charge for every little bit of configuration above and be-
yond, say, Sony PS2 multiplayer environment, like extra users, more
memory, more processors, ..., uname it, they charge for it), the place
looks more and more like a dominion of marketing folks, and lawyers,
with the latter no longer being considered a defense entity against
unfriendly intrusion, but rather a business division, expected to
generate substantial revenue. If a company trades innovative head-
count (i.e. developers and engineers) for headcount unaware, or un-
familiar with the prime business objective, then the second rate
headcount will come up with many "interesting" schemes to justify
their continued employment.

I might be overdoing it just so. But then I have seen this happen
thrice during my career, so there is a pattern.

Thank you for listening to a not-too-old man rambling ;)

Regards,

Cornelius


-- 
                             Cornelius Keck
                 cornelius at keck.cx / ckeck at texoma.net


From iking at windows.microsoft.com  Tue Jun  3 01:30:46 2003
From: iking at windows.microsoft.com (Ian King)
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 08:30:46 -0700
Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs
Message-ID: <F7B97826912BC4419D5DDF53B216945301ABA2FC@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>

There's an old joke:
 
If the law is against you, argue the facts.  
If the facts are against you, argue the law.  
If both are against you, call the other attorney names.  
 
It's possible this is an elaborate tactic to step on IBM's feet until IBM apologizes - see "The Mouse That Roared".  It could be that the issues are so convoluted, the SCO folks are very crafty (and think they can irritate Big Blue enough that IBM will pay them to go away).  But it is indeed possible that they are really this clueless.  There are many examples of businesses that once held pre-eminent positions, layed low by bonehead business decisions.  
 
In any event, baseless lawsuits are a common business tool these days.  And in a country where you can become independently wealthy by spilling coffee in your lap, and you can lose the popular vote by a large margin but be appointed to the highest office in the land by your daddy's Supreme Court - is any legal maneuver really a surprise anymore?  
 
I printed out my "ancient UNIX" license (I got a no-charge license), I'm not erasing my RK05s yet.  :-)  -- Ian 
 
NOTE: The above is my personal ranting, and should not be construed to reflect the policies or opinions of my employer.  

________________________________

From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org on behalf of Larry McVoy
Sent: Thu 5/29/2003 7:42 PM
To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #159 - 12 msgs



> SCO is blustering more and more as the open source community exposes
> them for the fruads that they have become.

In the for what it is worth department, I happen to know that this
stuff is more complex than it seems.  For instance, I am pretty sure
that ATT should have won their lawsuit over the BSD stuff and if you
doubt that I'd suggest that you go compare the UFS code against the 32v
or v7 code.  bmap() is a good place to look.  Any suggestions that that
was completely rewritten are patently false, at least in my opinion.
I'm a file system guy, I've done a lot of work in UFS, I'm intimately
familiar with the code.  In fact, I defended UFS against LFS when Kirk
wouldn't (LFS is a friggin' joke, any file system hacker knows that the
allocation policy is 90% of the file system).

I do not have knowledge of the code it is that SCO says infringes.  And I
think that SCO is about as astute as I am in terms of public relations
(we both tend to be our own worst enemies and I thought I was without
peer in that department :-)  But I suspect that there is at least some
merit to what they are claiming.  I have to believe that nobody is stupid
enough to have zero data and jump out in public like they are doing.
That's just way too far over the top.  Anything is possible I guess,
but doesn't it seem just a little unlikely that a corporation would
commit that public a suicide?  I'll probably be proved wrong but I'm
a CEO, running a small company, much smaller than SCO, and there is
no way I'd stick my neck out that far with no data to back it up.
I'd like to think I'm smarter than they are but I tend to doubt it,
they have more experience.
--
---
Larry McVoy              lm at bitmover.com          http://www.bitmover.com/lm
_______________________________________________
TUHS mailing list
TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



From kstailey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun  5 10:24:50 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 17:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] the SCO/Novell contract
Message-ID: <20030605002450.56849.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>

http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-1013229.html

Contract illuminates Novell, SCO spat

By Stephen Shankland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
June 4, 2003, 3:01 PM PT

A 1995 contract sheds light on the conflicting Unix ownership claims by Novell
and SCO Group, with SCO receiving broad rights to the operating system but
Novell retaining copyrights and patents.

According to a copy of the contract obtained by CNET News.com, Novell sold "all
rights and ownership of Unix and UnixWare" to the SCO Group's predecessor, the
Santa Cruz Operation. However, the asset purchase agreement, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, specifically excludes "all copyrights" and
"all patents" from the purchase.

"This agreement is kind of murky...You end up with a lot of questions, to put
it mildly," said Mark Radcliffe, an intellectual property attorney with law
firm Gray Cary. 

 While the contract squarely leaves the copyright with Novell, a section that
gives to SCO "all claims...against any parties relating to any right, property
or asset included in the (Unix) business" could be interpreted to give SCO the
right to enforce the copyright, Radcliffe said. "The question is, even though
(Novell) didn't assign the intellectual property (to SCO), did (Novell) assign
the rights to enforce the patents and copyrights?"

The Unix ownership issue is central to a debate about whether companies can be
taken to court for using Linux. On May 14, SCO claimed in letters sent to 1,500
of the world's largest companies that using Linux could open them to legal
liability because Unix source code has been copied into Linux.

That copying, if proven and illegal, could violate Unix copyrights and the
independent spirit of the open-source movement that creates Linux, but the
contract indicates SCO won't have a simple time relying on Unix copyrights in
such a case.

A week after SCO's letter, Novell said it never sold SCO the Unix copyrights
and patents and that SCO's actions could bring legal action on itself. "We
believe it unlikely that SCO can demonstrate that it has any ownership interest
whatsoever in those copyrights," Novell Chief Executive Jack Messman said in a
letter to SCO.

The Unix ownership debate grew from SCO's $1 billion lawsuit against IBM,
alleging Big Blue breached its contract with SCO and misappropriated SCO's
trade secrets by moving Unix intellectual property into Linux. IBM denies the
claims.

SCO didn't immediately respond to questions about how the contract supports its
claims to rights of copyright enforcement, but company Chief Executive Darl
McBride last week said the contract had "conflicting statements." 

 "It doesn't make sense. How would you transfer the product but not have the
copyright attached? That would be like transferring a book but only getting the
cover," McBride said.

Novell continues to disagree with SCO. "It's pretty clear that patents and
copyrights were excluded and not included in the business as it's described (in
the contract), so we don't believe SCO would have copyright and patent
enforcement rights," Hal Thayer, vice president of communications for Novell,
said Wednesday.

Novell is basing future operating system products on Linux, and open-source
advocates say they are reassured by Messman's words that the company won't
press its own copyright claims. "Novell is an ardent supporter of Linux and the
open-source development community," Messman has said.

"It's difficult to imagine any scenario in which we'd bring Unix copyright
infringement action against Linux users. We certainly don't have any plans to
do any such thing...and we wouldn't have undertaken this whole call to SCO to
prove their claims if that was the road we wanted to pursue," Thayer said.

The 1995 contract appears to give Novell the edge in the copyright debate, said
John Ferrell, an intellectual property attorney with Carr and Ferrell, who
reviewed the contract.

"This would support Novell's contention that SCO does not own the copyrights
and does not have the right to litigate" a copyright infringement case, Ferrell
said. However, he said, the contract does indicate SCO could pursue a case that
a Unix licensee breached its contract.

But the contract is odd, Ferrell said. "It's very unusual to have the transfer
of a software program and not have the rights of copyright transferred as
well," he said.

SCO vehemently argues that it has copyright enforcement rights, but in any
case, it doesn't need the Unix copyright to go after Linux users.

"I think it's perfectly clear we have the rights to enforce copyright claims,"
McBride said in an interview after Novell challenged SCO's Linux actions. But
more likely than a copyright case, would be one based on breach of contract, he
said.

"The letter went to 1,500 large companies around the world, the majority of
which all have (Unix) System V licenses with us...We do have sublicense
rights," McBride said. "They sign up for the fact that they will not
misappropriate the code." The sublicenses come through Unix purchases made with
direct Unix licensees such as Silicon Graphics, Hewlett-Packard and IBM, he
said.

But the absence of copyright and patent claims in SCO's lawsuit against IBM is
telling, Gray Cary's Radcliffe said. Copyright and patent claims can make a
strong case.

"If they had the rights to enforce the copyrights, how come that didn't show up
in the IBM suit?" Radcliffe asked. "It's very weird they would bring a lawsuit
on trade secret (misappropriation) and unfair competition and not put in
copyrights and patents. Those are the strongest rights. Particularly with IBM,
you don't go out and say, 'I'm not going to take the elephant-hunting rifle
with me, I'm just going to take my .22-caliber.'"

SCO has said it has the option to include copyright claims later. But while
it's said Unix code was copied into Linux, it hasn't yet said who it believes
is responsible. SCO says it will show proof of the copying later this month to
some neutral parties.

SCO's suit mentions concepts and methods, but not copyrights: "It is not
possible for Linux to rapidly reach Unix performance standards for complete
enterprise functionality without the misappropriation of Unix code, methods or
concepts to achieve such performance and coordination by a larger developer
such as IBM."

Radcliffe said copying methods and concepts are much weaker evidence than
copying code. "If they did enough due diligence to figure out there were
concepts there, how the heck did they miss that there was actual code copying?"
he asked.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Thu Jun  5 20:52:33 2003
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 22:52:33 +1200
Subject: [TUHS] About Sys III status
Message-ID: <200306052252.33751.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

I came across this:
cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/930303.ruling.txt

17 U.S.C.   101.  Version 32V source code has now been distributed,
without notice, to literally thousands of licensees.
Consequently, Plaintiff can have no valid copyright on 32V unless
it can fit within one of the statutory or common law escape
provisions.
          The three statutory escape provisions are listed in
section 405(a).  These provisions relieve a copyright owner from
the harsh consequences of noticeless publication if the owner
(i) omitted the notice from a "relatively small number of copies;"
(ii) registers the work within five years of publication, and then
makes a "reasonable effort" to add notices to the noticeless copies
already distributed; or (iii) proves that a third party omitted,
notice in violation of an express agreement in writing 17 U.S.C  
405(a)(1)-(3).
          Plaintiff cannot avail itself of any of these provisions.
Notice was omitted from thousands of copies of 32V; no contractual
agreements require the licensees to affix notice;
Plaintiff failed to copyright 32V until 1992, well over five years
after 32V was published; and Plaintiff has not yet made reasonable
efforts to add notices to the many noticeless publications of 32V.
Consequently, Plaintiff must try to fit within the common-law
doctrine of limited publication.

and I felt like asking a few questions in relation to Sys III - was it 
copyrighted?  When?  And has SCO's publication of said Sys III on its Ancient 
Unix web site created the presumption that SCO has no further interest in Sys 
III?

Wesley Parish



-- 
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."

From wkt at tuhs.org  Thu Jun  5 23:24:56 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 23:24:56 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] About Sys III status
In-Reply-To: <200306052252.33751.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>
References: <200306052252.33751.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <20030605132456.GA36977@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 10:52:33PM +1200, Wesley Parish wrote:
> and I felt like asking a few questions in relation to Sys III - was it 
> copyrighted?  When?  And has SCO's publication of said Sys III on its Ancient 
> Unix web site created the presumption that SCO has no further interest in Sys 
> III?

Well, here is a grep result:

$ zcat sys3.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr 
        /* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.,
 * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated
copyright
"\033\016O\b#\033\017", /*copyright*/
'co', 0336,     /*copyright*/
PAIR('c','o'), 0336,    /*copyright*/
PAIR('c','o'), 0336,    /*copyright*/
0153,   /*copyright*/
"\001c\bO",      /*copyright*/
"\001c\bO",      /*copyright*/
"\001\0338c\0339",       /*copyright*/
"\001c\bO",      /*copyright*/
"\003(c)",      /*copyright*/
        \(co    \e(co   copyright
* Copyright 1974,
Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1980 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.

This is approximately the same amount of copyright notices that appear in 32V.
And we should have enough witnesses that SysIII was actually available from
SCO's own website with no authentication required. So that does leave open
the question as to whether anybody still holds copyright on the code.

And you know what, the original copyright statements on SysV have more
UCB copyright notices than AT&T/Bell Labs copyright notices :-)

	Warren

$ zcat tape1.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr | uniq -c | sort -rn
  11 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
  11 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   7 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   7 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   6 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   6 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   3 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   3 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 PAIR('c','o'), 0336,	/*copyright*/
   2 PAIR('c','o'), 0336,	/*copyright*/
   2 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 "\001c\bO",	 /*copyright*/
   2 "\001c\bO",	 /*copyright*/
   1 x/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 x/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 t/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 t/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 e/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 e/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 copyrval( nl_file, symbol, ptr, size, memdev)
   1 copyrval( nl_file, symbol, ptr, size, memdev)
   1 copyright
   1 copyright
   1 copyrest (fp1, fp2, place, size)		/* Copy the rest of a file. */
   1 copyrest (fp1, fp2, place, size)		/* Copy the rest of a file. */
   1 copyreader
   1 copyreader
   1 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 Portions of this document were copyrighted
   1 Portions of this document were copyrighted
   1 Portions of this document were copyrighted
   1 Portions of this document were copyrighted
   1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   1 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   1 0153,	/*copyright*/
   1 0153,	/*copyright*/
   1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   1 .\" Portions of this document were copyrighted
   1 .\" Portions of this document were copyrighted
   1 'co', 0336,	/*copyright*/
   1 'co', 0336,	/*copyright*/
   1 "\033\016O\b#\033\017",	/*copyright*/
   1 "\033\016O\b#\033\017",	/*copyright*/
   1 "\003(c)",	/*copyright*/
   1 "\003(c)",	/*copyright*/
   1 "\001c\bO",	 /*copyright*/
   1 "\001c\bO",	 /*copyright*/
   1 "\001\0338c\0339",	 /*copyright*/
   1 "\001\0338c\0339",	 /*copyright*/
   1  * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated
   1  * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated
   1 	retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, area, size);
   1 	retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, area, size);
   1 	copyrval( system, V_STR, (char *) &v, sizeof v, mem);
   1 	copyrval( system, V_STR, (char *) &v, sizeof v, mem);
   1 	TR("Copyrest: returns %d\n", retcode, EMPTY, EMPTY);
   1 	TR("Copyrest: returns %d\n", retcode, EMPTY, EMPTY);
   1 	TR("Copyrest: fp1=%d fp2=%d place=%d ", fp1, fp2, place);
   1 	TR("Copyrest: fp1=%d fp2=%d place=%d ", fp1, fp2, place);
   1 	/* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.,
   1 	/* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.,
   1 	  copyrval( system, SWPLO_STR, (char *) &swplo, sizeof swplo, memdev);
   1 	  copyrval( system, SWPLO_STR, (char *) &swplo, sizeof swplo, memdev);
   1 	  copyrval( system, SBRPTE_STR, (char *) &sbrpte, sizeof sbrpte, memdev);
   1 	  copyrval( system, SBRPTE_STR, (char *) &sbrpte, sizeof sbrpte, memdev);
   1 			retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, EMPTY, BUFSIZE);
   1 			retcode = copyrest (fp1, fp2, EMPTY, BUFSIZE);
   1 			TR("Copyrest: no space\n", EMPTY, EMPTY, EMPTY);
   1 			TR("Copyrest: no space\n", EMPTY, EMPTY, EMPTY);

From wkt at tuhs.org  Fri Jun  6 07:55:50 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 07:55:50 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] About Sys V copyright notices
In-Reply-To: <20030605183553.3247.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030605132456.GA36977@minnie.tuhs.org>
	<20030605183553.3247.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030605215550.GA39830@minnie.tuhs.org>

Warren did:
> > $ zcat tape1.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr | uniq -c | sort -rn

On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 11:35:53AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> why did you run "uniq -c | sort" and not "sort | uniq -c" ?

Because it was late. I really should have done

$ zcat tape1.tar.gz | strings | grep -i copyr | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn:

  56 /* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
  20 c/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   6 Copyright \fB\^\s+8\v'.25m'\(co\v'-.25m'\s-8\|\fP1983 Western Electric Company, Incorporated.
   6 "\001c\bO",         /*copyright*/
   4 Portions of this document were copyrighted
   4 PAIR('c','o'), 0336,       /*copyright*/
   2 x/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 t/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 e/* Copyright (c) 1979 Regents of the University of California */
   2 copyright
   2 0153,      /*copyright*/
   2 .\" Portions of this document were copyrighted
   2 'co', 0336,        /*copyright*/
   2 "\033\016O\b#\033\017",    /*copyright*/
   2 "\003(c)", /*copyright*/
   2 "\001\0338c\0339",  /*copyright*/
   2  * Copyright 1975 Bell Telephone Laboratories, Incorporated
   2    /* Copyright 1976, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.,

There, that's better :-)

	Warren

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  7 08:15:57 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 15:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Cringely on SCO vs. IBM
Message-ID: <20030606221557.9555.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030605.html

Technician, Steal Thyself
SCO, Not IBM, May Have Put Unix Code Into Linux Instead?

By Robert X. Cringely

There is something about institutional memory, the way organizations do or
don't remember things. Covering IBM back in the Opel and Akers eras, I noticed
a very interesting thing about the way that company handled internal
information, which was through the use of plausible deniability.  There was a
difference at IBM between knowing something and having it be known that you
knew something.  So when an IBMer would say he didn't know a fact or the answer
to my question, it didn't always mean he lacked the information.  It could just
as easily have meant that he/she hadn't been BRIEFED on the information. 
Anything learned at the water cooler wasn't real.  I wonder, then, how they
handle institutional memory issues at SCO, our subject for the last couple
weeks, because reality seems not to even be involved.  Can it be that the very
crime SCO is accusing IBM of committing could have been done, instead, by SCO
itself?  I think so.

Remember, SCO is suing IBM for stealing bits of Unix and putting those bits
inside Linux.  How IBM is supposed to have done that remains a mystery, because
the only version of Linux that includes any IBM authorship claim is for the
S/390 mainframes, and even that wasn't written by IBM.  According to folks who
did the work, it was done under contract to IBM by SuSE Linux AG, the German
Linux vendor. IBM provided the hardware and some access to IBM mainframe
engineers, but 98 percent of the work was done by SuSE. At Linuxworld 2000, IBM
didn't even help with the install or configuration of Linux on the S/390 they
loaned SuSE for the show.

Where, then, did IBM get those Unix parts it is supposed to have stolen?  They
certainly didn't come from IBM's version of Unix, AIX, which bears little
internal similarity to any other Unix.  I think the parts may have come from
SCO, itself.

Here is where institutional memory ought to come into play but doesn't seem to
be.  Remember that the motto of the combined Caldera and SCO was "Unifying Unix
with Linux for Business."  It is very possible that SCO's Linux team added
UnixWare and OpenServer code to Linux.  They then sent their Linux developers
to SuSE when United Linux was formed. Soon after that, CEO Ransom Love
departed.  Now the SCO management is scouring the UnixWare, OpenServer and
Linux code bases and says that they are finding cut-and-pasted code.  Chances
are that their former employees put it there.

"Open Unix 8 is the first step in implementing the vision of the pending new
company," said Ransom Love, president and CEO of Caldera Systems in a company
press release way back when.  "It combines the heritage of Unix with the
momentum of Linux, and will be our premiere product for data intensive
applications like database, email and supply chain management. The
incorporation of the Linux application engine into the UnixWare kernel
essentially redefines the direction of the product, and motivates a new brand
identity -- Open Unix."

But wait, there's more!  Here is what Ransom Love said to ZDNet around the same
time:

ZDNet: What does the future hold for your unified Linux/Unix platform?

Love: "When we talk about unifying Unix and Linux, the two have a huge amount
in common.  A lot of people are running their businesses on Unix, while Linux
has a tremendous population on Web servers and other front-end servers.  So we
are taking both and combining them into one platform."

So SCO/Caldera spent two years "unifying" Unix and Linux and is now outraged to
find some of their intellectual property in Linux.  Well duh!  That's exactly
what they said they were going to do.

But does it even matter?  As I noted last week, Novell retained the Unix
patents and copyrights when it sold whatever it sold to SCO back in 1995.  The
best SCO can claim, given that Novell won't pursue a copyright or patent claim
against IBM, is that IBM is in violation of its Unix license agreement.

