From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Sat Jun  4 18:26:48 2005
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Sat,  4 Jun 2005 18:26:48 +1000 (EST)
Subject: [pups] Hardware Upgrade to Minnie
Message-ID: <20050604082648.EA68D424@minnie.tuhs.org>

All, sometime around noon localtime on Tuesday 7th June, I will be upgrading
the hardware which is minnie.tuhs.org from a 500MHz P3 to a 2.4GHz P4. This
will include an operating system upgrade (FreeBSD 4.8 to FreebSD 5.3) and
upgrades to the major subsystems (web, e-mail, mailing lists, twiki etc.).
Although I have had the new system running standalone for a few weeks, I
expect that there will be some breakages once it takes over from the old
system. Therefore, please be patient while I resolve any issues. If you do
notice some problems with the new system, then e-mail me at wkt at tuhs.org.

Thanks,
	Warren

From dave at horsfall.org  Sat Jun  4 19:06:04 2005
From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall)
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 19:06:04 +1000 (EST)
Subject: [pups] Hardware Upgrade to Minnie
In-Reply-To: <20050604082648.EA68D424@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <20050604082648.EA68D424@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.4.61.0506041858080.2295@dave.horsfall.org>

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005, Warren Toomey wrote:

> All, sometime around noon localtime on Tuesday 7th June, I will be upgrading
> the hardware which is minnie.tuhs.org from a 500MHz P3 to a 2.4GHz P4.

And if you were true to the faith, it would've been something like an
upgrade from a /40 to a /70 :-)

-- Dave

From Robertdkeys at aol.com  Fri Jun 10 09:56:51 2005
From: Robertdkeys at aol.com (Robertdkeys at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 19:56:51 EDT
Subject: [pups] Hardware Upgrade to Minnie
Message-ID: <1d7.3e3a8e33.2fda3143@aol.com>

Although a /70 might be fun, or even a /93, but....

nay, an update to a VAX would be fun.....(:+}}.....

Call her MinnieVAX at tuhs.org.....(:+}}.....

gasp!  (Sorry Warren)

Bob Keys


From agrier at poofygoof.com  Sun Jun 12 18:38:06 2005
From: agrier at poofygoof.com (Aaron J. Grier)
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 01:38:06 -0700
Subject: [pups] Re: Looking for PDP-11 Newsweek ad circa 1981
In-Reply-To: <20050530154456.48975.qmail@web50201.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.0.1117467705.65629.pups@minnie.tuhs.org>
	<20050530154456.48975.qmail@web50201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050612083806.GN1335@arwen.poofy.goof.com>

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 08:44:56AM -0700, Ryan Doherty wrote:
> I am looking for a copy (electronic or paper) of the digital PDP-11
> advertisement that appeared in Newsweek in the early 1980s.

a public library?

-- 
  Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier at poofygoof.com


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Sat Jun  4 18:26:48 2005
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Sat,  4 Jun 2005 18:26:48 +1000 (EST)
Subject: [TUHS] Hardware Upgrade to Minnie
Message-ID: <20050604082648.A51DF42C@minnie.tuhs.org>

All, sometime around noon localtime on Tuesday 7th June, I will be upgrading
the hardware which is minnie.tuhs.org from a 500MHz P3 to a 2.4GHz P4. This
will include an operating system upgrade (FreeBSD 4.8 to FreebSD 5.3) and
upgrades to the major subsystems (web, e-mail, mailing lists, twiki etc.).
Although I have had the new system running standalone for a few weeks, I
expect that there will be some breakages once it takes over from the old
system. Therefore, please be patient while I resolve any issues. If you do
notice some problems with the new system, then e-mail me at wkt at tuhs.org.

