From ssigala at globalnet.it  Fri Oct 10 02:20:41 1997
From: ssigala at globalnet.it (S. Sigala)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:20:41 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject: PDP-11, VAX, etc. hardware in Italy or near
In-Reply-To: <199710081809.EAA11819@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.971009181629.1760B-100000@athena.milk.it>

Hi, I'm interested in buying old hardware like PDP-11, VAX,
Sun, etc., if possible near Italy (or in E.U.).  Can someone
subscribed to this list suggest me [someone|a company|a university] that
sells this type of hardware, please?

Regards,
	Sandro


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA15858
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:00:59 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au  Fri Oct 10 09:00:59 1997
From: wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:00:59 +1000 (EST)
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
Message-ID: <199710092300.JAA02541@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>

I just received this email from Frank Wortner. Anybody have a copy of PDP-11
Xenix?

	Warren

----- Forwarded message from Frank Wortner -----

From: "Frank Wortner" <fwortner at prodigy.net>
To: <wkt at cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Request to Join PUPS

I've sent off email to a friend of mine who preserved some materials from a
now-defunct software company we used to work for.  He *might* have that
tape.  I regret not keeping track of it,  but fifteen years have elapsed
since I last booted it.

Too bad.  PDP-11 Xenix had a number of nice features.

o It was based on the Seventh Edition.
o It ran on everything from a PDP-11/23 on up.
o It could simulate split instruction and data space on non I&D machines.
(*)
o It had a complete shutdown procedure (an elaborate /etc/shutdown script)
o The kernel was delivered as an archive library (".a" file),  so you could
reconfigure without source.

Perhaps someone at SCO (or Microsoft) may still have a tape of it.  Most
software firms archive their products in secure vaults,  so it might still
exist in some warehouse.

(*) The scheme involved paging the instructions while the data remained
resident.  The first 8K of the program was always resident and contained a
jump table and supporting software.  The next 8K held whatever instructions
were executing at the time,  while the remaining 48K was reserved for the
data and stack segments.  Building a simulated I&D executable required the
user to link once as a pure executable,  once as a split executable, and
finally running both executables through a program which built the final
simulated split I&D executable.  The compiler had an option ('-j' if I
recall correctly) that performed these three links automatically.

Sorry for the rambling note,  but I'm just a bit overwhelmed by nostalgia.
;-)

Frank
----- End of forwarded message from Frank Wortner -----

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA16074
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 10:58:50 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From allisonp at world.std.com  Fri Oct 10 10:58:40 1997
From: allisonp at world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 20:58:40 -0400
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
Message-ID: <199710100058.AA13113@world.std.com>

<I just received this email from Frank Wortner. Anybody have a copy of PDP-1
<Xenix?
<
<	Warren

Well yes, sorta.  It's on the net, John Wilson has it on ftp.dbit.com.  The 
however is it's for the PRO350/380 systems.  I don't know if it can be moved 
to more standard PDP-11 configurations.

Allison


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA16364
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 13:20:26 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From djenner at halcyon.com  Fri Oct 10 13:20:01 1997
From: djenner at halcyon.com (David C. Jenner)
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 20:20:01 -0700
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
References: <199710100058.AA13113@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <343D9EE1.1E1F32E4@halcyon.com>

I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
collected everything else.)

There is, however, VENIX (no commercial relation to XENIX other than a
common parent) on ftp.update.uu.se.  This version of XENIX is for the
DEC Pro350/380, which is, essentially, a PDP-11.  There was also a VENIX
for "real" PDP-11s.

Dave

Allison J Parent wrote:
> 
> <I just received this email from Frank Wortner. Anybody have a copy of PDP-1
> <Xenix?
> <
> <       Warren
> 
> Well yes, sorta.  It's on the net, John Wilson has it on ftp.dbit.com.  The
> however is it's for the PRO350/380 systems.  I don't know if it can be moved
> to more standard PDP-11 configurations.
> 
> Allison
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vcard.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 330 bytes
Desc: Card for David C. Jenner
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/19971009/b82577c3/attachment.vcf>

From allisonp at world.std.com  Fri Oct 10 14:12:45 1997
From: allisonp at world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:12:45 -0400
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
Message-ID: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>

Dave,

<I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
<anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
<was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
<collected everything else.)

Your right, drain beth,  err brain death. Sometimes all those *nixs are the 
same to me.  Especially after configuring three vaxen for VMS and installing 
it.  I know heresy but, Netbsd has proven uninstallable here on all four 
systems.