WHAT license agreement?

That SCO/Novell deal from 1995 gets murkier and murkier when you add in the
claims of The Open Group, a consortium that acquired the Unix trademark from
Novell at the same time SCO wasn't acquiring the Unix copyrights or patents. 
"IBM's ability to call AIX a Unix system is due to its license from The Open
Group," says the group's marketing vice-president Graham Bird.  "This license
requires IBM (and all other licensees) to warrant that it's certified products
conform with the Single Unix Specification.  So, SCO cannot yank IBM's right to
call their certified products Unix, I'm delighted to say."

If SCO doesn't own the copyrights or patents, and it doesn't even have a
sublicensing agreement with the organization that owns the trademark, what
rights could they possibly intend to deny IBM as of June 13th?"

Nobody really knows. 

There is an easy solution to this problem, one that I wouldn't be at all
surprised is in the works.  SCO is angling to be acquired by IBM in an
out-of-court settlement.  Certainly, IBM can afford to buy the Unix copyrights
and patents from Novell and I think Novell would sell them.  That would bring
everything but the Unix trademark under the same roof.  And I don't think IBM
really cares that much about the Unix trademark.  They care much more about the
Linux trademark.  So let's say IBM buys up all these rights for a few hundred
million dollars, then puts the whole package under the General Public License,
essentially making Unix into an Open Source product.

Why would IBM do something like that?  They'd do it to sell more computers.

People forget that IBM is mainly a hardware and services company. By putting
Unix under the GPL they would become heroes to the programmers and system
admins and end up selling even more hardware and services.  Remember, IBM
already invested $1 billion in Linux and claimed to have made that money back
within a year. Buying SCO and the Novell IP could be viewed as just the next
step of that very smart investment.

[...snip unrelated sections...]


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  8 03:29:30 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 17:29:30 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
Message-ID: <Law14-F111R4ZDgC81T00047fe7@hotmail.com>

Hi all

just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 ? , 
like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) .

tks in advance for the infos.

rgs to all
zmkm

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail


From wkt at tuhs.org  Sun Jun  8 10:59:44 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 10:59:44 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F111R4ZDgC81T00047fe7@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F111R4ZDgC81T00047fe7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20030608005944.GA35462@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 05:29:30PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 ? 
> , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) .

lp ? :-)
	Warren

From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Sun Jun  8 12:21:35 2003
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 19:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
Message-ID: <200306080221.h582LZQ09115@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 10:59:44 +1000
> From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
> To: The Unix Heritage Society <tuhs at tuhs.org>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
> 
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 05:29:30PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 ? 
> > , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) .
> 
> lp ? :-)
> 	Warren

I think I remember being able to use the hardware Scroll Lock on a
VT05 terminal with some variety of Unix, perhaps late 6th Edition.

    carl
-- 
    carl lowenstein         marine physical lab     u.c. san diego
                                                 clowenst at ucsd.edu

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  8 18:22:54 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 08:22:54 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
Message-ID: <Law14-F75SRtvzrSqqq0000c111@hotmail.com>

Thanks guys ,

I think I am going to stick to bwc suggestion it looks suitable , I got the 
book and found it so I�ll work on it asap.

tks

>From: Carl Lowenstein <cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu>
>To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
>Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 19:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 10:59:44 +1000
> > From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
> > To: The Unix Heritage Society <tuhs at tuhs.org>
> > Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 05:29:30PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> > > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on 
>unix7 ?
> > > , like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) .
> >
> > lp ? :-)
> > 	Warren
>
>I think I remember being able to use the hardware Scroll Lock on a
>VT05 terminal with some variety of Unix, perhaps late 6th Edition.
>
>     carl
>--
>     carl lowenstein         marine physical lab     u.c. san diego
>                                                  clowenst at ucsd.edu
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  8 18:40:41 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 08:40:41 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
Message-ID: <Law14-F56X9F6JttDok0000c169@hotmail.com>

keneth

thanks for the interesting infos , you solved a big puzzle for me :-) now I 
know why the screen is acting rather strange. !

cheers



>From: Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com>
>To: zmkm zmkm <new_zmkm at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] a question re pdp11 unix7
>Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Seveth Edition UNIX assumed hardcopy terminal and did not have a terminal
>pager.
>
>Because of that assumption it also cannot backspace the way you would want 
>it
>to on a CRT.
>
>Use "#" for backspace "@" for kill line (modern version is Ctrl-U).  
>Characters
>will not be erased on screen but they will be discarded from the input 
>line.
>
>--- zmkm zmkm <new_zmkm at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > just a quick question about pdp11 unix7 , what's the pg command on unix7 
>? ,
> > like later versions of unix was pg as in ( ls -l | pg ) .
> >
> > tks in advance for the infos.
> >
> > rgs to all
> > zmkm
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
>http://calendar.yahoo.com

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


From arnold at skeeve.com  Sun Jun  8 19:56:08 2003
From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 12:56:08 +0300
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
Message-ID: <200306080956.h589u8si030665@localhost.localdomain>

What I find fascinating (and that no-one has mentioned yet) is how anyone
can claim that Unix internals are still trade secret, especially given
this book:

	The Design of the UNIX Operating System,
	Maurice J. Bach.
	Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986.
	ISBN 0-13-201799-7.

There's also these:

	The Magic Garden Explained:
	The Internals of Unix System V Release 4:
	An Open Systems Design,
	Berny Goodheart, James Cox, John R. Mashey.
	Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1994.
	ISBN 0-13-098138-9.

	Unix Internals: The New Frontiers,
	Uresh Vahalia.
	Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1996.
	ISBN 0-13-101908-2.
	According to Amazon.com, a new edition is scheduled for 2005.

The Bach book, in particular, is a rather large smoking gun that AT&T
didn't care a huge amount about trade secrets.  The book is still in
print (and selling for a whopping $69.97 on Amazon.com!).  It doesn't
contain actual source code, but let's get real here...

Arnold

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  8 20:32:56 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 10:32:56 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
Message-ID: <Law14-F104v3vRC1KFT00023fa4@hotmail.com>


add on the lion book

>From: Aharon Robbins <arnold at skeeve.com>
>To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
>Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 12:56:08 +0300
>
>What I find fascinating (and that no-one has mentioned yet) is how anyone
>can claim that Unix internals are still trade secret, especially given
>this book:
>
>	The Design of the UNIX Operating System,
>	Maurice J. Bach.
>	Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986.
>	ISBN 0-13-201799-7.
>
>There's also these:
>
>	The Magic Garden Explained:
>	The Internals of Unix System V Release 4:
>	An Open Systems Design,
>	Berny Goodheart, James Cox, John R. Mashey.
>	Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1994.
>	ISBN 0-13-098138-9.
>
>	Unix Internals: The New Frontiers,
>	Uresh Vahalia.
>	Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1996.
>	ISBN 0-13-101908-2.
>	According to Amazon.com, a new edition is scheduled for 2005.
>
>The Bach book, in particular, is a rather large smoking gun that AT&T
>didn't care a huge amount about trade secrets.  The book is still in
>print (and selling for a whopping $69.97 on Amazon.com!).  It doesn't
>contain actual source code, but let's get real here...
>
>Arnold
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


From arnold at skeeve.com  Sun Jun  8 23:09:39 2003
From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 16:09:39 +0300
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
Message-ID: <200306081309.h58D9dDc001829@localhost.localdomain>

> add on the lion book

Yes, that's been officially published, as well as in N-th generation
photo copies.  But the books I cited are for System V, including SVR4,
which is much more relevant for the issue under discussion...

Pfui.  What a mess this whole business is.

Arnold

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  9 12:32:55 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
In-Reply-To: <200306080956.h589u8si030665@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20030609023255.2087.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com>

Two words: "version control".

If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version control
archives will say who inserted it.  It will be very easy to prove if Caldera
inserted the code themselves.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Mon Jun  9 20:20:10 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 10:20:10 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
Message-ID: <Law14-F79hgnFZS4HIv00010252@hotmail.com>



Looks like sco has learned a lot from its cozying up with microsoft that is 
instead of meeting market challenges with better technology and competitive 
pricing against its competitors it resorts to the lowest form bullying 
marketing gimmicks and legal arm twisting  just like microsoft  style , so 
now they look like shooting themselves in the foot , good ! let's hope they 
shoot both feet !.


>From: Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com>
>To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
>Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 19:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Two words: "version control".
>
>If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known the version 
>control
>archives will say who inserted it.  It will be very easy to prove if 
>Caldera
>inserted the code themselves.
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
>http://calendar.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


From kstailey at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  9 21:57:58 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 04:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] IBM doesn't intend to respond to SCO's threat
Message-ID: <20030609115758.58851.qmail@web10008.mail.yahoo.com>


http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/OEG20030606S0039

Linux-Unix ties spelled out

By Charles J. Murray
EE Times
June 6, 2003 (5:08 p.m. ET)

PARK RIDGE, Ill. � SCO Group revealed the foundation of its legal battle with
the Linux community, when it rolled out evidence of large blocks of Linux code
that it contends were stolen from Unix. Analysts who saw the samples of the
allegedly stolen code said the evidence is damaging and that SCO Group has a
formidable legal case.

�If everything SCO showed me today is true, then the Linux community should be
very concerned,� said Bill Claybrook, research director for Linux and
open-source software at the Aberdeen Group (Boston).

If SCO (Lindon, Utah) prevails in its legal efforts, many observers believe the
action could, at best, result in hundreds of multimillion-dollar licensing
payments from Fortune 1000 companies and, at worst, damage the foundation of
open-source software.

The revelations by the SCO Group Wednesday (June 4) followed a turbulent week
in which the company exchanged both allegations and counterallegations with
Linux supporters and with Novell Inc. (Provo, Utah), which has proclaimed in an
open letter that SCO doesn't own the copyrights and patents to Unix, the
operating system Novell sold to SCO in 1995.

SCO's revelations also served as a response to the Linux community, which has
complained over the past two months that it doubted SCO's contentions of theft
because the company had not publicly disclosed evidence to support its claims.

Claybrook and another analyst who had been given an opportunity to see examples
of the alleged theft said the blocks of Unix and Linux were strikingly similar.
The two blocks of software, they said, contained as many as 80 lines of
identical code, along with identical developers' comments.

�One could argue that developers could write exact or very similar code, but
the developers' comments in the code are basically your DNA, or fingerprints,
for a particular piece of source code,� said Laura DiDio, a senior analyst with
the Yankee Group (Boston), who viewed the evidence.

�It's very unlikely that code and comments could be identical by pure chance,�
Claybrook said.

DiDio and Claybrook said they were given side-by-side copies of Unix and Linux
code to compare. Neither was paid for the work, and both agreed that the
evidence suggests SCO has a strong case in its $1 billion suit against IBM
Corp. and in its scrap with the Linux community.

Linux supporters, however, were quick to question the meaning of the evidence.
�Can SCO prove that this code came from SCO to Linux, and not from Linux to
SCO?� asked Jon �Maddog� Hall, executive director of Linux International
(Nashua, N.H.), a Linux advocacy organization. �Or did the code that's in SCO
Unix come from a third source? Show me the facts,� he said.

SCO's battle with the open-source community grabbed headlines two months ago
when it filed a $1 billion lawsuit in the state court of Utah against IBM,
alleging misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition in the Linux
market. In May, on the heels of that suit, SCO sent letters to Fortune 1,000
companies and 500 other businesses advising them to seek legal counsel if they
use Linux.

SCO's actions angered Linux supporters, who allegedly deluged the company with
angry e-mails, threatened drive-by shootings, and posted SCO's executives' home
phone numbers and addresses on Web sites.

On May 28, Novell jumped into the fray, arguing that it never sold the Unix
copyrights or patents to SCO when it consummated the Unix sale in 1995. In an
open letter to SCO, Novell said, �Apparently you share this view, since over
the last few months you have repeatedly asked Novell to transfer the copyrights
to SCO, requests Novell has rejected.�

Novell assailed

In a subsequent news conference on May 30, SCO chief executive officer Darl
McBride lashed out at Novell, restating SCO's claim that it owns the Unix
operating system patents and implying that Novell has a hidden agenda for
insisting otherwise.

�We strongly disagree with Novell's position and view it as a desperate measure
to curry favor with the Linux community,� McBride said.

Last week's analyst revelations, however, cast the battle in a new light. Until
the analysts weighed in, Linux backers had relied on the defense that no one
had seen proof of the allegations. Most said they didn't understand why SCO had
refused to release the alleged infringements for public scrutiny. Some said
they viewed SCO's actions as a means to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt
about open-source software.

But analysts categorically disagreed with that viewpoint last week. �SCO is not
trying to destroy Linux,� said DiDio of the Yankee Group. �That's silly. This
is about paying royalties.�

SCO contends that by co-opting code from Unix, Linux has severely damaged SCO's
intellectual property.  According to some estimates, the company collected
annual revenue of between $200 million and $250 million on Unix System 5 (sic)
software before the rise of Linux.  After Linux reached the mainstream, those
revenue figures dropped to about $60 million a year.

Because it believes Linux incorporates code that's been �stolen� from Unix, it
has warned hundreds of companies to stop using Linux or start paying royalties.

�SCO's words were that Linux distributors and others who are using Linux are
'distributing stolen goods,' � said Claybrook of Aberdeen Group.

Some companies, such as Sun Microsystems Inc., already pay hefty royalties to
SCO for Unix.  Two weeks ago, Microsoft Corp. joined that group when it agreed
to pay royalties that were said to be �significantly in excess of $10 million,�
one source said.  Microsoft declined to comment on the details.

Facing a choice

Many observers believe SCO's case is bolstered by the fact that it is
represented by high-powered attorney David Boies, who prosecuted the Microsoft
antitrust case and represented Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election
vote-counting scandal.

Analysts said IBM will be the first company to face a choice in the legal
matter.  �If IBM wants to cure this problem, they could start by buying all the
appropriate licenses and then paying SCO a billion dollars,� Claybrook said.
�But SCO now says that a billion may not be enough to cover their damages.�
Users of Linux also face a decision about whether to ignore SCO's letters or
pay for a license.  Analysts said companies may face that decision as soon as
June 13, the date on which SCO has threatened to terminate its existing Unix
contracts with IBM.

Intellectual-property attorneys advise that companies that received a letter
from SCO first determine whether IBM is indemnifying them, as users, against
legal action.

IBM, for its part, has said it doesn't intend to respond to SCO's threat. �We
believe our contact is perpetual and irrevocable,� an IBM spokeswoman said.
�We've already paid for it, and there is nothing else we need to do.�

Whether the legal actions will harm Linux in the long run is still open to
question, experts said.

The Linux community, unconvinced by SCO's actions, says it is still waiting for
more solid proof that SCO really has a case. Most say that showing the alleged
violations to a few analysts who sign nondisclosure agreements isn't enough.

�We still don't see the need for secrecy,� said Hall of Linux International.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Tue Jun 10 00:00:31 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Mon,  9 Jun 2003 09:00:31 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
Message-ID: <Dl4tzrT1lQK9.tB6tvnhh@128.100.27.218>

Kenneth Stailey:

  Two words: "version control".

  If the code that SCO purports is copied into Linux is known
  the version control archives will say who inserted it.  It will
  be very easy to prove if Caldera inserted the code
  themselves.

Alas, two more words: "read-write storage."  Version control
info is stored in a file; how do we know (as SCalderaO might
argue) that some hacker hasn't edited it after the fact to
pretend something was put in by Caldera, or that they just
lied about it to begin with?

Version control data might be a useful, but I suspect only as
a trail to specific people whose could then offer personal
testimony about the history of a particular piece of code.
The testimony would be harder to impeach than the code.

Even a read-only copy of the version control info, e.g. a
CD-ROM, isn't a lot more solid; some hard evidence would
be needed of when that CD-ROM was written, beyond the
easily-forged timestamps on the disc itself, and there could
still be a claim that someone just lied when writing it,
especially if there is a claim that malice was involved.  So
it still would probably come down to personal testimony.

The usual disclaimer applies: I'm no lawyer.  I'm just trying
to think of counter-arguments, both those reasonable in
abstract and those that seem to fit within the spirit of the
complaint against IBM.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON



From gerberb at zenez.com  Tue Jun 10 01:33:08 2003
From: gerberb at zenez.com (Boyd Lynn Gerber)
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 09:33:08 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs. IBM: NOVELL steps up to the plate
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F79hgnFZS4HIv00010252@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SC5.4.44.0306090929220.24355-100000@xenau105.zenez.com>

I think Novell for got about the admendment to the orignal agreement.

http://ir.sco.com/ReleaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=110907

I do not necessarily agree with what they are doing, but I think they do
have to protect their rights.  I know I would.

tt,

--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb at zenez.com>
ZENEZ	1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047


From kstailey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 11 00:16:50 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 07:16:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] one person comments on his attorney's take on the SCO NDA
Message-ID: <20030610141650.7048.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3752

In a nutshell the SCO NDA is a gag, a muzzle.  It restricts you to only being
able to say "yes there is common code" or "no there is no common code", nothing
else may be said by you without violating the NDA.


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 11 04:49:05 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
Message-ID: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.sco.com/scosource/

Way to weird:

http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html

Q: What is SVR6?
A: SVR6 is the code name for the next-generation operating platform designed to
take advantage of Web services and is the foundation of our SCOx strategy. As
the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to advance
the UNIX kernel for both 32-bit and 64-bit architectures. This will be
accomplished through the support of key industry partners who will also
contribute to this next-generation platform. SVR6 will be formally announced at
our upcoming SCO Forum event to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada on August 17-19 at
the MGM Grand Hotel.

It just keeps getting weirder:

http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From asmodai at wxs.nl  Wed Jun 11 05:16:33 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:16:33 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

-On [20030610 21:02], Kenneth Stailey (kstailey at yahoo.com) wrote:
>http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html
>
>Q: What is SVR6?
>A: SVR6 is the code name for the next-generation operating platform designed to
>take advantage of Web services and is the foundation of our SCOx strategy. As
>the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to advance
>the UNIX kernel for both 32-bit and 64-bit architectures. This will be
>accomplished through the support of key industry partners who will also
>contribute to this next-generation platform. SVR6 will be formally announced at
>our upcoming SCO Forum event to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada on August 17-19 at
>the MGM Grand Hotel.

OK, I am trying to maintain a neutral stance to SCO, even though they're
making it hard to do, but why does the above sound to me like trying to
get extra ammo they can use in court?  I mean I can already envision the
way the talks will go: "But your honour, we are heavily dependent on our
source code, since we are planning to unveil the SVR6 product in August
and the things which happened with IBM and Linux put our plans in
jeopardy..."

>It just keeps getting weirder:
>
>http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html

Ohh, now I get it.  Where on earth do they get the SCO Linux pedigree
and heritage from?  I very much doubt that Linus was doing stuff based
on SCO.  (Hey, everyone with a bit of clue of what happened knows it was
based upon Minix, sort of, but definately not SCO stuff.)

I seriously, seriously wonder where this is leading to.  The USA does
not have the best track record where it comes to sensible court rulings,
but if they have any Unix expert present he can refute a lot of the
so-called claims SCO is making.

This reminds me a lot of U-571, where Hollywood rewrote part of the real
world history for storyline sake.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
E pluribus unum...

From asmodai at ao.mine.nu  Wed Jun 11 06:15:31 2003
From: asmodai at ao.mine.nu (Paul Ward)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:15:31 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
 <20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>
Message-ID: <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu>


JRa> -On [20030610 21:02], Kenneth Stailey (kstailey at yahoo.com) wrote:

>>http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html

JRa> Ohh, now I get it.  Where on earth do they get the SCO Linux pedigree
JRa> and heritage from?  I very much doubt that Linus was doing stuff based
JRa> on SCO.  (Hey, everyone with a bit of clue of what happened knows it was
JRa> based upon Minix, sort of, but definately not SCO stuff.)

Looks like the average marketing droid stuff... I like the way SCO
appear to not want anything to do with kernels 2.0.x, 2.2.x, 2.3.x or 2.5.x
even though that graph clearly shows UnixWare getting "contributions"
from the Linux 2.2.x tree - case of someone being too quick with the
highlight methinks.