Thanks,
	Warren

From james at peacemax.org  Thu Jun  9 15:07:34 2005
From: james at peacemax.org (James Falknor)
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 23:07:34 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] Re: Sad news from IBM...
Message-ID: <42A7CE96.7040808@peacemax.org>

>
>
>I was reading Groklaw yesterday night when I came across this. It is a
>very sad thought to know that possibly tons of old/ancient code is being
>dumped in the trash bin.
>
>More so now since the advent of software patents: it may become very
>difficult to avoid a patent on a re-invention of the wheel if previous
>knowledge has been dumped.
>
>OK, the quote. It is from "the Todd Shaughnessy affidavit [PDF] from IBM 
>that Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells requested they file when they turned 
>over all the code and paperwork to SCO":
>
>	28. As I have noted above, IBM does not maintain revision control 
>	information for AIX source code pre-dating 1991. To the extent that 
>	any code for the AIX operating system (that did not duplicate the 
>	code already being produced in CMVC) was found during the search 
>	described in Paragraph 26-27 above, it was produced. Paragraphs 
>	29-31 below describe additional search efforts IBM undertook to 
>	locate pre-1991 versions of AIX code. No versions of AIX pre-dating 
>	1991 were found.
>
>	29. In the 1980s and early 1990s, IBM prepared vital records backups 
>	of AIX source code and transferred them to a remote storage location. 
>	At some point in the 1990s, the AIX vital records tapes were transferred 
>	to Austin, Texas. In late 2000, the tapes were determined to be obsolete, 
>	and were not retained.
>
>	30. The AIX development organization contacted other IBM employees who 
>	were known or believed to have been involved with the development or 
>	product release of AIX versions prior to 1991. In addition, IBM 
>	managers and attorneys asked current members of the AIX development 
>	organization whether they were aware of the location of pre-1991 
>	releases of AIX source code. No one asked was aware of any remaining 
>	copies of pre-1991 AIX source code.
>
>Perhaps we should do something to raise awareness about the relevance of 
>legacy (not only UNIX) source code. And in any case, it is a pity that all
>that historical information had been lost forever.
>
>I have always complained about this, and consider it the biggest drawback of
>closed proprietary source code: it is OK that law protects developer interests 
>with the goal of promoting innovation and the public benefit at large. But it
>is a lose for everybody whenever any such "protected" code is dumped into the
>bin banning anyone else from further benefitting from or exploiting it, and 
>opening the road for opportunists to claim they "newly invented" it.
>
>Sic. Sigh.
>				j
>

All may not be lost.

As it appears to me, TUHS has connections with Universities / Colleges 
and other types schools, as well as programmers, software engineers and 
the like.

All we need to do is put the word out that TUHS is seeking pre-1991 AIX 
source code and it's bound to surface. If all else fails, I'm sure 
someone has a pre-1991 AIX binary distribution that could be 
disassembled (that is if a binary distribution can be disassembled back 
to a rough source code).


To all TUHS members,
     As a part of the heritage of Unix, please search any and all your 
archives for pre-1991 AIX Source Code. Maybe, just maybe, a pre-1991 AIX 
Binary Distribution will suffice. Help IBM,  TUHS, and in the end, the 
heritage of Unix.

    Thank you,
    James Falknor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20050608/bf19aaf8/attachment.html>

From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au  Thu Jun  9 15:30:43 2005
From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:30:43 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Re: Sad news from IBM...
In-Reply-To: <42A7CE96.7040808@peacemax.org>
References: <42A7CE96.7040808@peacemax.org>
Message-ID: <20050609053043.GB91934@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>


On 2005-Jun-08 23:07:34 -0600, James Falknor <james at peacemax.org> wrote:
>All we need to do is put the word out that TUHS is seeking pre-1991 AIX 
>source code and it's bound to surface.

It depends how widely spread the source code was and how may people
still have readable 15 year old backups.  I know I tend to delete old
code after a while and many of my old QIC-150 tapes are no longer
readable.

> If all else fails, I'm sure 
>someone has a pre-1991 AIX binary distribution that could be 
>disassembled (that is if a binary distribution can be disassembled back 
>to a rough source code).