<DEC Pro350/380, which is, essentially, a PDP-11.  There was also a VENIX
<for "real" PDP-11s.

Well venix on the pro350 runs far better than POS!  In fact it's the only 
*nix running here as even slackware has had problems (bad CD!).

That however is news! Is there a version of venix for "real" PDP-11s? on 
the net?

Allison


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA16515
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:46:48 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From grog at lemis.com  Fri Oct 10 14:46:33 1997
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:16:33 +0930
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
In-Reply-To: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>; from Allison J Parent on Fri, Oct 10, 1997 at 12:12:45AM -0400
References: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <19971010141633.30732@lemis.com>

On Fri, Oct 10, 1997 at 12:12:45AM -0400, Allison J Parent wrote:
> Dave,
>
> <I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
> <anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
> <was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
> <collected everything else.)

I thought SCO developed XENIX right from the word go, only in those
days they belonged to Microsoft.

> Your right, drain beth,  err brain death. Sometimes all those *nixs are the
> same to me.  Especially after configuring three vaxen for VMS and installing
> it.  I know heresy but, Netbsd has proven uninstallable here on all four
> systems.

Interesting.  What was the problem?

Greg

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA17679
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 01:02:58 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From fwortner at prodigy.net  Sat Oct 11 00:57:18 1997
From: fwortner at prodigy.net (Frank Wortner)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 10:57:18 -0400
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
Message-ID: <01bcd58c$ce268560$488904c7@seeker.prodigy.com>

Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to
explain.

Way back when --- about 1981 or 82 --- I worked for a small (now defunct)
software company.  We owned 2 PDP-11/23s.  Initially,  we ran a distribution
of the Sixth Edition on them.  That came from a company in New York ---
that's where I am geographically,  BTW --- called Yourdon.  The system was
called UV6.

After a while,  we decided to upgrade to V7.  At the time,  we had begun a
relationship with another (now defunct) firm called Lifeboat Associates
(also in New York,  later in Tarrytown, NY).  They distributed microcomputer
software,  principally CP/M-based.  They were a Microsoft distributor.
Microsoft had just started Unix development at the time.  Lifeboat sold us a
V7 system:  Microsoft PDP-11 Xenix.  I know it was Microsoft because the
tape lables said so, and I remember that the line printer printed release
notes contained a banner page that indicated that they came from Microsoft's
DEC 20(!) (cheerfully named "Microsoft Heating Plant").

PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.
Processor support included all models of PDP-11 with MMUs:  23s, 34s, 40s,
45s, 55s, 60s, and 70s.  It had split I&D space emulation --- borrowed,  I
believe from 2.something BSD.  That emulation required a grand total of
three(!) link passes,  but the compiler driver was modified to do this
automatically if you specified the "-j" option.  Instead of source,  the
kernel was delivered mostly as .o files and .a libraries,  so you could
reconfigure the OS without source.  The reconfigure programs just spat out
some assembly language and C "glue" that you compiled and linked with the .o
and .a files.  In fact,  this was pretty much automated.  The system also
had a rather extensive /etc./shutdown shell script which calmly and
thoroughly brought the system to a quiescent state and could optionally
reboot or halt it.  Although the OS was pretty big --- I find it amazing
that I thought of it as "big" ;-) --- you could,  with some effort build a
boot floppy on a RX02 diskette.  That could run exactly 1 (one) process ---
the RX02 system had *no* swap space.   I remember system recovery sessions
in which I constantly had to boot the floppy,  see the shell prompt,  and
then "exec fsck" and watch as fsck finished its run,  and init respawned the
shell!

Anyhow,  I know I *used to have* the release notes and I *might* have had
the tape,  but both,  sadly,  are probably lost.  I was wondering if anyone
else might have seen or,  even better,  still has a tape of this rare
version of V7.  Perhaps there's an archive at Microsoft or SCO that harbors
a tape.  Most software firms do have some sort of policy about placing
products in escrow with a third party.  Maybe this still exists.  If not,
that's OK.  If SCO is kind enough to allow source licensing to individuals
for noncommercial use,  then this largely becomes a moot issue.

Full source V7 (or even better 2BSD) is probably a more "interesting" system
from a hobbyist or preservationist point of view,  particularly if you're
like me and don't have or care to own actual PDP-11 hardware.  I'm quite
happy to run John Wilson's and Bob Supnick's wonderful emulator programs
with whatever software I can obtain.  They let me have the PDP-11 models I
worked on (23, 34, 45) as well as those I'd like to have had (70) without
the hassle and expense of maintaining the actual hardware.