And, with all this SCO talk about SVR6 and about how good SCO UNIX is..
how come OpenServer feels very antiquated, and UnixWare very trashy
and amateur?

meep, another "asmodai" :)

-- 
Best regards,
 Paul                            mailto:asmodai at ao.mine.nu


From asmodai at wxs.nl  Wed Jun 11 06:38:17 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 22:38:17 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>
	<193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu>
Message-ID: <20030610203817.GK81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

-On [20030610 22:32], Paul Ward (asmodai at ao.mine.nu) wrote:
>meep, another "asmodai" :)

*grin*

Been using the nick for a long while now even...  Think I must be
getting close to a 10 year anniversary or so. :)

> Paul                            mailto:asmodai at ao.mine.nu
                                                 ^^-> Forgotten Realms
						 by chance?
-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
And your ways appear a total lack of Faith...

From asmodai at wxs.nl  Wed Jun 11 06:39:50 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 22:39:50 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030610191633.GJ81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>
	<193182844336.20030610211531@ao.mine.nu>
Message-ID: <20030610203950.GL81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

Ships,

sorry about that, seems mutt picked up a MUA follow-up to header and I
didn't notice, because I relied on `r' just being a normal reply. :(

Again, apologies.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
Hope is the last refuge for mad men and dreamers...

From wkt at tuhs.org  Wed Jun 11 08:24:21 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:24:21 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> It just keeps getting weirder:
> http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html

Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why
are they intimating that they will sue Linus?

This is becoming an alternate reality.

	Warren

From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Jun 11 08:57:08 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:57:08 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <000001c32fa3$a3452be0$239efea9@who5>

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
Folks it become an alternate reality, when SCO started the lawsuit. As
far as I can see, and this is based on watching these posts, and
others, on a different list, SCO is having problems. For example, they
were not at LWE this past January, however, they were present last
year, and for the few years that I've been going. I suspect that the
company is having a bad time this time period and faked up the lawsuit
to make up for that. And that's only my opinions.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Warren Toomey
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 6:24 PM
> To: Kenneth Stailey
> Cc: tuhs at tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] This is too weird
> 
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> > It just keeps getting weirder:
> > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html
> 
> Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why
> are they intimating that they will sue Linus?
> 
> This is becoming an alternate reality.
> 
> 	Warren
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG  Wed Jun 11 07:01:08 2003
From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 03 14:01:08 PDT
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
Message-ID: <0306102101.AA25507@ivan.Harhan.ORG>

Here is my response to SCO vs. Linux. The thing is, some of the things they are
saying I agree with most emphatically, except that what those things really
support is not SCO but our TUHS cause. Their main line, at least as I interpret
it, is that UNIX is the real OS, UNIX is better than Linux, and Linux is just a
naughty child that is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the adults. I
agree wholeheartedly! I and many other UNIX bigots have been more vocal about
this than SCO.

BUT... UNIX is not what SCO means by this term, UNIX is V7 -> 4BSD! That is the
real UNIX, USG is just a bad commercialized branch that no one ever really
liked anyway! So to all those Fortune 1000 (or whatever that was) companies
warned by SCO to stop running Linux, they should throw out those cheap micros,
put all their old large VAXen back online, and run True UNIX, 4.3 BSD UNIX! And
that *is* real UNIX, it comes directly from V7 and openly and proudly admits to
this fact! Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from
Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court to
determine what the hell it really is?

But SCO probably won't be too happy about it as they just gave away the True
UNIX (V7) to the World for free, and it's non-retractable.

So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, BSD
will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing
community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can
instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just as
free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh
diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to seize
it by force in a revolution.

MS (donning the flameproof spacesuit)

From grog at lemis.com  Wed Jun 11 11:19:39 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:49:39 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Wednesday, 11 June 2003 at  8:24:21 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
>> It just keeps getting weirder:
>> http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html
>
> Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why
> are they intimating that they will sue Linus?

I think that that was a slip of the tongue.  At any rate, I don't
think they have any intention of suing Linus.  Maybe it's part of a
FUD campaign.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030611/cf969579/attachment.sig>

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 11 13:02:05 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 20:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030611030205.67622.qmail@web10010.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> > It just keeps getting weirder:
> > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html
> 
> Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why
> are they intimating that they will sue Linus?
> 
> This is becoming an alternate reality.
> 
> 	Warren

When we find out that there's SCO code in Cygwin call me. ;)

The chart is a good way to confuse things.  The poor guy that made the original
must be crying that he let SCO use it years ago.

The part that confuses me is that I remember there were dotted lines one on the
original UNIX history chart that showed non-source-code-copying influences and
now even the real UNIX history chart is using only solid lines.  It makes MINIX
look like it has 7th Ed code in it instead of just being a 7th Ed API
implementation from scratch like it is.

That's the part that's really on drugs by the time SCO is using it as evidence
that there is a Linux pedigree or whatever that connects 7th Ed to Linux.

I think the real story is that they want to make as much press as they can
since it boosts their stock.

Meanwhile every time they say they own UNIX they are complete liars because:

> http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html
> 
> As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to

To what?  Violate their agreements with The Open Group?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585678840.html

"Reference to the SCO web site shows that they own certain intellectual
property and that they correctly attribute the trademark to The Open Group. 
SCO has never owned "UNIX".  SCO is licensed to use the registered trademark
UNIX "on and in connection" with their products that have been certified by The
Open Group, as are all other licensees," the statement said.

"These are the only circumstances in which a licensee may use the trademark
UNIX on and in connection with its products.  Statements that SCO 'owns the
UNIX operating system', has 'licensed UNIX to XYZ' are clearly inaccurate and
misleading."



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From asmodai at wxs.nl  Wed Jun 11 16:03:53 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:03:53 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
In-Reply-To: <0306102101.AA25507@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
References: <0306102101.AA25507@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
Message-ID: <20030611060353.GM81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

-On [20030611 03:39], Michael Sokolov (msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG) wrote:
>So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, BSD
>will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing
>community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can
>instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just as
>free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh
>diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to seize
>it by force in a revolution.

That's what I have been wondering about as well, it feels like the AT&T
versus the Regents of the University of Berkeley all over again.

But I'll stick to Free/Net/OpenBSD on slightly less archaic machines
though. ;)

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
And empty words are evil...

From asmodai at wxs.nl  Wed Jun 11 16:10:10 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:10:10 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>
	<20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030611061010.GN81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

-On [20030611 03:46], Greg Lehey (grog at lemis.com) wrote:
>I think that that was a slip of the tongue.  At any rate, I don't
>think they have any intention of suing Linus.  Maybe it's part of a
>FUD campaign.

Not sure if you guys noticed that, but they pulled Caldera Linux off of
their FTP site.

I seriously wonder if there are any normal people with a sane mind there
at SCO.

I mean, it is so different from their previous antics in which they even
allowed the old source code of the Unixes without any problems.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear...

From grog at lemis.com  Wed Jun 11 16:18:56 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:48:56 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030611061010.GN81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>
References: <20030610184905.66504.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030610222421.GA63364@minnie.tuhs.org>
	<20030611011939.GD40071@wantadilla.lemis.com>
	<20030611061010.GN81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>
Message-ID: <20030611061856.GK40071@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Wednesday, 11 June 2003 at  8:10:10 +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> -On [20030611 03:46], Greg Lehey (grog at lemis.com) wrote:
>> I think that that was a slip of the tongue.  At any rate, I don't
>> think they have any intention of suing Linus.  Maybe it's part of a
>> FUD campaign.
>
> Not sure if you guys noticed that, but they pulled Caldera Linux off of
> their FTP site.

Definitely.  They made a statement about it with the claim that they
can't justify distributing it.  My take is that they weren't making
any money with it.

> I seriously wonder if there are any normal people with a sane mind
> there at SCO.

I'm sure most are.  But they don't want to get fired.

> I mean, it is so different from their previous antics in which they
> even allowed the old source code of the Unixes without any problems.

Indeed.  I have an ongoing analysis page at
http://www.lemis.com/grog/sco.html which addresses most of these
issues.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030611/a513fe7f/attachment.sig>

From arnold at skeeve.com  Wed Jun 11 17:05:43 2003
From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:05:43 +0300
Subject: [TUHS] SCO vs IBM: what unix patents?
Message-ID: <200306110705.h5B75hpO007877@localhost.localdomain>

Just out of curiousity, what patents are there in the current Unix System V
system?  The setuid patent was released to the public, so that can't be
an issue.  And copyright, trade secrets, blah blah, I can understand.  But
I'm curious what is there in System V that has actually been patented?

Thanks,

Arnold

From asmodai at wxs.nl  Wed Jun 11 19:08:49 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 11:08:49 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] SCO to have violated GPL?
Message-ID: <20030611090849.GO81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

As seen on Slashdot:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1123176,00.asp

Some members of the open-source community are claiming that the SCO
Group may have violated the terms of the GNU GPL (General Public
License) by incorporating source code from the Linux kernel into the
Linux Kernel Personality feature found in SCO Unix without giving the
changes back to the community or displaying copyright notices
attributing the code to Linux.

A source close to SCO, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told eWEEK
that parts of the Linux kernel code were copied into the Unix System V
source tree by former or current SCO employees.

That could violate the conditions of the GNU GPL, which states that any
amendments to open-source code used in a commercial product must be
given back to the community or a copyright notice must be displayed
attributable to Linux, he said.

The source, who has seen both the Unix System V source code and the
Linux source code and who assisted with a SCO project to bring the two
kernels closer together, said that SCO "basically re-implemented the
Linux kernel with functions available in the Unix kernel to build what
is now known as the Linux Kernel Personality (LKP) in SCO Unix." 

The LKP is a feature that allows users to run standard Linux
applications along with standard Unix applications on a single system
using the UnixWare kernel.

"During that project we often came across sections of code that looked
very similar, in fact we wondered why even variable names were
identical. It looked very much like both codes had the same origin, but
that was good as the implementation of 95 percent of all Linux system
calls on the Unix kernel turned out to be literally 'one-liners'," the
source said.

Only a handful of system calls.socketcall, ipc and clone.were fairly
difficult to implement as they involved the obvious differentiators
between Linux and Unix: networking, inter-process communication and
kernel threads, the source said.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
I am the impossibility...

From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Wed Jun 11 21:52:18 2003
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:52:18 +1200
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <20030611030205.67622.qmail@web10010.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030611030205.67622.qmail@web10010.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200306112352.18254.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

And Coherent!

No, SCO has lost it, and lost all chance of ever regaining the trust of anyone 
with the barest skerrick of knowledge of Unix history.

I checked out an interesting web site:
http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html
I had no idea that cloning Unix had gotten off to such an early start - Idris 
from Plauger et al., Cromix from Cromemco, Yourdon's Omnix, Oasis, etc.

SCO hasn't got a leg to stand on - on the other hand, are those toenails I see 
stuck in its teeth?

Wesley Parish

On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:02, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> --- Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> > > It just keeps getting weirder:
> > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html
> >
> > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux, why
> > are they intimating that they will sue Linus?
> >
> > This is becoming an alternate reality.
> >
> > 	Warren
>
> When we find out that there's SCO code in Cygwin call me. ;)
>
> The chart is a good way to confuse things.  The poor guy that made the
> original must be crying that he let SCO use it years ago.
>
> The part that confuses me is that I remember there were dotted lines one on
> the original UNIX history chart that showed non-source-code-copying
> influences and now even the real UNIX history chart is using only solid
> lines.  It makes MINIX look like it has 7th Ed code in it instead of just
> being a 7th Ed API implementation from scratch like it is.
>
> That's the part that's really on drugs by the time SCO is using it as
> evidence that there is a Linux pedigree or whatever that connects 7th Ed to
> Linux.
>
> I think the real story is that they want to make as much press as they can
> since it boosts their stock.
>
> Meanwhile every time they say they own UNIX they are complete liars because:
> > http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html
> >
> > As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon SCO to
>
> To what?  Violate their agreements with The Open Group?
>
> http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585678840.html
>
> "Reference to the SCO web site shows that they own certain intellectual
> property and that they correctly attribute the trademark to The Open Group.
> SCO has never owned "UNIX".  SCO is licensed to use the registered
> trademark UNIX "on and in connection" with their products that have been
> certified by The Open Group, as are all other licensees," the statement
> said.
>
> "These are the only circumstances in which a licensee may use the trademark
> UNIX on and in connection with its products.  Statements that SCO 'owns the
> UNIX operating system', has 'licensed UNIX to XYZ' are clearly inaccurate
> and misleading."
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-- 
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."

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 12 02:42:53 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] The Open Group vs. SCO
Message-ID: <20030611164253.48601.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.opengroup.org/

Who Owns UNIX�?
You may have seen recent press articles announcing that SCO is the owner of
UNIX or has licensed UNIX to Microsoft. Such statements are inaccurate,
misleading and cause considerable confusion. The Open Group has owned the
registered trademark UNIX since 1994. Here
http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/who-owns-unix.htm is what we said in
response to a Linux Weekly News article last week. Also available is a
backgrounder http://www.opengroup.org/comm/press/unix-backgrounder.htm that
explains the history and reasons why The Open Group takes action on trademark
misuse.



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From sethm at loomcom.com  Thu Jun 12 03:53:18 2003
From: sethm at loomcom.com (Seth Morabito)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 10:53:18 -0700
Subject: [TUHS] The Open Group vs. SCO
In-Reply-To: <20030611164253.48601.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <95A33658-9C35-11D7-9947-000393CC2C24@loomcom.com>


On Wednesday, June 11, 2003, at 09:42 AM, Kenneth Stailey wrote:

> http://www.opengroup.org/
>
> Who Owns UNIX®?
> You may have seen recent press articles announcing that SCO is the 
> owner of
> UNIX or has licensed UNIX to Microsoft. Such statements are inaccurate,
> misleading and cause considerable confusion. The Open Group has owned 
> the
> registered trademark UNIX since 1994 [...]

But wait!  I thought Michael Sokolov was the owner of the One True 
UNIX?!?  I'm so confused!

[tongue planted firmly in cheek]

-Seth

From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Thu Jun 12 03:17:33 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:17:33 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] This is too weird
In-Reply-To: <200306112352.18254.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <000101c3303d$594f1880$239efea9@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
Wes, I remember " Cromix from Cromemco", the company made Single Board
Computers, I think they started making replacement hardware for the
Imsai family. I didn't know that they had cloned, or something like
that, for example UNIX, under its name. Heck, I even came within some
order of magnitude of buying a setup from them, then. 

Funny, funny, the first Get Away Special, wore one of those, the
school who built the thing, used a kludge from RS to program it.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Wesley Parish
> Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 7:52 AM
> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] This is too weird
> 
> And Coherent!
> 
> No, SCO has lost it, and lost all chance of ever regaining the trust
of anyone
> with the barest skerrick of knowledge of Unix history.
> 
> I checked out an interesting web site:
> http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html
> I had no idea that cloning Unix had gotten off to such an early
start - Idris
> from Plauger et al., Cromix from Cromemco, Yourdon's Omnix, Oasis,
etc.
> 
> SCO hasn't got a leg to stand on - on the other hand, are those
toenails I see
> stuck in its teeth?
> 
> Wesley Parish
> 
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:02, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> > --- Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 11:49:05AM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> > > > It just keeps getting weirder:
> > > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/unixtree/unixhistory01.html
> > >
> > > Well, if SCO is claiming intellecutal property rights to Linux,
why
> > > are they intimating that they will sue Linus?
> > >
> > > This is becoming an alternate reality.
> > >
> > > 	Warren
> >
> > When we find out that there's SCO code in Cygwin call me. ;)
> >
> > The chart is a good way to confuse things.  The poor guy that made
the
> > original must be crying that he let SCO use it years ago.
> >
> > The part that confuses me is that I remember there were dotted
lines one on
> > the original UNIX history chart that showed
non-source-code-copying
> > influences and now even the real UNIX history chart is using only
solid
> > lines.  It makes MINIX look like it has 7th Ed code in it instead
of just
> > being a 7th Ed API implementation from scratch like it is.
> >
> > That's the part that's really on drugs by the time SCO is using it
as
> > evidence that there is a Linux pedigree or whatever that connects
7th Ed to
> > Linux.
> >
> > I think the real story is that they want to make as much press as
they can
> > since it boosts their stock.
> >
> > Meanwhile every time they say they own UNIX they are complete
liars because:
> > > http://www.sco.com/scosource/linuxqanda.html
> > >
> > > As the owners of the UNIX operating system, it is incumbent upon
SCO to
> >
> > To what?  Violate their agreements with The Open Group?
> >
> > http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/23/1053585678840.html
> >
> > "Reference to the SCO web site shows that they own certain
intellectual
> > property and that they correctly attribute the trademark to The
Open Group.
> > SCO has never owned "UNIX".  SCO is licensed to use the registered
> > trademark UNIX "on and in connection" with their products that
have been
> > certified by The Open Group, as are all other licensees," the
statement
> > said.
> >
> > "These are the only circumstances in which a licensee may use the
trademark
> > UNIX on and in connection with its products.  Statements that SCO
'owns the
> > UNIX operating system', has 'licensed UNIX to XYZ' are clearly
inaccurate
> > and misleading."
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> > http://calendar.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> 
> --
> 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."
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com  Thu Jun 12 12:22:56 2003
From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 22:22:56 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Re: SCO vs IBM: what unix patents?
Message-ID: <b7f6a9f71b5f4eae2283b74f108d54fb@plan9.bell-labs.com>

Arnold asked,

 > Just out of curiousity, what patents are there in the current Unix System V
 > system?  The setuid patent was released to the public, so that can't be
 > an issue.  And copyright, trade secrets, blah blah, I can understand.  But
 > I'm curious what is there in System V that has actually been patented?

One article I read mentioned three, all visible in the
USPTO database:

	5,652,854 (filed 1995, granted 1997, assigned to Novell)
	5,265,250 (filed 1990, granted 1993, originally assigned to AT&T)
	6,097,384 (filed 1995, granted 2000, assigned to Novell)

The first has to do with page table mapping
and virtual address space, the second with RPC,
the third with managing memory in subobjects.

I have no idea how central these are to the
case.  They appear rather peripheral to me.

	Dennis

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 12 21:31:52 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 11:31:52 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
Message-ID: <Law14-F30jwGXSXCWV8000236a2@hotmail.com>









Michael

I don�t agree with you on this , your complain about linux is unfair , on 
the contrary to many unixers especially the new generation of hackers and 
new unix users even those users fed up with Microsoft gimmicks , linux was 
miracle touch that helped to re energize the otherwise stale unix market , 
simply look at the market today which operating system has grown beyond any 
expectations ? . Another thing , in the days of corporate greed and bullying 
a-la-microsoft way, linux played a significant role to cement the open 
source movement.

Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why it 
didn�t burst in the open ? , it�s troubles doesn�t have anything to do with 
linux it�s been there way before linux surfaced. I will not go into this 
flame war which is better BSD or Linux because both are dear to me and each 
has its own strong points and weaknesses .

Finally , this whole nonsense from SCO wouldn't be there if SCO had any good 
products to offer or enjoying good revenue , so this law suite shows how 
desperate SCO is sinking in the red and using this law suite to float itself 
again .


Love it or hate it linux is here to stay J .