I'd be very surprised if this produces anything useful.  The code will
have been compiled with a reasonable degree of optimisation and won't
have any debugging symbols in it.  It would be reasonably trivial to
turn it into something that a C compiler could understand but making
it look anything like the original is a major undertaking.

-- 
Peter Jeremy

This email may contain privileged/confidential information. You may not copy or disclose this email to anyone without the written permission of the sender.  If you have received this email in error please kindly delete this message and notify the sender.  Opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily the opinions of the employer. 

This email and any attached files should be scanned to detect viruses.  No liability will be accepted by the employer for loss or damage (whether caused by negligence or not) as a result of email transmission.


From grog at lemis.com  Tue Jun  7 11:46:28 2005
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:16:28 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] Re: Re: Plan 9 port license (was: licence of ditroff?)
Message-ID: <20050607014628.GT64194@wantadilla.lemis.com>

Somehow this message got stuck at the wrong end of my inbox.  It
relates to a thread on this list a few months back.  The content
speaks for itself, so I'll just forward it here.

Greg

----- Forwarded message from Russ Cox <russcox at gmail.com> -----

> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:33:17 -0500
> From: Russ Cox <russcox at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Russ Cox <russcox at gmail.com>
> To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com>
> Subject: Re: Plan 9 port license (was: licence of ditroff?)
>
> [Feel free to forward this response to the appropriate lists.]
>
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 09:39:32 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
>> As you can see, there's a certain amount of confusion about the
>> license of this software.  I took a cursory look and couldn't find
>> anything.  In this day of predatory companies, it would be good to
>> have clarity.  Could you please clarify, both to the list and on the
>> web site?
>
> The license is the Lucent Public License.  There are some exceptions
> with MIT-like licensing, but troff is not one of them.  This is made clear
> if you look in the tar file -- there is a LICENSE file in the root that
> explains the situation.  I've added a link to this file on the web site
> next to the download link.
>
> I hate haggling over licensing so I try to draw as little attention as
> possible to such issues.  I do appreciate their importance.
>
> The Lucent Public License is the IBM Public License made optionally non-viral.
> If you want to contribute changes back to the Plan 9 project, then
> those changes must be made available under the LPL.  But (and
> this is where the difference is) if you don't want to contribute your
> changes back, then you don't have to.
>
>>>> Instead of starting with 27 year old code, you'd be better
>>>> off taking the troff from http://www.swtch.com/plan9port.
>>>
>>> Thanks, that's a nice idea, but from what I experienced,
>>> the portability of recent AT&T/Bell/Lucent/whatever code
>>> is worse than the bugs in old code (eg. I could not get
>>> ksh93 to compile, something in there just dumped core;
>>> but then that's Unix, not Plan 9).
>
> Confusing Plan 9 with ksh is sure to offend both sets of authors.
>
> Plan9port builds and runs fine on Linux, FreeBSD, SunOS, and Mac OS X,
> and I'm sure it would be easy to get running on other Unix-like systems,
> but I haven't had the need and no one has mailed me diffs.
>
>>>> This is a port of many Plan 9 utilities to Unix.  The troff there
>>>> (a) has an explicit license that will probably do for the BSD people
>>>
>>> If it's the same licence as for 8c, then no, unfortunately.
>
> It's the LucentPL as mentioned earlier.  I'm sure the BSD guys
> won't love it (it's not the BSD license), but at least it's not viral.
>
> Russ

----- End forwarded message -----

--
The virus contained in this message was not detected.

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/20050607/09237d68/attachment.sig>

From james at peacemax.org  Sat Jun 18 15:36:52 2005
From: james at peacemax.org (James Falknor)
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:36:52 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
Message-ID: <42B3B2F4.4070503@peacemax.org>

To all the Unix Officiando's,

    Have any of you checked out the recent release of Sun's Solaris 10 
source code known as OpenSolaris?

    What are your thoughts on the subject?

    Is the source code still considered to be based on SVR4?

     Any likely chance of using Solaris source code to bring 32V or 
Version 7 of  Unix into the modern world of x86 usage?

Thank you,
James Falknor




From vasco at icpnet.pl  Sun Jun 19 02:39:24 2005
From: vasco at icpnet.pl (Andrzej Popielewicz)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 18:39:24 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <42B3B2F4.4070503@peacemax.org>
References: <42B3B2F4.4070503@peacemax.org>
Message-ID: <42B44E3C.1060107@icpnet.pl>

Uz.ytkownik James Falknor napisa?:

> To all the Unix Officiando's,
>
> Have any of you checked out the recent release of Sun's Solaris 10
> source code known as OpenSolaris?
>
> What are your thoughts on the subject?
>
> Is the source code still considered to be based on SVR4?
>
> Any likely chance of using Solaris source code to bring 32V or Version
> 7 of Unix into the modern world of x86 usage?
>
> Thank you,
> James Falknor
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>

I did not check sources of Solaris 10 yet, but as an owner of many
Solaris 8/9 licenses I will certainly do it.
As far as Unix Version 7 is concerned I see some chances . Let us
consider such idea .
For example Coherent is based on Unix version 7. It has also support for
DKI/DDI driver interface (but not complete implementation). Solaris
drivers as far as I know use DKI/DDI. So there is some chance that at
least drivers could be in some way portable .
Probably using NetBSD would be also an alternative.

Andrzej




From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jun 19 05:52:35 2005
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:52:35 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <42B44E3C.1060107@icpnet.pl>
Message-ID: <000401c5743f$4bce4c60$6401a8c0@who7>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
However, it happens that I spent some time talking with the folks at
the company in question, during the boot camp sessions that launched
Sol 10. It happens that the code is one hundred percent theirs. Now
there might be some lingering strangeness that follows from the BSD
evolved forms of Sol leading up to 10, that is all there will be.

Although I suspect a good hacker would be able to sort out the
differences and dummy up a working kit to support the assertions of
yours James Falknor, I myself do not have those talents.

However, Andrzej Popielewicz, I welcome your efforts.
----
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
---
"The Force will be with you... Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Andrzej Popielewicz
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 12:39 PM
> To: James Falknor
> Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
> 
> Uz.ytkownik James Falknor napisa?:
> 
> > To all the Unix Officiando's,
> >
> > Have any of you checked out the recent release of Sun's Solaris 10
> > source code known as OpenSolaris?
> >
> > What are your thoughts on the subject?
> >
> > Is the source code still considered to be based on SVR4?
> >
> > Any likely chance of using Solaris source code to bring 32V or
Version
> > 7 of Unix into the modern world of x86 usage?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > James Falknor
> >
> 
<<<SNIP!>>>
> I did not check sources of Solaris 10 yet, but as an owner of many
> Solaris 8/9 licenses I will certainly do it.
> As far as Unix Version 7 is concerned I see some chances . Let us
> consider such idea .
> For example Coherent is based on Unix version 7. It has also support
for
> DKI/DDI driver interface (but not complete implementation). Solaris
> drivers as far as I know use DKI/DDI. So there is some chance that
at
> least drivers could be in some way portable .
> Probably using NetBSD would be also an alternative.
> 
> Andrzej



From jpetts at operamail.com  Sun Jun 19 06:08:02 2005
From: jpetts at operamail.com (James)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:08:02 +0000 GMT
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
Message-ID: <2054168344-1119125315-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-22130-@engine93>

Groklaw (http://www.groklaw.net/) has some VERY good discussion of the 'openness' of this code...

 
-----Original Message-----
From: "Gregg C Levine" <hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:52:35 
To:<tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org>
Subject: RE: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code

Hello from Gregg C Levine
However, it happens that I spent some time talking with the folks at
the company in question, during the boot camp sessions that launched
Sol 10. It happens that the code is one hundred percent theirs. Now
there might be some lingering strangeness that follows from the BSD
evolved forms of Sol leading up to 10, that is all there will be.