_______________
preparing for eventual flame war ,

automatic sprinkler = check
fire extinguishers = check
fire fighting water hose  = check
fire proof suite and helmet = check

all systems go .

zmkm




>From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
>To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
>Date: Tue, 10 Jun 03 14:01:08 PDT
>
>Here is my response to SCO vs. Linux. The thing is, some of the things they 
>are
>saying I agree with most emphatically, except that what those things really
>support is not SCO but our TUHS cause. Their main line, at least as I 
>interpret
>it, is that UNIX is the real OS, UNIX is better than Linux, and Linux is 
>just a
>naughty child that is becoming more and more of a nuisance to the adults. I
>agree wholeheartedly! I and many other UNIX bigots have been more vocal 
>about
>this than SCO.
>
>BUT... UNIX is not what SCO means by this term, UNIX is V7 -> 4BSD! That is 
>the
>real UNIX, USG is just a bad commercialized branch that no one ever really
>liked anyway! So to all those Fortune 1000 (or whatever that was) companies
>warned by SCO to stop running Linux, they should throw out those cheap 
>micros,
>put all their old large VAXen back online, and run True UNIX, 4.3 BSD UNIX! 
>And
>that *is* real UNIX, it comes directly from V7 and openly and proudly 
>admits to
>this fact! Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from
>Holy UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court 
>to
>determine what the hell it really is?
>
>But SCO probably won't be too happy about it as they just gave away the 
>True
>UNIX (V7) to the World for free, and it's non-retractable.
>
>So if anything good comes out of this lawsuit it's that maybe, just maybe, 
>BSD
>will finally get some attention and use over Linux. The Free Computing
>community doesn't have to suffer any loss whatsoever if SCO wins, we can
>instead just switch from Linux to the much better True UNIX, which is just 
>as
>free but a lot more solid, mature, and True. And stick it to SCO and laugh
>diabolically at how they voluntarily made UNIX free without us having to 
>seize
>it by force in a revolution.
>
>MS (donning the flameproof spacesuit)
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


From kstailey at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 13 04:30:42 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 11:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] 
	Pirates Of Penguinance  (Apologies to Gilbert, Sullivan, and most
	of humanity)
Message-ID: <20030612183042.9629.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>

http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/PiratesOfPenguinance

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

From jcapp at anteil.com  Thu Jun 12 23:39:58 2003
From: jcapp at anteil.com (Jim Capp)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:39:58 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Another response to SCO vs. Linux
Message-ID: <20030612133949.GA7438@anteil.com>

Hi All,

     I have been an avid UNIX fan since 1983 when I read my first
UNIX manual and realized the power and flexibility of the command line
utilities and portability of the C compiler.

I have used many flavors of *NIX and the companies I worked for sold
a lot of SCO products.  However, it became increasingly annoying to
have to spend an extra $1,000 to get a C compiler.  Beginning in 1994,
we began replacing AT&T Unix, SCO Xenix, and SCO Unix with Linux.

The final straw for us using SCO was when a major client upgraded their
system from a 2-CPU NCR to a 4-CPU Gateway and it took us hours to
locate all the necessary drivers to make it fly.  Then afterwards,
the client could not find their license materials.  Just for fun,
we popped in a RH7.1 version of Linux and it booted fine, located all
the hardware and installed itself in about a half-hour.  It has been
running that way for the last two years.

We had another client simply upgrade their SCO Unix system from a Pentium-100
to a Pentium III.  After spending hours trying to move their SCO license
and finding out that the bootloaders didn't like *something* (unknown to
this day) we went back to the customer and suggested another path.
Today, that system is running Linux/Apache/PHP/PostgreSQL.

The bottom line is that Linux works well.  The fact that it is nearly
free (cost of media/downloads/time etc.) is a nice bonus.

IMHO, SCO is a victim of their own design (who would symbolically link
1,000 files to some strange /opt/SCO/.../.../etc/init.d/....???

I guess when your business models don't pan out, you can always sue
somebody ... especially when someone like Microsoft gives you the money.
Do you really think Microsoft would pay $10,000,000 to anyone else without
a fight and without trying every other business tactic that they have
used in the past?

Finally, to threaten pulling IBM's AIX license unless they "settle" is
hubris.

My only fear is that a judge might think 80 out of 2.5 million lines of
code has some significant value :-/

I sincerely hope the dialogue of practical arguments against SCO that I
have seen in this list make it to the right people in defense of IBM.

Sincerely,

Jim Capp


From jcapp at anteil.com  Thu Jun 12 23:52:55 2003
From: jcapp at anteil.com (Jim Capp)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:52:55 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Re: Your message to TUHS awaits moderator approval
In-Reply-To: <mailman.257.1055424764.204.tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <mailman.257.1055424764.204.tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030612135247.GA7527@anteil.com>

Hmmm, I thought I *was* a member ... is it possible I am a member
as jcapp at kp.net? or jcapp at acm.org?  Do I need to submit under another
address or am I missing the boat?

Thanks,

Jim


On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 11:32:44PM +1000, tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org wrote:
> Your mail to 'TUHS' with the subject
> 
>     Another response to SCO vs. Linux
> 
> Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
> 
> The reason it is being held:
> 
>     Post by non-member to a members-only list
> 
> Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive
> notification of the moderator's decision.  If you would like to cancel
> this posting, please visit the following URL:
> 
>     http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/confirm/tuhs/de9265d7287d853c78061cb586498f97f7b80c45

From an at atrn.org  Fri Jun 13 06:21:24 2003
From: an at atrn.org (Andy Newman)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 06:21:24 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F30jwGXSXCWV8000236a2@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <70860DDD-9D13-11D7-99FA-003065DC717E@atrn.org>


zmkm zmkm wrote:

> Good old dear BSD , where is it ??

Well some of it, via CMU and many, many other paths, is a
significant component of "the other" mass market, end-user
OS. And if you believe Apple's marketing they ship more Unix
(woops, OpenGroup says they're not allowed to say that)
systems than anyone else.


From grog at lemis.com  Fri Jun 13 09:16:27 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:46:27 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F30jwGXSXCWV8000236a2@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F30jwGXSXCWV8000236a2@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20030612231627.GH1015@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
>
> Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why
> it didn?t burst in the open ?

Glad you asked.  It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago.  Don't
underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030613/91df20d0/attachment.sig>

From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Fri Jun 13 14:55:17 2003
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 21:55:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
Message-ID: <200306130455.h5D4tHa15069@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:46:27 +0930
> From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com>
> To: zmkm zmkm <new_zmkm at hotmail.com>
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> >
> > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why
> > it didn?t burst in the open ?
> 
> Glad you asked.  It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago.  Don't
> underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux.
> 
> Greg

In case you are referring to the BSD vs. AT&T suit, BSD won.

    carl

From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp  Tue Jun 17 15:04:40 2003
From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:04:40 +0900 (JST)
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
Message-ID: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>

Hi

I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH.

UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 
and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only.
Is it possible without any modification ?

Does anyone try this ?
Are there more better emulator than SIMH ?
or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ?

Thanks


- Akito


From wkt at tuhs.org  Tue Jun 17 15:53:33 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:53:33 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
References: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <20030617055333.GA19155@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:04:40PM +0900, Akito Fujita wrote:
> I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH.
> 
> UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 
> and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only.
> Is it possible without any modification ?

No, I don't think you can run UNIX/32V using SIMH.
You need something that really looks like a VAX-11/780.

	Warren

From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp  Tue Jun 17 16:09:06 2003
From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:09:06 +0900 (JST)
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: <20030617055333.GA19155@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
	<20030617055333.GA19155@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030617.150906.74753149.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>

From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 15:53:33 +1000

> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:04:40PM +0900, Akito Fujita wrote:
> > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH.
> > 
> > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 
> > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only.
> > Is it possible without any modification ?
> 
> No, I don't think you can run UNIX/32V using SIMH.
> You need something that really looks like a VAX-11/780.

Also I have looked for more better emulator than SIMH,
but I've never find anything yet.

Does anyone have a good information about it ?


- Akito

From asmodai at wxs.nl  Tue Jun 17 19:03:00 2003
From: asmodai at wxs.nl (Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 11:03:00 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] I knew that penguin couldn't be trusted
Message-ID: <20030617090259.GD81568@nexus.ninth-circle.org>

If you believe Mr Sontag's words of course.

I sincerely wonder what kind of medication the guy is using.

http://www.byte.com/documents/s=8276/byt1055784622054/0616_marshall.html

Best part:

At this point I started to think about the public interest and about
restrictive monopolies laws. It was almost as though Sontag was reading
my mind.and yes, SCO has that base covered too.

I listened to how IBM has bypassed U.S. export controls with Linux. How
"Syria and Libya and North Korea" are all building supercomputers with
Linux and inexpensive Intel hardware, in violation of U.S. export
control laws. These laws would normally restrict export of technologies
such as JFS, NUMA, RCU, and SMP.and, (I was waiting for this)
"encryption technologies." "We know that is occurring in Syria," I
heard, even though my mind was fogging over at this point.

"So are you saying that the U.S. government might file a "Friend of the
Court Brief" to support your case against IBM?" I blurted out. "Don't be
surprised" was Sontag's answer. 

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / a capoeirista
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/diary/
Is there a place deep within, a place where you hide your darkest Sins..?

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 18 03:26:26 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <20030617172626.66147.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Akito Fujita <akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH.
> 
> UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780 
> and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only.
> Is it possible without any modification ?

VAX-11/780 is a unibus VAX.
Micro VAX III / SIMH VAX is a Qbus VAX.

http://world.std.com/~bdc/projects/vaxen/vax-perf.html

SIMH is "Mayfair III" on that page.

> Does anyone try this ?
> Are there more better emulator than SIMH ?
> or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> - Akito
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Wed Jun 18 05:29:06 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 19:29:06 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
Message-ID: <Law14-F56iJ9lI2dtud0003cbd9@hotmail.com>

Hi all

what about eVAX ??? , any one tried this ? is it any good ??

Akito

I don't know if you got my earlier email it was bounced back earlier today 
from TUHS any way v32 doesn't support virtual memory.

zmkm



>From: Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com>
>To: Akito Fujita <akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>, tuhs at tuhs.org
>CC: Akito Fujita <akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
>Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>--- Akito Fujita <akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I have a plan to run UNIX/32V using SIMH.
> >
> > UNIX/32V is required VAX-11/780
> > and SIMH support Micro VAX III (?) only.
> > Is it possible without any modification ?
>
>VAX-11/780 is a unibus VAX.
>Micro VAX III / SIMH VAX is a Qbus VAX.
>
>http://world.std.com/~bdc/projects/vaxen/vax-perf.html
>
>SIMH is "Mayfair III" on that page.
>
> > Does anyone try this ?
> > Are there more better emulator than SIMH ?
> > or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > - Akito
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
>http://sbc.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Wed Jun 18 06:09:09 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 13:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: <20030617.140440.74753453.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306171307481.485-100000@gladen>

On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Akito Fujita wrote:
[snip]
> Are there more better emulator than SIMH ?
> or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ?
[snip]

I don't know if it is any better since I haven't ever used it, but
supposedly ts10 can emulate a vax.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/ts10/

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from
  mediocre minds.
                  -- Albert Einstein
  
  They laughed at Einstein.  They laughed at the Wright Brothers.
  But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
                  -- Carl Sagan


From sword7 at speakeasy.org  Wed Jun 18 12:26:14 2003
From: sword7 at speakeasy.org (Timothy Stark)
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:26:14 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306171307481.485-100000@gladen>
Message-ID: <000001c33540$fdcf34a0$1f915c42@sword70>

All,

Yes, latest ts10 versions are at
ftp://ftp.firesword7.net/pub/ts10/develop.  11/780 emulation is not
finished yet because I am figuring out how some memory and unibus
configuration programming works.  I have working Massbus emulation for
11/780 emulation.

Tim Stark

-----Original Message-----
From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org]
On Behalf Of Andru Luvisi
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:09 PM
To: Akito Fujita
Cc: tuhs at tuhs.org
Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation

On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Akito Fujita wrote:
[snip]
> Are there more better emulator than SIMH ?
> or Should I add the feature of 11/780 emulation into SIHM ?
[snip]

I don't know if it is any better since I haven't ever used it, but
supposedly ts10 can emulate a vax.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/ts10/



From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp  Wed Jun 18 15:28:34 2003
From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:28:34 +0900 (JST)
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F56iJ9lI2dtud0003cbd9@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F56iJ9lI2dtud0003cbd9@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20030618.142834.74748811.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>

From: "zmkm zmkm" <new_zmkm at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 19:29:06 +0000

> I don't know if you got my earlier email it was bounced back earlier today 
> from TUHS any way v32 doesn't support virtual memory.

Yes, I know it.

I want to make sure how different it from BSD.
That is reason why I want to run UNIX/32V.
Perhaps, no one have seen UNIX/32V which is running in Japan.

Also we can run old [34]BSD stuff without modification,
if we have VAX-11/780 emulator.


- Akito

From nao at tom-yam.or.jp  Wed Jun 18 15:54:05 2003
From: nao at tom-yam.or.jp (nao)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:54:05 +0900 (JST)
Subject: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation
In-Reply-To: Akito Fujita's message of "Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:28:34 +0900 (JST)"
	<20030618.142834.74748811.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
References: <Law14-F56iJ9lI2dtud0003cbd9@hotmail.com>
	<20030618.142834.74748811.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>
Message-ID: <200306180554.h5I5s5IT057207@miffy.tom-yam.or.jp>

Hi,

In message "Re: [TUHS] VAX-11/780 emulation"
    on 03/06/18, Akito Fujita <akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp> writes:
>I want to make sure how different it from BSD.
>That is reason why I want to run UNIX/32V.
>Perhaps, no one have seen UNIX/32V which is running in Japan.
>
>Also we can run old [34]BSD stuff without modification,
>if we have VAX-11/780 emulator.

Some report on UNIX/32V for VAX-11/780 located at the University of
Tokyo appeared in a Japanese journal for computer architecture in
1981. See the following web page for details. CAVEAT: it contains lots
of Japanese characters.

http://www.ipsj.or.jp/members/SIGNotes/Jpn/08/1981/041/article005.html

Naoki Hamada
nao at tom-yam.ro.jp

From peterjeremy at optushome.com.au  Thu Jun 19 21:00:54 2003
From: peterjeremy at optushome.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:00:54 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] My response to SCO vs. Linux
In-Reply-To: <200306130455.h5D4tHa15069@opihi.ucsd.edu>
References: <200306130455.h5D4tHa15069@opihi.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <20030619110053.GC9069@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>

On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 09:55:17PM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote:
>> From: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com>
>> On Thursday, 12 June 2003 at 11:31:52 +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
>> > Good old dear BSD , where is it ?? still fighting a niche turf , why
>> > it didn?t burst in the open ?
>> 
>> Glad you asked.  It was the victim of a law suit ten years ago.  Don't
>> underestimate what the current legal challenges can do to Linux.
>In case you are referring to the BSD vs. AT&T suit, BSD won.

But BSD basically stagnated during the suit - which took 2-3 years.
No-one wanted to have anything to do with BSD whilst the suit was
on and it took a while to recover.  Linux was unaffected and basically
gained 3-4 years headstart.

What Greg is suggesting is that if something equivalent comes along
for Linux (and I don't believe the SCO case is it), it will put a
really serious dent in its growth.  Even if Linux won, the after-effect
will last for years.

Peter

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 20 09:31:06 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:31:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
Message-ID: <20030619233106.83233.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 20 09:35:39 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:35:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <20030619233106.83233.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>

http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/ancient-unix/

   	
				

  20th Jun 2003
	

home | news | register | members | privacy policy | faqs | about | contact
	

Not Logged In  
	 Directory Listing 	
		
	
	
SCO Ancient Unix
Software License Agreement

THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. ("SCO") HEREBY GRANTS TO YOU THE SPECIAL
SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT STATED BELOW ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES STATED IN THIS
SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT. BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, OR USING THE
ANCIENT UNIX SOURCE CODE, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ THIS SPECIAL
SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT, UNDERSTAND IT, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT.

THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ANCIENT
UNIX SOURCE CODE (AGREEMENT)

A. THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC., a California corporation (SCO), having an
office at 400 Encinal Street, Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900 and you as
LICENSEE, agree that, as of the Effective Date hereof, as defined in Section
7.1, the terms and conditions set forth in this AGREEMENT shall apply to use by
LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT.

B. SCO makes certain licensing rights for SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS available under
this AGREEMENT, including rights to make and use DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS. Such
SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is identified in Section 3 of this AGREEMENT .

C. This AGREEMENT sets forth the entire agreement and understanding between the
parties as to the subject matter hereof and merges all prior discussions
between them, and neither of the parties shall be bound by any conditions,
definitions, warranties, understandings or representations with respect to such
subject matter other than as expressly provided herein or as duly set forth on
or subsequent to the date of acceptance hereof in writing and signed by a
proper and duly authorized representative of the party to be bound thereby. No
provision appearing on any form originated by LICENSEE shall be applicable
unless such provision is expressly accepted in writing by an authorized
representative of SCO.

D. The AUTHORIZED COUNTRY for this AGREEMENT shall be any countries not
excluded by Section 5.2

I. DEFINITIONS

1.1 AUTHORIZED COUNTRY means one or more countries specified above.

1.2 CPU means a computer having one or more processing units and a single
global memory space.

1.3 COMPUTER PROGRAM means any instruction or instructions for controlling the
operation of a CPU.

1.4 DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT means COMPUTER PROGRAMS in OBJECT CODE format based
on a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.

1.5 DESIGNATED CPU means all CPUs licensed as such for a specific SOURCE CODE
PRODUCT.

1.6 OBJECT CODE means a COMPUTER PROGRAM in binary form, resulting from the
compilation of SOURCE CODE by computer or compiler into machine executable code
and which is in a form of computer programs not convenient to human
understanding of the program logic, but which is appropriate for execution or
interpretation by computer.

1.7 SOURCE CODE means COMPUTER PROGRAMS written in certain programming
languages in electronic media form and in a form convenient for reading and
review by a trained individual, such
as a printed or written listing of programs, containing specific algorithms,
instructions, plans, routines and the like, for controlling the operation of a
computer system, but which is not in a form that would be suitable for
execution directly on computer hardware.

1.8 SOURCE CODE PRODUCT means a SCO software offering, primarily in SOURCE CODE
form. Such offering may also include OBJECT CODE components.

1.9 SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM means a SCO software offering that is (i)
specifically designed for a 16-Bit computer, or (ii) the 32V version, and (iii)
specifically excludes UNIX System V and
successor operating systems.

2. GRANT OF RIGHTS

2.1 (a) SCO grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive
right to use, in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY, each SOURCE CODE PRODUCT identified in
Section 3 of this AGREEMENT, solely for personal use (as restricted in Section
2.1(b)) and solely on or in conjunction with DESIGNATED CPUs, and/or Networks
of CPUs, licensed by LICENSEE through this SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT
for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. Such right to use
includes the right to modify such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT and to prepare DERIVED
BINARY PRODUCT based on such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, provided that any such
modification or DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that contains any part of a SOURCE CODE
PRODUCT subject to this
AGREEMENT is treated hereunder the same as such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. SCO claims
no ownership interest in any portion of such a modification or DERIVED BINARY
PRODUCT that is not part of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.

(b) Personal use is limited to noncommercial uses. Any such use made in
connection with the development of enhancements or modifications to SOURCE CODE
PRODUCTS is permitted only if (i) neither the results of such use nor any
enhancement or modification so developed is intended primarily for the benefit
of a third party and (ii) any copy of any such result, enhancement or
modification, furnished by LICENSEE to a third party holder of an equivalent
Software License with SCO where permitted by Section 8.4(b) below, is furnished
for no more than the cost of reproduction and shipping. Any such copy that
includes any portion of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be subject tothe provisions
of such Section 8.4.

(c) LICENSEE may produce printed and on-line copies of documentation included
with the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT as necessary for use with the DESIGNATED CPUs. All
copies must include a legally sufficient copyright notice and a statement that
the documents include a portion or all of SCO's copyrighted documentation,
which is being reproduced with permission.

(d) Commercial use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS or of any result,
enhancement or modification associated with the use of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS
under this AGREEMENT is not permitted. Such commercial use is permissible only
pursuant to the terms of an appropriate commercial software agreement between
SCO or a corporate affiliate thereof and LICENSEE. For purposes of this
AGREEMENT, commercial use includes, but is not limited to, furnishing copies to
third parties in a manner not permitted by Section 8.4(b).

(e) SCO also grants LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive right
to make copies of DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS and, subject to U. S. Government
export requirements and to Section 8.4(b), to furnish such copies directly to
other LICENSEES who have an equivalent Software License with SCO before or at
the time of furnishing each copy of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT.

2.2 (a) Any notice acknowledging a contribution of a third party appearing in a
SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be included in corresponding portions of DERIVED
BINARY PRODUCTS made by LICENSEE.

(b) Each portion of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT shall include an appropriate
copyright notice. Such copyright notice may be the copyright notice or notices
appearing in or on the corresponding portions of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT on
which such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is based or, if copyrightable changes are
made in developing such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT, a copyright notice
identifying the owner of such changes.