Although I suspect a good hacker would be able to sort out the
differences and dummy up a working kit to support the assertions of
yours James Falknor, I myself do not have those talents.

However, Andrzej Popielewicz, I welcome your efforts.
----
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
---
"The Force will be with you... Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Andrzej Popielewicz
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 12:39 PM
> To: James Falknor
> Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
> 
> Uz.ytkownik James Falknor napisa?:
> 
> > To all the Unix Officiando's,
> >
> > Have any of you checked out the recent release of Sun's Solaris 10
> > source code known as OpenSolaris?
> >
> > What are your thoughts on the subject?
> >
> > Is the source code still considered to be based on SVR4?
> >
> > Any likely chance of using Solaris source code to bring 32V or
Version
> > 7 of Unix into the modern world of x86 usage?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > James Falknor
> >
> 
<<<SNIP!>>>
> I did not check sources of Solaris 10 yet, but as an owner of many
> Solaris 8/9 licenses I will certainly do it.
> As far as Unix Version 7 is concerned I see some chances . Let us
> consider such idea .
> For example Coherent is based on Unix version 7. It has also support
for
> DKI/DDI driver interface (but not complete implementation). Solaris
> drivers as far as I know use DKI/DDI. So there is some chance that
at
> least drivers could be in some way portable .
> Probably using NetBSD would be also an alternative.
> 
> Andrzej

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

Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.


From bmc at zion.eng.sun.com  Sun Jun 19 08:35:05 2005
From: bmc at zion.eng.sun.com (Bryan Cantrill)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <2054168344-1119125315-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-22130-@engine93>
	from James at "Jun 18, 2005 08:08:02 pm"
Message-ID: <200506182235.j5IMZ5HW028548@zion.eng.sun.com>


> Groklaw (http://www.groklaw.net/) has some VERY good discussion of the 'openness' of this code...

Can we please restrict this kind of dogmatic assertion to Groklaw?  CDDL
(the license for OpenSolaris) is an OSI-approved license; it is just as
open as the BSD license or the MPL or any other OSI-approved license.

As for Unix history, you can definitely see the Sixth Edition roots
of Solaris.  Look, for example, at the comment above exit():

  http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/uts/common/os/exit.c#exit

Pretty amazing that this comment hasn't changed in 30+ years...

	- Bryan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan Cantrill, Solaris Kernel Development.       http://blogs.sun.com/bmc


From grog at lemis.com  Sun Jun 19 11:07:38 2005
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 10:37:38 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <200506182235.j5IMZ5HW028548@zion.eng.sun.com>
References: <2054168344-1119125315-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-22130-@engine93>
	<200506182235.j5IMZ5HW028548@zion.eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: <20050619010738.GA65015@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Saturday, 18 June 2005 at 15:35:05 -0700, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
>
>> Groklaw (http://www.groklaw.net/) has some VERY good discussion of
>> the 'openness' of this code...
>
> Can we please restrict this kind of dogmatic assertion to Groklaw?

And if it has to be discussed here at all, correct URLs would be
useful.  There's no mention of the strings "Solaris" or "CDDL" on the
page specified above.

> CDDL (the license for OpenSolaris) is an OSI-approved license; it is
> just as open as the BSD license or the MPL or any other OSI-approved
> license.
>
> As for Unix history, you can definitely see the Sixth Edition roots
> of Solaris.  Look, for example, at the comment above exit():
>
>   http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/uts/common/os/exit.c#exit

Thanks.  That's very interesting.

> Pretty amazing that this comment hasn't changed in 30+ years...

It would seem that it's the exception.  I'm surprised how little
resemblance I find between this code and FreeBSD.

Greg
--
The virus contained in this message was not detected.