2.3 No right is granted hereunder to use any trademark of SCO (or a corporate
affiliate thereof). However, LICENSEE must state in packaging, labeling or
otherwise that a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is derived from SCO's software under
license from SCO and identify such software (including any trademark, provided
the proprietor of the trademark is appropriately identified). LICENSEE agrees
not to use a name or trademark for a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that is confusingly
similar to a name or trademark used by SCO (or a corporate affiliate thereof).

2.4 A single back-up CPU may be used as a substitute for the DESIGNATED CPU
without notice to SCO during any time when such DESIGNATED CPU is inoperative
because it is malfunctioning or undergoing repair, maintenance or other
modification.

3. LICENSED SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS

The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are
restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR
OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of
the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and
successor operating systems:

16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V

4. DELIVERY

SCO makes no guarantees or commitments that any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is
available from SCO. If available, and upon acceptance by LICENSEE of the terms
of this AGREEMENT, SCO will provide LICENSEE one (1) copy of such SOURCE CODE
PRODUCT via its FTP site established for such purpose.

5. EXPORT

5.1 LICENSEE agrees that it will not, without the prior written consent of SCO,
export, directly or indirectly, SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS covered by this AGREEMENT
to any country outside of the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY.

5.2 LICENSEE acknowledges that the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS, the media, and any
immediate product (including processes) produced directly by the use of any
such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS are subject to export controls under the U.S. Export
Administration Regulations and the export regulations of other countries.
LICENSEE may not export or re-export, directly or indirectly, the SOURCE CODE
PRODUCTS, the media, any related technical information or materials covered by
this AGREEMENT, or any immediate product (including processes) produced
directly by the use of any such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to any country that is in
violation of U.S. Export Administration Regulations and/or the export
regulations of other countries unless an appropriate authorization from the
U.S. Commerce Department and any other relevant government authority has been
obtained.

5.3 LICENSEE agrees that its obligations under Sections 5.1 and 5.2 shall
survive and continue after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT.

6. FEES AND TAXES

6.1 The rights granted to LICENSEE for use of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS
identified in Section 3 above are granted to LICENSEE at no charge.

6.2 LICENSEE shall pay all taxes (and any related interest or penalty), however
designated, imposed as a result of the existence or operation of this
AGREEMENT, except (i) any tax imposed upon SCO (or a corporate affiliate
thereof) in the jurisdiction in which LICENSEE is located if such tax is
allowable as a credit against United States income taxes of SCO (or such an
affiliate) and (ii) any income tax imposed upon SCO (or such an affiliate) by
the United States or any governmental entity within the United States proper
(the fifty (50) states and the District of Columbia). To assist in obtaining
the credit identified in (i) of this Section 6.2, LICENSEE shall furnish SCO
with such evidence as may be required by United States taxing authorities to
establish that any such tax has been paid. If SCO is required to collect a tax
to be paid by LICENSEE, LICENSEE shall pay such tax to SCO on demand.

7. TERM

7.1 This AGREEMENT shall become effective on and as of the date of acceptance
of the terms of this AGREEMENT. The initial term of this AGREEMENT shall be for
one (1) year. Thereafter, the AGREEMENT will automatically renew for successive
one (1) year terms unless either party gives the other, no later than ninety
(90) days before the end of the initial term, or then current extension,
written notice of its intent to terminate this AGREEMENT. Nothing in this
AGREEMENT shall be construed to require either party to extend this AGREEMENT
beyond the initial term or any subsequent term.

7.2 LICENSEE may terminate its rights under this AGREEMENT by written notice to
SCO certifying that LICENSEE has discontinued use of and returned or destroyed,
at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT.

7.3 If LICENSEE fails to fulfill one or more of its obligations under this
AGREEMENT, SCO may, upon its election and in addition to any other remedies it
might have, at any time terminate all the rights granted by it hereunder to
LICENSEE. Upon such termination LICENSEE shall immediately discontinue use of
and return or destroy, at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in
its possession.

7.4 In the event of termination of LICENSEE's rights under Sections 7.2 or 7.3,
(i) all fees that LICENSEE has become obligated to pay shall become immediately
due and payable and (ii) SCO shall have no obligation to refund any amounts
paid to it hereunder.

8. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

8.1 This AGREEMENT shall prevail notwithstanding any conflicting terms or
legends which may appear in a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.

8.2 SCO warrants that it is empowered to grant the rights granted herein. SCO
and other developers make no other representations or warranties, expressly or
impliedly. By way of example but not of limitation, SCO and other developers
make no representations or warranties of merchantability or fitness for any
particular purpose, or that the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT will not
infringe any patent, copyright or trademark. SCO and other developers shall not
be held to any liability with respect to any claim by LICENSEE, or a third
party on account of, or arising from, the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.

8.3 Neither the execution of this AGREEMENT nor anything in any SOURCE CODE
PRODUCT shall be construed as an obligation upon SCO or any other developer to
furnish any person, including LICENSEE, any assistance of any kind whatsoever,
or any information or documentation.

8.4 (a) LICENSEE agrees that it shall hold all parts of the SOURCE CODE
PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT in confidence for SCO. LICENSEE further
agrees that should it make such disclosure of any or all of such SOURCE CODE
PRODUCTS (including methods or concepts utilized therein) to anyone to whom
such disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are granted hereunder,
LICENSEE shall appropriately notify each such person to whom any such
disclosure is made that such disclosure is made in confidence and shall be kept
in confidence and have each such person sign a confidentiality agreement
containing restrictions on disclosure substantially similar to those set forth
herein.

If LICENSEE should become aware of a violation of SCO's intellectual property
and/or proprietary rights, LICENSEE shall promptly notify SCO and cooperate
with SCO in such enforcement.

If information relating to a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT subject to this AGREEMENT at
any time becomes available without restriction to the general public by acts
not attributable to LICENSEE, LICENSEE's obligations under this section shall
not apply to such information after such time.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8.4(a), LICENSEE may make
available copies of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, either in modified or unmodified
form, to third parties in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY having Source Code Licenses of
the same scope herewith from SCO for the same SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, if and only
if (i) LICENSEE first requests verification of the status of the recipient by
contacting SCO at the address contained in Section 8.8(a) or other number
specified by SCO, and (ii) SCO gives written verification of the recipient's
software license status. LICENSEE shall maintain a record of each such SOURCE
CODE PRODUCT made available.

8.5 On SCO's request, but not more frequently than annually, LICENSEE shall
furnish to SCO a statement, listing the location, type and serial number of the
DESIGNATED CPU hereunder and stating that the use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE
PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT has been reviewed and that each such SOURCE
CODE PRODUCT is being used solely on the DESIGNATED CPU (or temporarily on a
back-up CPU) for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in full compliance with the
provisions of this AGREEMENT.

8.6 The obligations of LICENSEE under Section 8.4 shall survive and continue
after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT.

8.7 Neither this AGREEMENT nor any rights hereunder, in whole or in part, shall
be assignable or otherwise transferable by LICENSEE and any purported
assignment or transfer shall be null and void.

8.8 (a) Correspondence with SCO relating to this AGREEMENT shall be sent to:

THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC.
400 Encinal Street
Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900
United States of America

Attention: Law and Corporate Affairs

8.9 LICENSEE shall obtain all approvals from any governmental authority in the
AUTHORIZED COUNTRY required to effectuate this AGREEMENT according to its
terms, including any such approvals required for LICENSEE to make payments to
SCO pursuant to this AGREEMENT. LICENSEE shall bear all expenses associated
with obtaining such approvals.

8.10 The construction and performance of this AGREEMENT shall be governed by
the laws of the State of California, USA.


Click ACCEPT to proceed.
	
[Buttons still work, in fact I just got my copy of Sys III :) ]
 

 

 

Last reviewed Mayl 2, 2000

	
		
		
	 Login 	
		
	

		

--- Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html
> 
> http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html

------ 
------
------


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From wkt at tuhs.org  Fri Jun 20 09:56:52 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:56:52 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030619233106.83233.qmail@web10009.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030619235652.GA40975@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 04:35:39PM -0700, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/ancient-unix/
> 
> The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are
> restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR
> OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of
> the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and
> successor operating systems:
> 
> 16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V
> 
> Click ACCEPT to proceed.
> 	
> [Buttons still work, in fact I just got my copy of Sys III :) ]


I would be very careful here. At the very least, the contract doesn't
explicitly cover SysIII, although you could argue that it is a
SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM. And the Caldera license explicitly forbids
SysIII.

	Warren

From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Fri Jun 20 10:10:52 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <20030619235652.GA40975@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306191709510.485-100000@gladen>

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Warren Toomey wrote:
[snip]
> I would be very careful here. At the very least, the contract doesn't
> explicitly cover SysIII, although you could argue that it is a
> SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM. And the Caldera license explicitly forbids
> SysIII.

It seems to me that the fact that SCO offered SysIII on the page linked to
from the license agreement implies that SCO intended for SysIII to be
covered by this license.

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  "Taking the envelope and pencil in his otherwise empty hands, the
  medium feels it, stares into space, grunts, foams at the mouth, and
  otherwise becomes very psychic."
  	- Theodore Annemann


From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au  Fri Jun 20 11:52:47 2003
From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:52:47 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306191709510.485-100000@gladen>
References: <20030619235652.GA40975@minnie.tuhs.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0306191709510.485-100000@gladen>
Message-ID: <20030620015247.GF273@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>

On 2003-Jun-19 17:10:52 -0700, Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Warren Toomey wrote:
>[snip]
>> I would be very careful here. At the very least, the contract doesn't
>> explicitly cover SysIII, although you could argue that it is a
>> SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM. And the Caldera license explicitly forbids
>> SysIII.
>
>It seems to me that the fact that SCO offered SysIII on the page linked to
>from the license agreement implies that SCO intended for SysIII to be
>covered by this license.

I think the status of SysIII was always a bit murky.  Whilst it may
have been old SCO's intention that the Ancient UNIX license covered
SysIII, the license doesn't say so.  Since the license doesn't
explicitly allow SysIII, it would be up to you to convince the judge
that the license does implicitly cover SysIII.

Of course, by publishing SysIII, SCO have blown any trade secret claims
relating to SysIII out of the water.  But that doesn't make it legal
for you to use it.

Peter

From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Fri Jun 20 13:00:52 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 23:00:52 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000101c336d8$297d01c0$239efea9@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
It seems that the archive is still available under their mismanaged
FTP
server. Since I already agreed to that oddball license, I am now
downloading
them from the FTP site. (I trimmed the original message there was a
complaint!)

Warren, the HTML pages make a reference to an older webpage on the
TUHS
webservers, is a CD still available? Or are they making that up?
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Kenneth Stailey
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 7:36 PM
> To: Kenneth Stailey; tuhs at tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
> --- Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html
> >
> >
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.ht
ml
> 
> ------
> ------
> ------
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From drwho8 at worldnet.att.net  Fri Jun 20 10:57:52 2003
From: drwho8 at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 20:57:52 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
References: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001701c336c6$fb277f00$239efea9@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
It seems that the archive is still available under their mismanaged FTP
server. Since I already agreed to that oddball license, I am now downloading
them from the FTP site.

Warren, the HTML pages make a reference to an older webpage on the TUHS
webservers, is a CD still available? Or are they making that up?
Gregg C Levine drwho8 at worldnet.att.net
"Oh my!" The Second Doctor's nearly favorite phrase.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Stailey" <kstailey at yahoo.com>
To: "Kenneth Stailey" <kstailey at yahoo.com>; <tuhs at tuhs.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page


> http://public.planetmirror.com/pub/ancient-unix/
>
>
>
>
>   20th Jun 2003
>
>
> home | news | register | members | privacy policy | faqs | about | contact
>
>
> Not Logged In
> Directory Listing
>
>
>
> SCO Ancient Unix
> Software License Agreement
>
> THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. ("SCO") HEREBY GRANTS TO YOU THE SPECIAL
> SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT STATED BELOW ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES STATED IN
THIS
> SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT. BY DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, OR USING
THE
> ANCIENT UNIX SOURCE CODE, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE READ THIS SPECIAL
> SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT, UNDERSTAND IT, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY IT.
>
> THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC. SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR
ANCIENT
> UNIX SOURCE CODE (AGREEMENT)
>
> A. THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC., a California corporation (SCO), having
an
> office at 400 Encinal Street, Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900 and you as
> LICENSEE, agree that, as of the Effective Date hereof, as defined in
Section
> 7.1, the terms and conditions set forth in this AGREEMENT shall apply to
use by
> LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT.
>
> B. SCO makes certain licensing rights for SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS available
under
> this AGREEMENT, including rights to make and use DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS.
Such
> SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is identified in Section 3 of this AGREEMENT .
>
> C. This AGREEMENT sets forth the entire agreement and understanding
between the
> parties as to the subject matter hereof and merges all prior discussions
> between them, and neither of the parties shall be bound by any conditions,
> definitions, warranties, understandings or representations with respect to
such
> subject matter other than as expressly provided herein or as duly set
forth on
> or subsequent to the date of acceptance hereof in writing and signed by a
> proper and duly authorized representative of the party to be bound
thereby. No
> provision appearing on any form originated by LICENSEE shall be applicable
> unless such provision is expressly accepted in writing by an authorized
> representative of SCO.
>
> D. The AUTHORIZED COUNTRY for this AGREEMENT shall be any countries not
> excluded by Section 5.2
>
> I. DEFINITIONS
>
> 1.1 AUTHORIZED COUNTRY means one or more countries specified above.
>
> 1.2 CPU means a computer having one or more processing units and a single
> global memory space.
>
> 1.3 COMPUTER PROGRAM means any instruction or instructions for controlling
the
> operation of a CPU.
>
> 1.4 DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT means COMPUTER PROGRAMS in OBJECT CODE format
based
> on a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.
>
> 1.5 DESIGNATED CPU means all CPUs licensed as such for a specific SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCT.
>
> 1.6 OBJECT CODE means a COMPUTER PROGRAM in binary form, resulting from
the
> compilation of SOURCE CODE by computer or compiler into machine executable
code
> and which is in a form of computer programs not convenient to human
> understanding of the program logic, but which is appropriate for execution
or
> interpretation by computer.
>
> 1.7 SOURCE CODE means COMPUTER PROGRAMS written in certain programming
> languages in electronic media form and in a form convenient for reading
and
> review by a trained individual, such
> as a printed or written listing of programs, containing specific
algorithms,
> instructions, plans, routines and the like, for controlling the operation
of a
> computer system, but which is not in a form that would be suitable for
> execution directly on computer hardware.
>
> 1.8 SOURCE CODE PRODUCT means a SCO software offering, primarily in SOURCE
CODE
> form. Such offering may also include OBJECT CODE components.
>
> 1.9 SUCCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM means a SCO software offering that is (i)
> specifically designed for a 16-Bit computer, or (ii) the 32V version, and
(iii)
> specifically excludes UNIX System V and
> successor operating systems.
>
> 2. GRANT OF RIGHTS
>
> 2.1 (a) SCO grants to LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and
nonexclusive
> right to use, in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY, each SOURCE CODE PRODUCT
identified in
> Section 3 of this AGREEMENT, solely for personal use (as restricted in
Section
> 2.1(b)) and solely on or in conjunction with DESIGNATED CPUs, and/or
Networks
> of CPUs, licensed by LICENSEE through this SPECIAL SOFTWARE LICENSE
AGREEMENT
> for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. Such right to use
> includes the right to modify such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT and to prepare
DERIVED
> BINARY PRODUCT based on such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, provided that any such
> modification or DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that contains any part of a SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCT subject to this
> AGREEMENT is treated hereunder the same as such SOURCE CODE PRODUCT. SCO
claims
> no ownership interest in any portion of such a modification or DERIVED
BINARY
> PRODUCT that is not part of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.
>
> (b) Personal use is limited to noncommercial uses. Any such use made in
> connection with the development of enhancements or modifications to SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCTS is permitted only if (i) neither the results of such use nor any
> enhancement or modification so developed is intended primarily for the
benefit
> of a third party and (ii) any copy of any such result, enhancement or
> modification, furnished by LICENSEE to a third party holder of an
equivalent
> Software License with SCO where permitted by Section 8.4(b) below, is
furnished
> for no more than the cost of reproduction and shipping. Any such copy that
> includes any portion of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be subject tothe
provisions
> of such Section 8.4.
>
> (c) LICENSEE may produce printed and on-line copies of documentation
included
> with the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT as necessary for use with the DESIGNATED
CPUs. All
> copies must include a legally sufficient copyright notice and a statement
that
> the documents include a portion or all of SCO's copyrighted documentation,
> which is being reproduced with permission.
>
> (d) Commercial use by LICENSEE of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS or of any result,
> enhancement or modification associated with the use of SOURCE CODE
PRODUCTS
> under this AGREEMENT is not permitted. Such commercial use is permissible
only
> pursuant to the terms of an appropriate commercial software agreement
between
> SCO or a corporate affiliate thereof and LICENSEE. For purposes of this
> AGREEMENT, commercial use includes, but is not limited to, furnishing
copies to
> third parties in a manner not permitted by Section 8.4(b).
>
> (e) SCO also grants LICENSEE a personal, nontransferable and nonexclusive
right
> to make copies of DERIVED BINARY PRODUCTS and, subject to U. S. Government
> export requirements and to Section 8.4(b), to furnish such copies directly
to
> other LICENSEES who have an equivalent Software License with SCO before or
at
> the time of furnishing each copy of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT.
>
> 2.2 (a) Any notice acknowledging a contribution of a third party appearing
in a
> SOURCE CODE PRODUCT shall be included in corresponding portions of DERIVED
> BINARY PRODUCTS made by LICENSEE.
>
> (b) Each portion of a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT shall include an appropriate
> copyright notice. Such copyright notice may be the copyright notice or
notices
> appearing in or on the corresponding portions of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCT
on
> which such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is based or, if copyrightable changes
are
> made in developing such DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT, a copyright notice
> identifying the owner of such changes.
>
> 2.3 No right is granted hereunder to use any trademark of SCO (or a
corporate
> affiliate thereof). However, LICENSEE must state in packaging, labeling or
> otherwise that a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT is derived from SCO's software
under
> license from SCO and identify such software (including any trademark,
provided
> the proprietor of the trademark is appropriately identified). LICENSEE
agrees
> not to use a name or trademark for a DERIVED BINARY PRODUCT that is
confusingly
> similar to a name or trademark used by SCO (or a corporate affiliate
thereof).
>
> 2.4 A single back-up CPU may be used as a substitute for the DESIGNATED
CPU
> without notice to SCO during any time when such DESIGNATED CPU is
inoperative
> because it is malfunctioning or undergoing repair, maintenance or other
> modification.
>
> 3. LICENSED SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS
>
> The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT
are
> restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR
> OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early
versions of
> the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V
and
> successor operating systems:
>
> 16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V
>
> 4. DELIVERY
>
> SCO makes no guarantees or commitments that any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT is
> available from SCO. If available, and upon acceptance by LICENSEE of the
terms
> of this AGREEMENT, SCO will provide LICENSEE one (1) copy of such SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCT via its FTP site established for such purpose.
>
> 5. EXPORT
>
> 5.1 LICENSEE agrees that it will not, without the prior written consent of
SCO,
> export, directly or indirectly, SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS covered by this
AGREEMENT
> to any country outside of the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY.
>
> 5.2 LICENSEE acknowledges that the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS, the media, and
any
> immediate product (including processes) produced directly by the use of
any
> such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS are subject to export controls under the U.S.
Export
> Administration Regulations and the export regulations of other countries.
> LICENSEE may not export or re-export, directly or indirectly, the SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCTS, the media, any related technical information or materials
covered by
> this AGREEMENT, or any immediate product (including processes) produced
> directly by the use of any such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to any country that
is in
> violation of U.S. Export Administration Regulations and/or the export
> regulations of other countries unless an appropriate authorization from
the
> U.S. Commerce Department and any other relevant government authority has
been
> obtained.
>
> 5.3 LICENSEE agrees that its obligations under Sections 5.1 and 5.2 shall
> survive and continue after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT.
>
> 6. FEES AND TAXES
>
> 6.1 The rights granted to LICENSEE for use of the SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS
> identified in Section 3 above are granted to LICENSEE at no charge.
>
> 6.2 LICENSEE shall pay all taxes (and any related interest or penalty),
however
> designated, imposed as a result of the existence or operation of this
> AGREEMENT, except (i) any tax imposed upon SCO (or a corporate affiliate
> thereof) in the jurisdiction in which LICENSEE is located if such tax is
> allowable as a credit against United States income taxes of SCO (or such
an
> affiliate) and (ii) any income tax imposed upon SCO (or such an affiliate)
by
> the United States or any governmental entity within the United States
proper
> (the fifty (50) states and the District of Columbia). To assist in
obtaining
> the credit identified in (i) of this Section 6.2, LICENSEE shall furnish
SCO
> with such evidence as may be required by United States taxing authorities
to
> establish that any such tax has been paid. If SCO is required to collect a
tax
> to be paid by LICENSEE, LICENSEE shall pay such tax to SCO on demand.
>
> 7. TERM
>
> 7.1 This AGREEMENT shall become effective on and as of the date of
acceptance
> of the terms of this AGREEMENT. The initial term of this AGREEMENT shall
be for
> one (1) year. Thereafter, the AGREEMENT will automatically renew for
successive
> one (1) year terms unless either party gives the other, no later than
ninety
> (90) days before the end of the initial term, or then current extension,
> written notice of its intent to terminate this AGREEMENT. Nothing in this
> AGREEMENT shall be construed to require either party to extend this
AGREEMENT
> beyond the initial term or any subsequent term.
>
> 7.2 LICENSEE may terminate its rights under this AGREEMENT by written
notice to
> SCO certifying that LICENSEE has discontinued use of and returned or
destroyed,
> at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS subject to this
AGREEMENT.
>
> 7.3 If LICENSEE fails to fulfill one or more of its obligations under this
> AGREEMENT, SCO may, upon its election and in addition to any other
remedies it
> might have, at any time terminate all the rights granted by it hereunder
to
> LICENSEE. Upon such termination LICENSEE shall immediately discontinue use
of
> and return or destroy, at SCO's option, all copies of SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS
in
> its possession.
>
> 7.4 In the event of termination of LICENSEE's rights under Sections 7.2 or
7.3,
> (i) all fees that LICENSEE has become obligated to pay shall become
immediately
> due and payable and (ii) SCO shall have no obligation to refund any
amounts
> paid to it hereunder.
>
> 8. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
>
> 8.1 This AGREEMENT shall prevail notwithstanding any conflicting terms or
> legends which may appear in a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.
>
> 8.2 SCO warrants that it is empowered to grant the rights granted herein.
SCO
> and other developers make no other representations or warranties,
expressly or
> impliedly. By way of example but not of limitation, SCO and other
developers
> make no representations or warranties of merchantability or fitness for
any
> particular purpose, or that the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT will not
> infringe any patent, copyright or trademark. SCO and other developers
shall not
> be held to any liability with respect to any claim by LICENSEE, or a third
> party on account of, or arising from, the use of any SOURCE CODE PRODUCT.
>
> 8.3 Neither the execution of this AGREEMENT nor anything in any SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCT shall be construed as an obligation upon SCO or any other
developer to
> furnish any person, including LICENSEE, any assistance of any kind
whatsoever,
> or any information or documentation.
>
> 8.4 (a) LICENSEE agrees that it shall hold all parts of the SOURCE CODE
> PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT in confidence for SCO. LICENSEE further
> agrees that should it make such disclosure of any or all of such SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCTS (including methods or concepts utilized therein) to anyone to
whom
> such disclosure is necessary to the use for which rights are granted
hereunder,
> LICENSEE shall appropriately notify each such person to whom any such
> disclosure is made that such disclosure is made in confidence and shall be
kept
> in confidence and have each such person sign a confidentiality agreement
> containing restrictions on disclosure substantially similar to those set
forth
> herein.
>
> If LICENSEE should become aware of a violation of SCO's intellectual
property
> and/or proprietary rights, LICENSEE shall promptly notify SCO and
cooperate
> with SCO in such enforcement.
>
> If information relating to a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT subject to this AGREEMENT
at
> any time becomes available without restriction to the general public by
acts
> not attributable to LICENSEE, LICENSEE's obligations under this section
shall
> not apply to such information after such time.
>
> (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8.4(a), LICENSEE may make
> available copies of a SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, either in modified or
unmodified
> form, to third parties in the AUTHORIZED COUNTRY having Source Code
Licenses of
> the same scope herewith from SCO for the same SOURCE CODE PRODUCT, if and
only
> if (i) LICENSEE first requests verification of the status of the recipient
by
> contacting SCO at the address contained in Section 8.8(a) or other number
> specified by SCO, and (ii) SCO gives written verification of the
recipient's
> software license status. LICENSEE shall maintain a record of each such
SOURCE
> CODE PRODUCT made available.
>
> 8.5 On SCO's request, but not more frequently than annually, LICENSEE
shall
> furnish to SCO a statement, listing the location, type and serial number
of the
> DESIGNATED CPU hereunder and stating that the use by LICENSEE of SOURCE
CODE
> PRODUCTS subject to this AGREEMENT has been reviewed and that each such
SOURCE
> CODE PRODUCT is being used solely on the DESIGNATED CPU (or temporarily on
a
> back-up CPU) for such SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS in full compliance with the
> provisions of this AGREEMENT.
>
> 8.6 The obligations of LICENSEE under Section 8.4 shall survive and
continue
> after any termination of rights under this AGREEMENT.
>
> 8.7 Neither this AGREEMENT nor any rights hereunder, in whole or in part,
shall
> be assignable or otherwise transferable by LICENSEE and any purported
> assignment or transfer shall be null and void.
>
> 8.8 (a) Correspondence with SCO relating to this AGREEMENT shall be sent
to:
>
> THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC.
> 400 Encinal Street
> Santa Cruz, California 95061-1900
> United States of America
>
> Attention: Law and Corporate Affairs
>
> 8.9 LICENSEE shall obtain all approvals from any governmental authority in
the
> AUTHORIZED COUNTRY required to effectuate this AGREEMENT according to its
> terms, including any such approvals required for LICENSEE to make payments
to
> SCO pursuant to this AGREEMENT. LICENSEE shall bear all expenses
associated
> with obtaining such approvals.
>
> 8.10 The construction and performance of this AGREEMENT shall be governed
by
> the laws of the State of California, USA.
>
>
> Click ACCEPT to proceed.
>
> [Buttons still work, in fact I just got my copy of Sys III :) ]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Last reviewed Mayl 2, 2000
>
>
>
>
> Login
>
>
>
>
>
> --- Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html
> >
> > http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient_unix.html
>
> ------
> ------
> ------
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From wkt at tuhs.org  Fri Jun 20 17:01:59 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:01:59 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <001701c336c6$fb277f00$239efea9@who5>
References: <20030619233539.97540.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>
	<001701c336c6$fb277f00$239efea9@who5>
Message-ID: <20030620070159.GA44912@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 08:57:52PM -0400, Gregg C Levine wrote:
> Warren, the HTML pages make a reference to an older webpage on the TUHS
> webservers, is a CD still available? Or are they making that up?