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/20050619/bce33f63/attachment.sig>

From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jun 19 12:10:05 2005
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:10:05 -0400
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <200506182235.j5IMZ5HW028548@zion.eng.sun.com>
Message-ID: <001201c57474$060a64e0$6401a8c0@who7>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
Bryan, nice to see someone here, I might have met. Were you present at
any of the boot camp gatherings since the official release? According
to Ambreesh at the one in March, there isn't any further BSD based
things inside Solaris. 

Mind you we didn't discuss anything from original UNIX at that
gathering, but it did come up during later discussions.

Now I'll grant you that exit just may be something that all of you
have not gotten around to constructing a replacement for, but that's
all.

Incidentally this is the one issue that Groklaw has definitely Charlie
Foxed themselves out.
---
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
---
"The Force will be with you... Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org
[mailto:tuhs-bounces at minnie.tuhs.org] On
> Behalf Of Bryan Cantrill
> Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 6:35 PM
> To: James
> Cc: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
> 
> 
> > Groklaw (http://www.groklaw.net/) has some VERY good discussion of
the
> 'openness' of this code...
> 
> Can we please restrict this kind of dogmatic assertion to Groklaw?
CDDL
> (the license for OpenSolaris) is an OSI-approved license; it is just
as
> open as the BSD license or the MPL or any other OSI-approved
license.
> 
> As for Unix history, you can definitely see the Sixth Edition roots
> of Solaris.  Look, for example, at the comment above exit():
> 
>
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/uts/common/os/exit.c#ex
it
> 
> Pretty amazing that this comment hasn't changed in 30+ years...
> 
> 	- Bryan
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Bryan Cantrill, Solaris Kernel Development.
http://blogs.sun.com/bmc
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



From grog at lemis.com  Mon Jun 20 07:24:17 2005
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 06:54:17 +0930
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <42b57082.vD3Ev7xNdTPge2A4%Gunnar.Ritter@pluto.uni-freiburg.de>
References: <2054168344-1119125315-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-22130-@engine93>
	<200506182235.j5IMZ5HW028548@zion.eng.sun.com>
	<20050619010738.GA65015@wantadilla.lemis.com>
	<42b57082.vD3Ev7xNdTPge2A4%Gunnar.Ritter@pluto.uni-freiburg.de>
Message-ID: <20050619212417.GB65015@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Sunday, 19 June 2005 at 15:17:54 +0200, Gunnar Ritter wrote:
> Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, 18 June 2005 at 15:35:05 -0700, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
>
>> I'm surprised how little resemblance I find between this code and
>> FreeBSD.
>
> I am not that surprised given the fact that BSD was forced to drop
> the AT&T code more than ten years ago in order to become free.

I was looking in the ufs code, which was derived from BSD.

Greg
--
The virus contained in this message was not detected.

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/20050620/2718ddaa/attachment.sig>

From Gunnar.Ritter at pluto.uni-freiburg.de  Sun Jun 19 23:17:54 2005
From: Gunnar.Ritter at pluto.uni-freiburg.de (Gunnar Ritter)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 15:17:54 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] Solaris 10 source code
In-Reply-To: <20050619010738.GA65015@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <2054168344-1119125315-cardhu_blackberry.rim.net-22130-@engine93>
	<200506182235.j5IMZ5HW028548@zion.eng.sun.com>
	<20050619010738.GA65015@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <42b57082.vD3Ev7xNdTPge2A4%Gunnar.Ritter@pluto.uni-freiburg.de>

Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, 18 June 2005 at 15:35:05 -0700, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
> > Pretty amazing that this comment hasn't changed in 30+ years...
> It would seem that it's the exception.

There are more such cases in the utilities collection. For example,
most of the essential code of OpenSolaris bc, dc, diff, fgrep, ed,
and egrep is the same as in v7. (Most comments are new indeed.)

I have created a portable version of the OpenSolaris Bourne shell at
<http://heirloom.sourceforge.net/sh.html>. In the future, utilities
from OpenSolaris will also be included in the Heirloom Toolchest.
This particularly applies to System V utilities that were not in v7
and have not yet been rewritten by me for this purpose. Many
OpenSolaris utilities still contain line length limits, though, and
their multibyte code often exits when it encounters illegal byte
sequences in its input.

> I'm surprised how little resemblance I find between this code and
> FreeBSD.

I am not that surprised given the fact that BSD was forced to drop
the AT&T code more than ten years ago in order to become free.

	Gunnar


From james at peacemax.org  Tue Jun 21 10:52:33 2005
From: james at peacemax.org (James Falknor)
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:52:33 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] Unix Tenth Edition ownership?
Message-ID: <42B764D1.8030201@peacemax.org>

To all Unix Officiando's,

    Who has ownership of Unix Tenth Edition?

    Has anybody tried contacting the current owner for it's release 
under an OSI approved license?


Thank you,
James Falknor




From wkt at tuhs.org  Tue Jun 21 11:06:16 2005
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 11:06:16 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Unix Tenth Edition ownership?
In-Reply-To: <42B764D1.8030201@peacemax.org>
References: <42B764D1.8030201@peacemax.org>
Message-ID: <20050621010616.GA50835@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 06:52:33PM -0600, James Falknor wrote:
> To all Unix Officiando's,
>    Who has ownership of Unix Tenth Edition?
>    Has anybody tried contacting the current owner for it's release 
> under an OSI approved license?

Norman Wilson is the custodian of Tenth Edition. He would like to donate
a copy to the archives, but 10e contains quite a lot of material gathered
from many places, and the task of tracking down all the copyright owners
and getting permission would be an arduous task. Norman reads the list, so
he may respond with a more detailed comment.

	Warren


From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Tue Jun 21 19:41:17 2005
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:41:17 +1200
Subject: [TUHS] Unix Tenth Edition ownership?
In-Reply-To: <20050621010616.GA50835@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <42B764D1.8030201@peacemax.org>
	<20050621010616.GA50835@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <200506212141.17127.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:06, Warren Toomey wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 06:52:33PM -0600, James Falknor wrote:
> > To all Unix Officiando's,
> >    Who has ownership of Unix Tenth Edition?
> >    Has anybody tried contacting the current owner for it's release
> > under an OSI approved license?
>
> Norman Wilson is the custodian of Tenth Edition. He would like to donate
> a copy to the archives, but 10e contains quite a lot of material gathered
> from many places, and the task of tracking down all the copyright owners
> and getting permission would be an arduous task. Norman reads the list, so
> he may respond with a more detailed comment.
>
> 	Warren

With all due respect, may I suggest that this list is precisely the sort of 
resource necessary for tracking down copyright ownerships?

After all, we do have a good number of subscribers who were there at the ealry 
stages of Unix(R)(T[F]M).  (I wasn't - I was a high-schoold student at Deakin 
High, Canberra at the time Prof Lions was writing his Commentary, and the 
nearest _we_ got to computers was an Apple II we got in 1978 - and it was 
mostly used for games. ;)  Sad but true. ;^)

I'm sure we're up to it.  Just ask us.

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

-- 
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
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 cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Wed Jun 22 02:32:20 2005
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 09:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals
Message-ID: <200506211632.j5LGWKQ01623@opihi.ucsd.edu>

While preparing to move out of the office that I have occupied for the
past couple of decades, I came across an unused set of V7M-11 manuals.
Three large binders, DEC Orange (Chinese Red?).  Is this something that
should be archived somewhere?  Scanned and put on line?  I don't have
the resources to do that, but could ship them somewhere.