We used to distibute CD copies of the Archive on a voluntary basis, but
with all the ftp & http mirrors these days I decided it was all too much
work. However, if you want a CD of something, ask away & someone might
put their hand up :-)

	Warren

From bwc at coraid.com  Fri Jun 20 23:21:20 2003
From: bwc at coraid.com (bwc at coraid.com)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:21:20 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002?
Message-ID: <4a63dc02eee9c2657a34cf34ebd328bc@coraid.com>

I've got a sheet of paper here that is a license from Caldera dated
January 23, 2002.  Isn't that the current license?  I don't see any timer
limit on the license.

  Brantley

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 20 23:59:41 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 06:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes
Message-ID: <20030620135941.9596.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi,

Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set
of files into a tape image.  Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11?

Thanks,
Ken


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 21 00:56:23 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 07:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002?
In-Reply-To: <4a63dc02eee9c2657a34cf34ebd328bc@coraid.com>
Message-ID: <20030620145623.63399.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>


--- bwc at coraid.com wrote:
> I've got a sheet of paper here that is a license from Caldera dated
> January 23, 2002.  Isn't that the current license?  I don't see any timer
> limit on the license.
> 
>   Brantley

I'm no lawyer but I think that unless there are provisions for revoking the
license in the license then the license is perpetual.

Question:  The SCO Group is Caldera's new name.  What is the relationship
between THE SANTA CRUZ OPERATION, INC and Caldera / The SCO Group?

> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Sat Jun 21 01:12:24 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:12:24 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] What about the license from Jan 23, 2002?
Message-ID: <20030620151300.9D09A1EEC@minnie.tuhs.org>

Just to clarify, what Brantley has is his own copy of the Bill
Broderick letter, printed from the PDF file.  If it's valid, it
is effectively unrevokable anyway as it grants permission to use
and distribute freely to anyone as long as credit to Caldera is
maintained.  But as long as nobody has a signed original it may
be messy to prove that it's valid.

On the other hand, I assume that if it can be shown that Caldera
were aware of the letter and behaved as if it were valid, there
are no secrets left to protect in V7 or 32/V.

On the other leg, however, that letter doesn't open up System III.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 21 01:18:58 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 08:18:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] SCO removed the anchient UNIX offer web page
In-Reply-To: <000101c336d8$297d01c0$239efea9@who5>
Message-ID: <20030620151858.70075.qmail@web10004.mail.yahoo.com>

God, I spelled "ancient" wrong last night. :)  It's hell getting old.

The license says:

<< 3. LICENSED SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS

The SOURCE CODE PRODUCTS to which SCO grants rights under this AGREEMENT are
restricted to the following UNIX Operating Systems, including SUCCESSOR
OPERATING SYSTEMs, that operate on the 16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of
the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System with specific exclusion of UNIX System V and
successor operating systems:  

16-Bit UNIX Editions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 32-bit 32V >>

It does not mention System III explicitly either by inclusion or exclusion so
it depends on interpretation.  The System III distribution includes both PDP-11
and VAX source but only PDP-11 binaries.  Do you think the term "early versions
of 32-Bit UNIX Operating System" covers something that came out four years
after 32V, is still fully 16-bit compatible, and does not take advantage of the
full 4GB address space the way that a true 32-bit system would?

The README says

<< The version of System III here ran on the PDP-11 platform, and was
supplied by Keith Bostic.

boot contains the tape bootstrap,
cpio.tape contains the standalone cpio(1) program,
and mini-root contains a dump of the root file system.

A tar archive of the whole of System III is available in sys3.tar.gz >>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Sat Jun 21 02:11:33 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes
In-Reply-To: <20030620135941.9596.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306200906580.485-100000@gladen>

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set
> of files into a tape image.  Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11?

Check out the Perl scripts tapadd.pl, tapcat.pl, and mkdisttap.pl in
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_Simh/211bsd.tar.gz

For details of the tape format, search for "Magnetic Tapes" in
simh_doc.txt.

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should
  not do is to include untried ideas of his own.''  Ratfor follows this
  precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone
  else.
  		-- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR: A Preprocessor for a 
  		                        Rational Fortran"


From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Sat Jun 21 02:36:48 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:36:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306200930420.485-201000@gladen>

I am having difficulty installing SysIII on simh.  I have attached my simh
pdp11 ini file (sys3.simh.bootstrap) and the Perl script used to create
the install tape (mksys3tap.pl).  Everything seems to go fine while
installing the miniroot, but when I try to boot from the "installed"
system I don't get very far.  Below is a transcript.  Any ideas?

Andru


$ pdp11 sys3.simh.bootstrap

PDP-11 simulator V2.10-3
RL: creating new file
Create bad block table on last track? [N]
UNIX tape boot loader
UNIX -- Initial Load: Tape-to-Disk

The type of disk drive on which the Root file system will reside,
as well as the type of tape drive that will be used for Tape 1
must be specified below.

Answer the questions with a 'y' or 'n' followed by
a carriage return or line feed.
There is no type-ahead -- wait for the question to complete.
The character '@' will kill the entire line,
while the character '#' will erase the last character typed.

RP03 at address 176710?: n
RP04/5/6 at address 176700?: n
RL01 at address 174400?: y
Drive number (0-3)?: 0
Disk drive 0 selected.

Mount a formatted pack on drive 0.
Ready?: y

TU10/TM11 at address 172520?: y
Drive number (0-7)?: 0
Tape drive 0 selected.

The tape on drive 0 will be read from the current position
at 800bpi, 5120 characters (10 blocks) per record,
and written onto the pack on drive 0 starting at block 0.

Ready?: y
Size of filesystem to be copied is 6000 blocks.
What is the pack volume label? (e.g. p0001):
The pack will be labelled p0001.
The boot block for your type of disk drive will now be installed.

The file system copy is now complete.

To boot the basic unix for your disk and tape drives
as indicated above, mount this pack on drive 0
and read in the boot block (block 0) using
whatever means you have available; see romboot(8), 70boot(8).

Then boot the program unixrltm using diskboot(8).
Normally:  #0=unixrltm

The system will initially come up single-user; see init(8).
If you have an upper case only console terminal,
you must execute: stty lcase; see stty(1).

After UNIX is up, link the file unixrltm to unix using ln(1).
        # ln /unixrltm /unix

Set the date(1).

Good Luck!

The tape will now be rewound.


HALT instruction, PC: 002460 (BR 2456)
sim> boot rl0
#0=unixrltm
ka6 = 1512
aps = 141774
pc = 1476 ps = 30010
trap type 0
ka6 = 1512
aps = 141666
pc = 113444 ps = 30300
trap type 0
panic: trap

-------------- next part --------------
set cpu 22b
att rl0 test.dsk
att tm0 sys3.tap
b tm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mksys3tap.pl
Type: application/x-perl
Size: 643 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030620/525a784a/attachment.bin>

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 21 03:50:23 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 17:50:23 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
Message-ID: <Law14-F55trUVYKkpLT0004962a@hotmail.com>


Andu

wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete tar 
and make a dsk out of it) .

zmkm

>From: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
>Reply-To: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
>To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
>Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:36:48 -0700 (PDT)
>
>I am having difficulty installing SysIII on simh.  I have attached my simh
>pdp11 ini file (sys3.simh.bootstrap) and the Perl script used to create
>the install tape (mksys3tap.pl).  Everything seems to go fine while
>installing the miniroot, but when I try to boot from the "installed"
>system I don't get very far.  Below is a transcript.  Any ideas?
>
>Andru
>
>
>$ pdp11 sys3.simh.bootstrap
>
>PDP-11 simulator V2.10-3
>RL: creating new file
>Create bad block table on last track? [N]
>UNIX tape boot loader
>UNIX -- Initial Load: Tape-to-Disk
>
>The type of disk drive on which the Root file system will reside,
>as well as the type of tape drive that will be used for Tape 1
>must be specified below.
>
>Answer the questions with a 'y' or 'n' followed by
>a carriage return or line feed.
>There is no type-ahead -- wait for the question to complete.
>The character '@' will kill the entire line,
>while the character '#' will erase the last character typed.
>
>RP03 at address 176710?: n
>RP04/5/6 at address 176700?: n
>RL01 at address 174400?: y
>Drive number (0-3)?: 0
>Disk drive 0 selected.
>
>Mount a formatted pack on drive 0.
>Ready?: y
>
>TU10/TM11 at address 172520?: y
>Drive number (0-7)?: 0
>Tape drive 0 selected.
>
>The tape on drive 0 will be read from the current position
>at 800bpi, 5120 characters (10 blocks) per record,
>and written onto the pack on drive 0 starting at block 0.
>
>Ready?: y
>Size of filesystem to be copied is 6000 blocks.
>What is the pack volume label? (e.g. p0001):
>The pack will be labelled p0001.
>The boot block for your type of disk drive will now be installed.
>
>The file system copy is now complete.
>
>To boot the basic unix for your disk and tape drives
>as indicated above, mount this pack on drive 0
>and read in the boot block (block 0) using
>whatever means you have available; see romboot(8), 70boot(8).
>
>Then boot the program unixrltm using diskboot(8).
>Normally:  #0=unixrltm
>
>The system will initially come up single-user; see init(8).
>If you have an upper case only console terminal,
>you must execute: stty lcase; see stty(1).
>
>After UNIX is up, link the file unixrltm to unix using ln(1).
>         # ln /unixrltm /unix
>
>Set the date(1).
>
>Good Luck!
>
>The tape will now be rewound.
>
>
>HALT instruction, PC: 002460 (BR 2456)
>sim> boot rl0
>#0=unixrltm
>ka6 = 1512
>aps = 141774
>pc = 1476 ps = 30010
>trap type 0
>ka6 = 1512
>aps = 141666
>pc = 113444 ps = 30300
>trap type 0
>panic: trap
>
><< sys3.simh.bootstrap >>
><< mksys3tap.pl >>
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


From macbiesz at optonline.net  Sat Jun 21 04:07:04 2003
From: macbiesz at optonline.net (Maciek Bieszczad)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:07:04 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306200930420.485-201000@gladen>
Message-ID: <000001c33756$c28272f0$05fea8c0@maciek>

I'm having some trouble trying to build sys3.tap with mksys3tap.pl. I
also tried another script (the original mkdisttap.pl from 2.11BSD), but
none of these perl scripts seem to work for me. Am I doing something
wrong here?

Maciek

[~/sys3]# ls
boot  cpio.tape  mini-root mksys3tap.pl* script
[~/sys3]# ./mksys3tap.pl > sys3.tap
[~/sys3]# ls -l sys3.tap
-rw-r--r--    1 root     root     3076812 Jun 18 18:59 sys3.tap
[~/sys3]# cat script
set cpu 22b
att rl0 test.dsk
att tm0 sys3.tap
b tm
[~/sys3]# pdp11 script

PDP-11 simulator V2.10-4
RL: creating new file
Create bad block table on last track? [N]

Trap stack push abort, PC: 000002 (BITB @(R3)+,@(R3)+)
sim>


From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Sat Jun 21 04:21:34 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:21:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F55trUVYKkpLT0004962a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306201102550.485-100000@gladen>

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, zmkm zmkm wrote:
>
> Andu
>
> wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete tar
> and make a dsk out of it) .

I'm not clear on what you mean by this.  Here is how I was planning to do
the install:

 1) Boot from tape
 2) Install miniroot on disk
 3) Boot from disk
 4) Untar rest of installation onto disk from tar tape file

The instructions in usr/src/man/docs/setup (in the tar file) talk about
using cpio and cpio format tape files instead of tar, but all I have is a
tar file.

I have not managed to finish step 3.

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst



Quote Of The Moment:
  Appel's method avoids making a large number of small trampoline bounces
  by occasionally jumping off the Empire State Building.
                  -- Henry G. Baker, "Cheney on the M.T.A."


From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Sat Jun 21 04:29:19 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
In-Reply-To: <000001c33756$c28272f0$05fea8c0@maciek>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306201123510.485-100000@gladen>

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Maciek Bieszczad wrote:
> I'm having some trouble trying to build sys3.tap with mksys3tap.pl. I
> also tried another script (the original mkdisttap.pl from 2.11BSD), but
> none of these perl scripts seem to work for me. Am I doing something
> wrong here?

It looks like the same thing I am doing, but...

> [~/sys3]# ls
> boot  cpio.tape  mini-root mksys3tap.pl* script
> [~/sys3]# ./mksys3tap.pl > sys3.tap
> [~/sys3]# ls -l sys3.tap
> -rw-r--r--    1 root     root     3076812 Jun 18 18:59 sys3.tap

We don't seem to have the same sizes...

-rw-r--r--    1 luvisi   luvisi    3086172 Jun 20 09:44 sys3.tap
-rw-r--r--    1 luvisi   luvisi       9216 Mar 18 16:12 boot
-rw-r--r--    1 luvisi   luvisi    3072000 Mar 18 16:12 mini-root

If I replace
  add_file("boot", 512);
with
  add_file("/dev/null", 512);

I get 3076812, so I suspect that your "boot" file is empty.

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  C. A. R. Hoare once said that ``One thing [the language designer] should
  not do is to include untried ideas of his own.''  Ratfor follows this
  precept very closely -- everything in it has been stolen from someone
  else.
  		-- Brian W. Kernighan, "RATFOR: A Preprocessor for a 
  		                        Rational Fortran"


From akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp  Sat Jun 21 18:12:53 2003
From: akito_fujita at mvg.biglobe.ne.jp (Akito Fujita)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 17:12:53 +0900 (JST)
Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306200906580.485-100000@gladen>
References: <20030620135941.9596.qmail@web10005.mail.yahoo.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0306200906580.485-100000@gladen>
Message-ID: <20030621.171253.74751175.akito_fujita@mvg.biglobe.ne.jp>

From: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
Subject: Re: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:11:33 -0700 (PDT)

> On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, Kenneth Stailey wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set
> > of files into a tape image.  Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11?
> 
> Check out the Perl scripts tapadd.pl, tapcat.pl, and mkdisttap.pl in
> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_Simh/211bsd.tar.gz
> 
> For details of the tape format, search for "Magnetic Tapes" in
> simh_doc.txt.

You can see "SIMH Magtape Representation and Handling" also.
(http://simh.trailing-edge.com/docs/simh_magtape.pdf)


- Akito

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 22 00:57:11 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 07:57:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] emulating old PDP-11's
Message-ID: <20030621145711.84636.qmail@web10006.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi,

Seems that SIMH/PDP11, p11 and ts10 do not simulate older PDP-11's

They appear to cover only /*3 (/23, /53, /73, etc) models.

Am I wrong about this?

Are there any open source emulators for the /40, /45, or /70?

I know about Charon and Esatz.

Thanks,
Ken


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From wkt at tuhs.org  Sun Jun 22 09:39:00 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:39:00 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Newer copies of SysV?
Message-ID: <20030621233900.GA460@minnie.tuhs.org>

All,
I just received this from Sebastien Loisel. I don't have any recent
SysV sources, but I though I'd pass this on to the mailing list in
case anybody else can help Sebastien.

	Warren

----- Forwarded message from "S. Loisel" <loisel at math.mcgill.ca> -----

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:44:21 -0400
From: "S. Loisel" <loisel at math.mcgill.ca>
Subject: System V
To: wkt at tuhs.org

Hello,

I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm interested in the current Unix debacle. 
I'm diffing linux kernel sources against Unix sources, and I've written 
a program to do that efficiently, but I'm afraid that what Unix sources 
I can locate aren't actually relevant (I've been using what I can find 
at minnie.tuhs.org...)

I know that a lot of people have the correct sources and that they were 
even available for download on the web, so I was wondering if you could 
hook me up somehow?

I'm a researcher at McGill university in Montreal 
(http://www.math.mcgill.ca/loisel/) and I would only be using that 
source code for research. I intend to diff the files and then provide a 
list of similar files, and I hope to quote the common portions (assuming 
they are short enough for "fair use.")

If you can't help me, can you tell me someone who could?

Thank you very much,

Sebastien Loisel
----- End forwarded message -----

From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Sun Jun 22 20:41:33 2003
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:41:33 +1200
Subject: [TUHS] About early Un*x clones
Message-ID: <200306222241.33385.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

Whitesmith under the capable guidance of Plauger - who else - came up with 
Idris.  And a number of other Un*x clones were duly written at about the same 
time, according to:
http://www.robotwisdom.com/linux/nonnix.html

The question is, is it possible to get ahold of those for the early Un*x  
hobbyist?  Does anyone have any knowledge of their whereabouts, and 
(potential) legal statii?

Wesley Parish
-- 
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."

From iosglpgc at teleline.es  Sun Jun 22 22:08:28 2003
From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 13:08:28 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
Message-ID: <000f01c338b6$ff2405a0$0100000a@cicm.iosg.com>

Is it possible to get a UNIX that runs on a 8086 or 8088 PC?
Or for 80286 or 80386?

Xenix?
AT&T?
SCO?
Interactive UNIX?

Where please?


From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Mon Jun 23 02:21:11 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:21:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
In-Reply-To: <000f01c338b6$ff2405a0$0100000a@cicm.iosg.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306220918190.13105-100000@gladen>

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Natalia Portillo wrote:
> Is it possible to get a UNIX that runs on a 8086 or 8088 PC?
> Or for 80286 or 80386?
>
> Xenix?
> AT&T?
> SCO?
> Interactive UNIX?

Minix is available and under a BSD like license.  I don't know if it will
suit you since it isn't derived from AT&T code, and the source for the for
the compiler is not included.

http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  Churchill's Commentary on Man:
          Man will occasionally stumble over the truth,
          but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on.


From luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu  Mon Jun 23 02:33:23 2003
From: luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu (Andru Luvisi)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306220918190.13105-100000@gladen>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306220927260.13105-100000@gladen>

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Andru Luvisi wrote:
[snip]
> Minix is available and under a BSD like license.  I don't know if it will
> suit you since it isn't derived from AT&T code, and the source for the for
> the compiler is not included.
>
> http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html

I spoke too soon.  Apparently the sources for ACK are now available:
  ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/kjb/ACK/ACK-5.2.tar.gz

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  Heisenberg may have been here.


From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 23 03:29:11 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:29:11 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
Message-ID: <Law14-F28ByNgsTWbgY00009af1@hotmail.com>

andru

actually it's indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer to the 
actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C compiler and 
an assembler in the distribution ,
I am currently using 2.0.3 and I like it except for few reservations about 
its developments tools ,  it's nice in the way unix purist used to like 
versions 6 and 7 , small efficient neat and trying hard to become fully 
posix .

the development tools aren't as good as they should be  I don't like the ACK 
(amersterdam compiler kit) it feels gaged but its latest c compiler is 
highly ansi compatible , its assembler is a close cousin to the old 
assembler in IBM PC/IX version of unix.

to answer natalia

you can run it in two modes 16 bit and 32 bit check the 2.0.3 distribution 
page there are several packages 86/286/386 , don't bother with the so called 
2.0.0. or CD distribution it's old., the real nice touch is the version that 
runs in dos under windows , it's cute but be aware not everything works in 
due to the limited resources , but I like it for quick hacks.
minix was done for educational purposes the book published by AST the guy 
behind minix contains complete source code and oriented towards students .

here's the direct link to 2.0.3.

http://www.cs.vu.nl/pub/minix/2.0.3/


good luck


>From: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
>Reply-To: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
>To: Natalia Portillo <iosglpgc at teleline.es>
>CC: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
>Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 09:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Andru Luvisi wrote:
>[snip]
> > Minix is available and under a BSD like license.  I don't know if it 
>will
> > suit you since it isn't derived from AT&T code, and the source for the 
>for
> > the compiler is not included.
> >
> > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html
>
>I spoke too soon.  Apparently the sources for ACK are now available:
>   ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/kjb/ACK/ACK-5.2.tar.gz
>
>Andru
>--
>Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst
>
>Quote Of The Moment:
>   Heisenberg may have been here.
>
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 23 03:37:53 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:37:53 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
Message-ID: <Law14-F9CwoYbq2qEAC00014e73@hotmail.com>

andru

I should've known better before I rush my reply :-) , what I meant was since 
gnu cpio  can uncompress those cpio files , so I assumed that it can be 
uncompressed booted and re packaged as a single .dsk image (like the unix7 
thing) , but since I have no background in pdp11 hardware I am not sure how 
can this be done.

cheers.

zmkm







>From: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
>Reply-To: Andru Luvisi <luvisi at andru.sonoma.edu>
>To: zmkm zmkm <new_zmkm at hotmail.com>
>CC: tuhs at tuhs.org
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] Installing SysIII on simh?
>Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:21:34 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> >
> > Andu
> >
> > wouldn't be easier to load it through dsk (I mean download the complete 
>tar
> > and make a dsk out of it) .
>
>I'm not clear on what you mean by this.  Here is how I was planning to do
>the install:
>
>  1) Boot from tape
>  2) Install miniroot on disk
>  3) Boot from disk
>  4) Untar rest of installation onto disk from tar tape file
>
>The instructions in usr/src/man/docs/setup (in the tar file) talk about
>using cpio and cpio format tape files instead of tar, but all I have is a
>tar file.
>
>I have not managed to finish step 3.
>
>Andru
>--
>Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst
>
>
>
>Quote Of The Moment:
>   Appel's method avoids making a large number of small trampoline bounces
>   by occasionally jumping off the Empire State Building.
>                   -- Henry G. Baker, "Cheney on the M.T.A."
>

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 23 03:47:12 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 17:47:12 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
Message-ID: <Law14-F97GsKsJbB8qr0007d0d5@hotmail.com>


natalia

check also comp.os.minix it's active.

zmkm

>From: "Natalia Portillo" <iosglpgc at teleline.es>
>To: <tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org>
>Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
>Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 13:08:28 +0100
>
>Is it possible to get a UNIX that runs on a 8086 or 8088 PC?
>Or for 80286 or 80386?
>
>Xenix?
>AT&T?
>SCO?
>Interactive UNIX?
>
>Where please?
>
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


From wkt at tuhs.org  Mon Jun 23 07:28:41 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:28:41 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F28ByNgsTWbgY00009af1@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F28ByNgsTWbgY00009af1@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20030622212841.GA10384@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 05:29:11PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> actually [Minix is] indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer to
> the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C compiler and 
> an assembler in the distribution

Sorry to be a pedant here, but Minix was written wholly from scratch and
has no AT&T code in it at all. I know, I've been playing with it since
version 1.1. See also Tanenbaum's Operating Systems: Design and Implementation
textbook for the fully story.

Ciao!
	Warren

From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 23 17:15:39 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:15:39 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
Message-ID: <Law14-F478ES092DaCd000523bd@hotmail.com>

warren

you missunderstood my point , I didn't imply it has at&t code !, what I 
meant is it has the look and feel of at&t unix and indeed it was modeled (if 
you prefer instead of derived :-) ) after unix 6 as per the author and the 
way it look and feel.

as for the book , yup I read both the original book and the second one , 
that's what I meant it's an educational project oriented towards students.

cheers
zmkm


>From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
>To: The Unix Heritage Society <tuhs at tuhs.org>
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
>Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:28:41 +1000
>
>On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 05:29:11PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> > actually [Minix is] indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer 
>to
> > the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C 
>compiler and
> > an assembler in the distribution
>
>Sorry to be a pedant here, but Minix was written wholly from scratch and
>has no AT&T code in it at all. I know, I've been playing with it since
>version 1.1. See also Tanenbaum's Operating Systems: Design and 
>Implementation
>textbook for the fully story.
>
>Ciao!
>	Warren
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail


From new_zmkm at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 23 17:15:23 2003
From: new_zmkm at hotmail.com (zmkm zmkm)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:15:23 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
Message-ID: <Law14-F499osESlSVwJ0000a00a@hotmail.com>

warren

you missunderstood my point , I didn't imply it has at&t code !, what I 
meant is it has the look and feel of at&t unix and indeed it was modeled (if 
you prefer instead of derived :-) ) after unix 6 as per the author and the 
way it look and feel.

as for the book , yup I read both the original book and the second one , 
that's what I meant it's an educational project oriented towards students.

cheers
zmkm


>From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
>To: The Unix Heritage Society <tuhs at tuhs.org>
>Subject: Re: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
>Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:28:41 +1000
>
>On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 05:29:11PM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> > actually [Minix is] indeed derived from at&t unix 6 also it feels closer 
>to
> > the actual old unix than other newer variants and it comes with C 
>compiler and
> > an assembler in the distribution
>
>Sorry to be a pedant here, but Minix was written wholly from scratch and
>has no AT&T code in it at all. I know, I've been playing with it since
>version 1.1. See also Tanenbaum's Operating Systems: Design and 
>Implementation
>textbook for the fully story.
>
>Ciao!
>	Warren
>_______________________________________________
>TUHS mailing list
>TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


From wkt at tuhs.org  Mon Jun 23 17:31:35 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:31:35 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F478ES092DaCd000523bd@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F478ES092DaCd000523bd@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20030623073135.GA16384@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:15:39AM +0000, zmkm zmkm wrote:
> warren
> 
> you missunderstood my point , I didn't imply it has at&t code!

Ah, apologies. I usually take ``derived'' to mean ``used code from'' :-)

Ciao!
	Warren

From loisel at math.mcgill.ca  Tue Jun 24 04:27:10 2003
From: loisel at math.mcgill.ca (Sebastien Loisel)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 14:27:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [TUHS] System V
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306231412310.16647-100000@prism.math.mcgill.ca>

Hello,

I have located 30 boot floppies for AT&T UNIX SVR4.0 2.1 for the 386
Apparently, only SCSI hard drive controllers are supported. I don't have a 
machine with a SCSI hard drive (and I'd rather not sacrifice a live 
machine to svr4.)

I tried booting in in bochs, and it sort of works, but it panics 
relatively early. I suspect it's for the lack of SCSI emulation in bochs, 
but I'm not sure.

I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've 
grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the 
clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is 
what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but 
many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of 
bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and 
14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my 
rh8 box.

Anyone knows enough about this operating system to help me out? Perhaps 
some hints as to where the kernel sources might be located, how they are 
encoded? (I hope the kernel sources are in fact on the disks!)

Sebastien Loisel


From michael_davidson at pacbell.net  Tue Jun 24 04:42:05 2003
From: michael_davidson at pacbell.net (Michael Davidson)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 11:42:05 -0700
Subject: [TUHS] System V
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306231412310.16647-100000@prism.math.mcgill.ca>
Message-ID: <3EF749FD.2000905@pacbell.net>

Sebastien Loisel wrote:

>
>I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've 
>grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the 
>clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is 
>what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but 
>many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of 
>bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and 
>14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my 
>rh8 box.
>
I suspect that most of the disks are either System V .pkg datastreams
or cpio archives.

Since this is obviously an installable binary distribution the only
"source code" that you are going to find on it are the header files
in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc and, perhaps, a few example
or demo programs.

Don't bother looking for kernel source code - it isn't there.






From loisel at math.mcgill.ca  Tue Jun 24 05:38:56 2003
From: loisel at math.mcgill.ca (Sebastien Loisel)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 15:38:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [TUHS] System V
In-Reply-To: <3EF749FD.2000905@pacbell.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306231537080.16647-100000@prism.math.mcgill.ca>

Thanks. At least now I can stop fighting with those svr4 floppies.

Did the svr4/386 sources ever get out in the wild?

Sebastien Loisel

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:

> Sebastien Loisel wrote:
> 
> >
> >I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've 
> >grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the 
> >clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is 
> >what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but 
> >many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of 
> >bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and 
> >14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my 
> >rh8 box.
> >
> I suspect that most of the disks are either System V .pkg datastreams
> or cpio archives.
> 
> Since this is obviously an installable binary distribution the only
> "source code" that you are going to find on it are the header files
> in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc and, perhaps, a few example
> or demo programs.
> 
> Don't bother looking for kernel source code - it isn't there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


From mcrosby at marthon.org  Tue Jun 24 06:18:42 2003
From: mcrosby at marthon.org (Matthew Crosby)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:18:42 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Newer copies of SysV?
In-Reply-To: <20030621233900.GA460@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <20030621233900.GA460@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030623201842.GA67841@marthon.org>

Solaris is derived from Sys V, and the source is readily available to 
educational institutions.  It could be a help...  (though I warn you, they
kernel in particular has a changed a LOT from stock Sys V)

Remember that vanilla sys V source is still nominally under NDA for whoever 
has it, so I wouldn't bet on getting it... 

On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:39:00AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> All,
> I just received this from Sebastien Loisel. I don't have any recent
> SysV sources, but I though I'd pass this on to the mailing list in
> case anybody else can help Sebastien.
> 
> 	Warren
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from "S. Loisel" <loisel at math.mcgill.ca> -----
> 
> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 12:44:21 -0400
> From: "S. Loisel" <loisel at math.mcgill.ca>
> Subject: System V
> To: wkt at tuhs.org
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm sorry to bother you, but I'm interested in the current Unix debacle. 
> I'm diffing linux kernel sources against Unix sources, and I've written 
> a program to do that efficiently, but I'm afraid that what Unix sources 
> I can locate aren't actually relevant (I've been using what I can find 
> at minnie.tuhs.org...)
> 
> I know that a lot of people have the correct sources and that they were 
> even available for download on the web, so I was wondering if you could 
> hook me up somehow?
> 
> I'm a researcher at McGill university in Montreal 
> (http://www.math.mcgill.ca/loisel/) and I would only be using that 
> source code for research. I intend to diff the files and then provide a 
> list of similar files, and I hope to quote the common portions (assuming 
> they are short enough for "fair use.")
> 
> If you can't help me, can you tell me someone who could?
> 
> Thank you very much,
> 
> Sebastien Loisel

-- 
Matthew Crosby                                         mcrosby at marthon.org
"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate"

From loisel at math.mcgill.ca  Tue Jun 24 06:30:09 2003
From: loisel at math.mcgill.ca (Sebastien Loisel)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:30:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Newer copies of SysV?
In-Reply-To: <20030623201842.GA67841@marthon.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306231628590.16647-100000@prism.math.mcgill.ca>

Thanks for the information. I've already started asking around at McGill 
university for licenses, archives and such.

Sebastien Loisel

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Matthew Crosby wrote:

> Solaris is derived from Sys V, and the source is readily available to 
> educational institutions.  It could be a help...  (though I warn you, they
> kernel in particular has a changed a LOT from stock Sys V)
> 
> Remember that vanilla sys V source is still nominally under NDA for whoever 
> has it, so I wouldn't bet on getting it... 
> 


From kstailey at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 24 07:23:43 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 14:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
In-Reply-To: <20030623073135.GA16384@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030623212343.26545.qmail@web10001.mail.yahoo.com>

My turn to be the apologetic pendant but Andy wrote that he was trying to clone
version 7 not version 6.  A quick way to check is look for a stat.h file with a
"struct stat" in it.  That was added after version 6.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE  Tue Jun 24 07:57:23 2003
From: helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE (Wolfgang Helbig)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:57:23 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes
Message-ID: <200306232205.h5NM5Un00269@bsd.korb>

Just to keep it Unix-like, I wrote enblock, which takes a file in stdin
a produces a tape file on stdout in SIMH-format. It takes one option,
the block size, which defaults to 512. It writes an end of file mark
after each run. To write more than one file on one tape, type

 	enblock <file1 >tape ; enblock <file2 >>tape
to write an end of tape mark, type
	enblock </dev/null >>tape

You'll find enblock.c at
	http://www.ba-stuttgart.de/~helbig/os/v6/enblock.c
	

>Hi,
>
>Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a set
>of files into a tape image.  Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11?
>
>Thanks,
>Ken


From grog at lemis.com  Tue Jun 24 08:15:51 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:45:51 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] System V
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306231537080.16647-100000@prism.math.mcgill.ca>
References: <3EF749FD.2000905@pacbell.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0306231537080.16647-100000@prism.math.mcgill.ca>
Message-ID: <20030623221550.GX93137@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Monday, 23 June 2003 at 15:38:56 -0400, Sebastien Loisel wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
>> Sebastien Loisel wrote:
>>> I'm trying to find whatever source code there is on those floppies. I've
>>> grepped through the disk images, and I did find some source code in the
>>> clear. However, I suspect I haven't yet found the kernel source (which is
>>> what I'm after.) Disks 13 and 14 have an actual filesystem on them, but
>>> many (all?) of the other disks appear to be laid out as flat arrays of
>>> bytes without much (any?) filesystem information. The fs on disks 13 and
>>> 14 doesn't appear to be completely standard sysv, at least according to my
>>> rh8 box.
>>
>> I suspect that most of the disks are either System V .pkg datastreams
>> or cpio archives.
>>
>> Since this is obviously an installable binary distribution the only
>> "source code" that you are going to find on it are the header files
>> in /usr/include and /usr/include/sys etc and, perhaps, a few example
>> or demo programs.
>>
>> Don't bother looking for kernel source code - it isn't there.
>>
> Thanks. At least now I can stop fighting with those svr4 floppies.
>
> Did the svr4/386 sources ever get out in the wild?