Labels on the binders are:
V7M-11	Volume 1	Programmer's Manual
V7M-11	Volume 2A and 2B	Programmer's Manual
V7M-11	System Management and Operation Manuals

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


From wkt at tuhs.org  Wed Jun 22 07:11:43 2005
From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:11:43 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals
In-Reply-To: <200506211632.j5LGWKQ01623@opihi.ucsd.edu>
References: <200506211632.j5LGWKQ01623@opihi.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <20050621211143.GA10981@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:32:20AM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> While preparing to move out of the office that I have occupied for the
> past couple of decades, I came across an unused set of V7M-11 manuals.
> Three large binders, DEC Orange (Chinese Red?).  Is this something that
> should be archived somewhere?  Scanned and put on line?  I don't have
> the resources to do that, but could ship them somewhere.
> 
> Labels on the binders are:
> V7M-11	Volume 1	Programmer's Manual
> V7M-11	Volume 2A and 2B	Programmer's Manual
> V7M-11	System Management and Operation Manuals

Carl, we have v7m source + binaries in the Unix Archive, but I'm not sure
if this also includes the documentation that you have unearthed. I will
go through what's in the archive here and see if it corresponds with what
you have, and get back to you.

	Warren


From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Wed Jun 22 07:46:43 2005
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals
Message-ID: <200506212146.j5LLkhk02766@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:11:43 +1000
> From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
> To: Carl Lowenstein <cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals
> 
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:32:20AM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> > While preparing to move out of the office that I have occupied for the
> > past couple of decades, I came across an unused set of V7M-11 manuals.
> > Three large binders, DEC Orange (Chinese Red?).  Is this something that
> > should be archived somewhere?  Scanned and put on line?  I don't have
> > the resources to do that, but could ship them somewhere.
> > 
> > Labels on the binders are:
> > V7M-11	Volume 1	Programmer's Manual
> > V7M-11	Volume 2A and 2B	Programmer's Manual
> > V7M-11	System Management and Operation Manuals
> 
> Carl, we have v7m source + binaries in the Unix Archive, but I'm not sure
> if this also includes the documentation that you have unearthed. I will
> go through what's in the archive here and see if it corresponds with what
> you have, and get back to you.
> 
> 	Warren

Fine.  I didn't mention that I also came across a V7M-11 distribution
tape, because I was pretty sure you already had that.

I will be away for about three weeks starting Monday 27 June, so we might
not connect until I get back.  On the other hand, these books have been
sitting around for a few years, another month won't hurt them.

    carl



From wb at freebie.xs4all.nl  Wed Jun 22 08:23:58 2005
From: wb at freebie.xs4all.nl (Wilko Bulte)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:23:58 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals
In-Reply-To: <200506212146.j5LLkhk02766@opihi.ucsd.edu>
References: <200506212146.j5LLkhk02766@opihi.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <20050621222358.GC63033@freebie.xs4all.nl>

On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 02:46:43PM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote..
> > Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 07:11:43 +1000
> > From: Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org>
> > To: Carl Lowenstein <cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu>
> > Subject: Re: [TUHS] DEC V7M-11 manuals
> > 
> > On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:32:20AM -0700, Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> > > While preparing to move out of the office that I have occupied for the
> > > past couple of decades, I came across an unused set of V7M-11 manuals.
> > > Three large binders, DEC Orange (Chinese Red?).  Is this something that
> > > should be archived somewhere?  Scanned and put on line?  I don't have
> > > the resources to do that, but could ship them somewhere.
> > > 
> > > Labels on the binders are:
> > > V7M-11	Volume 1	Programmer's Manual
> > > V7M-11	Volume 2A and 2B	Programmer's Manual
> > > V7M-11	System Management and Operation Manuals
> > 
> > Carl, we have v7m source + binaries in the Unix Archive, but I'm not sure
> > if this also includes the documentation that you have unearthed. I will
> > go through what's in the archive here and see if it corresponds with what
> > you have, and get back to you.
> > 
> > 	Warren
> 
> Fine.  I didn't mention that I also came across a V7M-11 distribution
> tape, because I was pretty sure you already had that.

Oh... a real one.. Don't throw that one away right? ;-)

-- 
Wilko		wilko at FreeBSD.org