Doubtless, but it wasn't legal.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030624/78cf6250/attachment.sig>

From kstailey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 25 00:34:45 2003
From: kstailey at yahoo.com (Kenneth Stailey)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] question about SIMH tapes
In-Reply-To: <200306232205.h5NM5Un00269@bsd.korb>
Message-ID: <20030624143445.33838.qmail@web10003.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi Wolfgang,

By default your software is copyright under the Berne treaty.

If you indend to make this public-domain please add a comment indicating that
this is so.

Thanks,
Ken

--- Wolfgang Helbig <helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE> wrote:
> Just to keep it Unix-like, I wrote enblock, which takes a file in stdin
> a produces a tape file on stdout in SIMH-format. It takes one option,
> the block size, which defaults to 512. It writes an end of file mark
> after each run. To write more than one file on one tape, type
> 
>  	enblock <file1 >tape ; enblock <file2 >>tape
> to write an end of tape mark, type
> 	enblock </dev/null >>tape
> 
> You'll find enblock.c at
> 	http://www.ba-stuttgart.de/~helbig/os/v6/enblock.c
> 	
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >Harti's p11 comes with mktape which when given a control file will turn a
> set
> >of files into a tape image.  Is there anything like this for SIMH PDP-11?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Ken
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From iosglpgc at teleline.es  Wed Jun 25 06:13:52 2003
From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:13:52 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F478ES092DaCd000523bd@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <007801c33a8d$52b21c70$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com>

Finally the posts became absolutely out of context.

I was talking about getting UNIX variants, nor "derivates" (such as
Linux or MINIX), nor current in-development projects like
Free/Open/Net-BSD.


From wkt at tuhs.org  Wed Jun 25 08:22:13 2003
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:22:13 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
Message-ID: <20030624222213.GA34084@minnie.tuhs.org>

I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is.
	Warren

 Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
 Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700
 Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
 From: "Ian King" <iking at windows.microsoft.com>
 To: "Natalia Portillo" <iosglpgc at teleline.es>, <tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org>

I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a derivative.
:-)  Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things
started branching it gets pretty confusing.  It's possibly an
indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' (Coherent?  XINU?) from
a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess).   

FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 8086 (I recall
buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so years ago).  Is
that more the sort of thing you're looking for?  The current version(s)
of XINU are available at http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html,
according to Google.  -- Ian 

From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Jun 25 08:28:40 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:28:40 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
In-Reply-To: <20030624222213.GA34084@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <000001c33aa0$07e48120$239efea9@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
Go ahead and laugh, but your server could be having a bad day today.
That being said, I am curious myself, as to the differences. Can
someone come up with the definite explanation regarding which is
which?
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Warren Toomey
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:22 PM
> To: The Unix Heritage Society
> Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> 
> I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is.
> 	Warren
> 
>  Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
>  Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700
>  Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
>  From: "Ian King" <iking at windows.microsoft.com>
>  To: "Natalia Portillo" <iosglpgc at teleline.es>,
<tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org>
> 
> I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a
derivative.
> :-)  Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things
> started branching it gets pretty confusing.  It's possibly an
> indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' (Coherent?  XINU?)
from
> a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess).
> 
> FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 8086 (I recall
> buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so years ago).  Is
> that more the sort of thing you're looking for?  The current
version(s)
> of XINU are available at
http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html,
> according to Google.  -- Ian
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From jwillis at coherent-logic.com  Fri Jun 27 08:54:51 2003
From: jwillis at coherent-logic.com (John Willis)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:54:51 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
Message-ID: <JEEJJGIHMMPINMGMPLGGOECICBAA.jwillis@coherent-logic.com>

Just noticed in the publication data for "The UNIX Programming Environment"
that
it was created on a VAX 11/750 running V7 UNIX. How is this possible? I have
an 11/750 and V7 is my favorite UNIX... if I could do this, it would be
awesome.

Anyone have any insights?


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Fri Jun 27 09:15:23 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 19:15:23 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
In-Reply-To: <JEEJJGIHMMPINMGMPLGGOECICBAA.jwillis@coherent-logic.com>
Message-ID: <000401c33c38$d25ab160$239efea9@who5>

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
I have a copy here of it, and I'll check it, and also a copy of the C
book. John, yes it was, and the one for C, is the 9th one of UNIX, on
the 8550. Is it possible, gang, that the releases for the VAX, track a
different sequence of events, then for the PDP-11? But more
importantly, both books were done using the UNIX tools and using
output devices that are actually typesetters, rather then printers. I
know. I've met both. However, considering that the author of the first
is one of the authors for the definitive C book, would they have had
access to unreleased versions? 

Dennis you worked on that historic text with Brian Kernighan, and the
book we are talking about, Brian worked with someone else, can you
check on my assertions, and report back?

John, you have a 11/750? Where do you keep it? 
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of John Willis
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:55 PM
> To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
> 
> Just noticed in the publication data for "The UNIX Programming
Environment"
> that
> it was created on a VAX 11/750 running V7 UNIX. How is this
possible? I have
> an 11/750 and V7 is my favorite UNIX... if I could do this, it would
be
> awesome.
> 
> Anyone have any insights?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From jwillis at coherent-logic.com  Fri Jun 27 09:24:38 2003
From: jwillis at coherent-logic.com (John Willis)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 17:24:38 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
In-Reply-To: <000401c33c38$d25ab160$239efea9@who5>
Message-ID: <JEEJJGIHMMPINMGMPLGGIECJCBAA.jwillis@coherent-logic.com>

I have an entire room of my house dedicated to computers including a VAX
11/750, a MicroVAX 3100, a VAXstation 3100, a VAXstation 2000, a MicroVAX
II, and a huge HP 9000/800 I40... Needless to say, it gets hot.

-----Original Message-----
From: Gregg C Levine [mailto:hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:15 PM
To: 'John Willis'; tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
Subject: RE: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
I have a copy here of it, and I'll check it, and also a copy of the C
book. John, yes it was, and the one for C, is the 9th one of UNIX, on
the 8550. Is it possible, gang, that the releases for the VAX, track a
different sequence of events, then for the PDP-11? But more
importantly, both books were done using the UNIX tools and using
output devices that are actually typesetters, rather then printers. I
know. I've met both. However, considering that the author of the first
is one of the authors for the definitive C book, would they have had
access to unreleased versions?

Dennis you worked on that historic text with Brian Kernighan, and the
book we are talking about, Brian worked with someone else, can you
check on my assertions, and report back?

John, you have a 11/750? Where do you keep it?
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of John Willis
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:55 PM
> To: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
>
> Just noticed in the publication data for "The UNIX Programming
Environment"
> that
> it was created on a VAX 11/750 running V7 UNIX. How is this
possible? I have
> an 11/750 and V7 is my favorite UNIX... if I could do this, it would
be
> awesome.
>
> Anyone have any insights?
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Fri Jun 27 10:03:18 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 20:03:18 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
Message-ID: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org>

Look again.  The colophon in my copy of The UNIX Programming Environment
(first paperback printing of the first edition) says
	This book was typeset in Times Roman and Courier by the
	authors, using a Mergenthaler Linotron 202 typesetter driven
	by a VAX-11/750 running the 8th Edition of the UNIX operating
	system.

I don't have a copy of the latter-day (now contains ISO) C book, but
if I recall correctly when it was written, it was probably typed in
on a VAX 8550 running the 9th edition system.  Probably it was the
latter-day 9th, which had crept along quite a bit beyond the hasty
9/e manual.  After I made some radical changes to the way device
drivers plugged into the kernel, I changed it to print `9Vr2' when
it booted, partly to distinguish the old system from the newer one
and partly to annoy enough people to reach critical energy to produce
a 10/e manual.  The tactic took a while but was ultimately successful.

For those who don't know the historic chain, the systems loosely
called V8, V9, and V10 were never real releases in any sense; they
were just names hung on the continuously-evolving system we ran in
the 1980s in the Computing Science Research Center at Bell Labs.
Brian and Dennis and Rob (and, for six years, I) used that system
for everyday work as well as as a sandbox for systems work; hence
the credit in the books.  There were tapes called V8 and V9 issued
to a few specific places under special on-off letter agreement, but
they correspond only approximately to the like-numbered manuals.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
(which feels a lot like New Jersey this evening)

From iosglpgc at teleline.es  Fri Jun 27 10:57:47 2003
From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 01:57:47 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Canary Islands
Message-ID: <000c01c33c47$2217b730$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com>

Just guessing,

Any of these antique VAX and other machines running UNIXes arrived my
islands?
Does anybody know?
Is there a possibility for a museum (my computer museum) to get one of
these machines?

Thanks to all ;)


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Fri Jun 27 11:00:33 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:00:33 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
In-Reply-To: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <000301c33c47$940b02c0$239efea9@who5>

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
Don't go getting your panties in a twist, Norman, (to quote an old
friend.), I did look before completing the posting. And yes it did say
that. I have here a personal edition of the C book, (I bought it,
because I wanted to have the thing here when I did work in the
language, and needed to double check a reference.). 

I have out a copy of the book that John is kvetching about from my
local library. I checked that one, and it strangely enough agrees with
what you're saying, and with John too. I find it, ah, logical, that
the guys would use a Mergenthaler Linotron 202 typesetter for their
print runs. Actually the word is imagesetter. But that term will do. 
As I recall you worked there for a while, and do know what you're
talking about, so I'm not going to indulge myself in a flame war.
Besides I've actually done enough typesetting so as to be able to
argue the point with the bit brains at Adobe, so I'll even agree with
you now.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Norman Wilson
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:03 PM
> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
> Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
> 
> Look again.  The colophon in my copy of The UNIX Programming
Environment
> (first paperback printing of the first edition) says
> 	This book was typeset in Times Roman and Courier by the
> 	authors, using a Mergenthaler Linotron 202 typesetter driven
> 	by a VAX-11/750 running the 8th Edition of the UNIX operating
> 	system.
> 
> I don't have a copy of the latter-day (now contains ISO) C book, but
> if I recall correctly when it was written, it was probably typed in
> on a VAX 8550 running the 9th edition system.  Probably it was the
> latter-day 9th, which had crept along quite a bit beyond the hasty
> 9/e manual.  After I made some radical changes to the way device
> drivers plugged into the kernel, I changed it to print `9Vr2' when
> it booted, partly to distinguish the old system from the newer one
> and partly to annoy enough people to reach critical energy to
produce
> a 10/e manual.  The tactic took a while but was ultimately
successful.
> 
> For those who don't know the historic chain, the systems loosely
> called V8, V9, and V10 were never real releases in any sense; they
> were just names hung on the continuously-evolving system we ran in
> the 1980s in the Computing Science Research Center at Bell Labs.
> Brian and Dennis and Rob (and, for six years, I) used that system
> for everyday work as well as as a sandbox for systems work; hence
> the credit in the books.  There were tapes called V8 and V9 issued
> to a few specific places under special on-off letter agreement, but
> they correspond only approximately to the like-numbered manuals.
> 
> Norman Wilson
> Toronto ON
> (which feels a lot like New Jersey this evening)
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Fri Jun 27 11:00:33 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:00:33 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
In-Reply-To: <000b01c33c46$3673c580$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com>
Message-ID: <000201c33c47$939584a0$239efea9@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
Okay. That's almost how I describe the state of the art to my friends,
and co-workers, and even customers. But shouldn't you have sent this
to the list as well as to me?
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Natalia Portillo [mailto:iosglpgc at teleline.es]
> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:51 PM
> To: 'Gregg C Levine'
> Subject: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> 
> I think that you can always compare with ice creams.
> 
> UNIX is an ice cream brand.
> It have many flavours: Bell/AT&T, BSD, Xenix, AIX, A/UX, Coherent,
etc.
> There are other brands.
> MINIX which have only a flavour.
> Linux, with many flavours as RedHat, YDL, Debian, etc
> 
> > -----Mensaje original-----
> > De: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
> > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] En nombre de Gregg C Levine
> > Enviado el: martes, 24 de junio de 2003 23:29
> > Para: 'Warren Toomey'; 'The Unix Heritage Society'
> > Asunto: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> >
> >
> > Hello from Gregg C Levine
> > Go ahead and laugh, but your server could be having a bad day
today.
> > That being said, I am curious myself, as to the differences. Can
> > someone come up with the definite explanation regarding which is
> > which?
> > -------------------
> > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
> > "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
> > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
> > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
> > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Warren Toomey
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:22 PM
> > > To: The Unix Heritage Society
> > > Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> > >
> > > I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it
is.
> > > 	Warren
> > >
> > >  Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
> > >  Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700
> > >  Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
> > >  From: "Ian King" <iking at windows.microsoft.com>
> > >  To: "Natalia Portillo" <iosglpgc at teleline.es>,
> > <tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org>
> > >
> > > I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a
> > derivative.
> > > :-)  Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after
things
> > > started branching it gets pretty confusing.  It's possibly an
> > > indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' (Coherent?
XINU?)
> > from
> > > a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess).
> > >
> > > FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 8086 (I
recall
> > > buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so years ago).
Is
> > > that more the sort of thing you're looking for?  The current
> > version(s)
> > > of XINU are available at
> > http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html,
> > > according to Google.  -- Ian
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TUHS mailing list
> > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> >


From iosglpgc at teleline.es  Fri Jun 27 11:00:47 2003
From: iosglpgc at teleline.es (Natalia Portillo)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 02:00:47 +0100
Subject: RV: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
Message-ID: <000f01c33c47$8ce57b60$0100a8c0@cicm.iosg.com>

Sorry this message was intented to be sent to the list.

(sorry gregg)

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Natalia Portillo [mailto:iosglpgc at teleline.es] 
> Enviado el: viernes, 27 de junio de 2003 1:51
> Para: 'Gregg C Levine'
> Asunto: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> 
> 
> I think that you can always compare with ice creams.
> 
> UNIX is an ice cream brand.
> It have many flavours: Bell/AT&T, BSD, Xenix, AIX, A/UX, 
> Coherent, etc.
> There are other brands.
> MINIX which have only a flavour.
> Linux, with many flavours as RedHat, YDL, Debian, etc
> 
> > -----Mensaje original-----
> > De: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org 
> > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] En nombre de Gregg C Levine
> > Enviado el: martes, 24 de junio de 2003 23:29
> > Para: 'Warren Toomey'; 'The Unix Heritage Society'
> > Asunto: RE: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> > 
> > 
> > Hello from Gregg C Levine
> > Go ahead and laugh, but your server could be having a bad day today.
> > That being said, I am curious myself, as to the differences. Can
> > someone come up with the definite explanation regarding which is
> > which?
> > -------------------
> > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
> > "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
> > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
> > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
> > [mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Warren Toomey
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:22 PM
> > > To: The Unix Heritage Society
> > > Subject: [TUHS] Unix Derivatives and Variants
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure why mailman rejected this e-mail. Anyway, here it is.
> > > 	Warren
> > > 
> > >  Subject: RE: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
> > >  Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:39:11 -0700
> > >  Thread-Topic: [TUHS] Getting UNIXs for 16-bit 8086
> > >  From: "Ian King" <iking at windows.microsoft.com>
> > >  To: "Natalia Portillo" <iosglpgc at teleline.es>,
> > <tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org>
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to discern the difference between a variant and a
> > derivative.
> > > :-)  Yes, we can trace back to the One True UNIX, but after things
> > > started branching it gets pretty confusing.  It's possibly an
> > > indefensible taxonomy to distinguish a 'variant' 
> (Coherent?  XINU?)
> > from
> > > a derivative (which would encompass any BSD forms, I guess).
> > > 
> > > FWIW, a while back someone was selling XINU ported to 
> 8086 (I recall
> > > buying a set of 5-1/4" source disks a thousand or so 
> years ago).  Is
> > > that more the sort of thing you're looking for?  The current
> > version(s)
> > > of XINU are available at
> > http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/xsoft.html,
> > > according to Google.  -- Ian
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TUHS mailing list
> > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> > 
> 


From agrier at poofygoof.com  Fri Jun 27 11:32:02 2003
From: agrier at poofygoof.com (Aaron J. Grier)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 18:32:02 -0700
Subject: [TUHS] Re: V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
In-Reply-To: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <20030627000500.C0A881EFB@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030627013202.GX7074@goldberry.poofy.goof.com>

On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 08:03:18PM -0400, Norman Wilson wrote:

> I don't have a copy of the latter-day (now contains ISO) C book, but
> if I recall correctly when it was written, it was probably typed in on
> a VAX 8550 running the 9th edition system.

<digs out old copy>

	"[...] using a Graphic Systems phototypesetter driven by
	a PDP-11/70 running under the UNIX operating system."

-- 
  Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier at poofygoof.com
  "Isn't an OS that openly and proudly admits to come directly from Holy
   UNIX better than a cheap UNIX copycat that needs to be sued in court
   to determine what the hell it really is?"  --  Michael Sokolov

From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Fri Jun 27 13:28:30 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 23:28:30 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
Message-ID: <20030627032910.CCD551FC6@minnie.tuhs.org>

Fear not, Gregg; no twists intended or assumed.  It could well be
that there was an earlier print run of The UNIX Programming Environment
that got it wrong and claimed to be done with V7 on an 11/750.  But
I've never seen it (which is why I specified the exact edition and
printing I was quoting); and if it said that it was an error or a fib.

So far as I know nobody ever did a port of straight V7 to a VAX.
TUPE was written just before I arrived at the Labs; it's possible
that the 11/70 was still around during the writing, though it was
gone before I came.  I don't know whether the name V8 was coined
before the 11/70 was retired.  Maybe Dennis remembers more.

The original edition of The C Programming Language was certainly
done on an 11/70; it may have been published before the VAX hardware
existed in the field, and certainly before that part of Bell Labs
had one.  My beat-up paperback copy (copyright 1978, third printing)
credits Graphic Systems for the typesetter, the 11/70 for the system
hardware, but just says UNIX--no version stated--for the OS.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON

From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com  Fri Jun 27 14:46:34 2003
From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:46:34 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Re: V7 UNIX on VAX 11/750
Message-ID: <3aa1c8ef356619d06b93fc64ee312297@plan9.bell-labs.com>

To clean up some of the questions:

We (in our group) owned successively two photographic
typesetters:

The original Graphics Systems
C/A/T, which  was used to render the camera-
ready copy for several editions of the manual,
also the first edition of K&R as well as
other books.  This exposed characters
by flashing a Xenon lamp through a spinning
cylinder with the character images arranged
around the axis; the character was imaged
onto a fiber-optic bundle, which moved
horizontally with respect to the paper. The paper
was moved vertically.

The Linotron 202;  it had a CRT on which lines
of characters were drawn, with an unmoving,
line-wide fiber bundle. Rollers moved the paper
vertically.

Both of these were managed by us (including
the hardware connection, via DR11-C; it stood
in for the paper tape that the manufacturers
had intended).

These used chemical processing to develop
the paper. This was messy and (especially
for the C/A/T version) smelly, so we were
glad when the local Comp Center began offering
service on an Autologic APS-5, a machine similar
in design to the 202, but better engineered,
and the comp center managed the chemistry.
This was used for the second edition of K&R,
for example. I think what we sent was troff output
which the CC converted to Postscript.

Later this service was outsourced, then dropped.
In recent years laser printers have become
good enough that decent camera-ready copy
can be generated using them (e.g. for
Kernighan and Pike, The Practice of Programming).

As for the system aspects: K&R 1 (1978) was done on
what would soon be 7th edition Unix, on 11/70;
K&R 2 (1988) using 9th edition on VAX 8550.
Kernighan and Pike's Unix Programming
Evironment (1984) used 8th edition
on VAX 11/750.

About the releases (or pseudo releases) that
Norman mentions: actually 8th edition was
somewhat real, in that a consistent tape
and captured, probably corresponds fairly
well with its manual, and was educationally
licensed for real, though not in large quantity.
9th and 10th were indeed more conceptual in that
we sent stuff to people (e.g. Norman) who asked,
but they weren't collected in complete and
coherent form.

	Dennis


From macbiesz at optonline.net  Sat Jun 28 01:20:45 2003
From: macbiesz at optonline.net (Maciek Bieszczad)
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:20:45 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Comparing UNIX/Linux Code
Message-ID: <000001c33cbf$b07b3330$06fea8c0@maciek>

An interesting attempt at finding shared code:

http://www.rickbradley.com/chron/20030619/

--
Maciek (macbiesz at optonline.net)