BTW,  if John or Bob reads this list,  l'd like to say "Thank you" to both
of them.  Also thanks to Warren for his work preserving the old Unix
software.  It's a great deal of fun to see old "friends" again,  and I think
it will be just as much fun to see software and "hardware" combinations that
I didn't have access to in the "good old days."  Thanks also to SCO for
binary licenses for these "historic" systems;  I hope that they will be able
to license source code in the near future.

Sorry for the long ramble and thanks for reading!

Frank



Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA17931
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 03:15:43 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From sms at moe.2bsd.com  Sat Oct 11 02:55:45 1997
From: sms at moe.2bsd.com (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
Message-ID: <199710101655.JAA20665@moe.2bsd.com>

Howdy -

> From: "Frank Wortner" <fwortner at prodigy.net>
> Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to

	And I hate to see a fellow talk to himself without interruption ;-)

> PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.
> Processor support included all models of PDP-11 with MMUs:  23s, 34s, 40s,

	I remember (not terribly fondly) running V7 on an 11/23.  We hacked
	in an overlay scheme to the kernel (but not user programs).  Just
	enough resources to run 1 user and a couple processes - do an "ls" and
	the shell got swapped out, when 'ls' finished the shell would get
	swapped back in.  Wheee! ;)

> 45s, 55s, 60s, and 70s.  It had split I&D space emulation --- borrowed,  I
> believe from 2.something BSD.  That emulation required a grand total of

	Not having used Xenix I'd never heard the term "split I&D space
	emulation".   What we hacked in to V7 and BSD later implemented
	was an even older concept:  overlays.

	2.9 was the first version I know of that had 'overlay' support.  The
	overlays were memory resident and switching between them was done
	by flipping MMU registers.  

	It is (present tense since 2.11BSD uses the same method today) done
	with a single link phase (no "-j" option or multiple link edits).  In
	2.9 there was a limit of 7 overlay segments plus the base segment. Later
	on (the 1985 update to 2.9) the limit was increased to 15 overlays
	which has proven to be adequate since then.  For the kernel the overlays
	could only be 8kb (1 page register) but user mode programs could have
	larger (but still multiple of 8kb) overlays.

	In 2.9 there was a separate libc.a that you did need to link with
	because the callframe had an extra word (the overlay number) and
	'csv, cret' had a couple extra instructions to switch overlays.  Later
	(2.10 and up) the callframe was changed to always have the extra word
	This made life easier (at the expense of an extra 3microseconds per
	function call) by not having to maintain/build two versions of all
	the libraries.

> three(!) link passes,  but the compiler driver was modified to do this
> automatically if you specified the "-j" option.  Instead of source,  the
> kernel was delivered mostly as .o files and .a libraries,  so you could

	A multiphase link IS currently used to build the 2.11 networking though.
	The networking code (4.3BSD's TCP/IP stack) runs in supervisor mode.
	The kernel, at boot time, loads /netnix into supervisor space.  The
	/netnix image is built in a similar manner to what was mentioned for
	Xenix's emulated I&D space - first build the unix image (with undefined
	references to the networking code), then build the netnix image
	(with undefined references to the kernel code), then cross reference
	the two images for undefineds and create .s stub files to satisfy 
	the undefineds.  Assemble the two .s files and then link unix with
	d.netnix.o and netnix with d.unix.o and voila a kernel and an image
	it can load into supervisor space.

> reboot or halt it.  Although the OS was pretty big --- I find it amazing
> that I thought of it as "big" ;-) --- you could,  with some effort build a

	Even V7 had trouble fitting on a non split I/D machine.  The problem
	is that the kernel has to map the I/O page which removes an extra
	MMU page from being used for data.  Then the 'u' area needs a page
	(for the kernel stack and per process context).  And you need a page
	to perform copyin/copyout with (and to map the buffer cache if that
	has been moved external to the kernel) - that leaves only 40kb for
	everything else (and on a nonsplit I/D machine with overlays you'd
	need two or three pages for the base segment and an overlay, that leaves
	just 2 pages or 16kb for all the data).

> Full source V7 (or even better 2BSD) is probably a more "interesting" system
> from a hobbyist or preservationist point of view,  particularly if you're
> like me and don't have or care to own actual PDP-11 hardware.  I'm quite

	An 11/73 takes up less space than some PC tower cases and uses about
	the same amount of electricity.

> happy to run John Wilson's and Bob Supnick's wonderful emulator programs
> with whatever software I can obtain.  They let me have the PDP-11 models I

	I can't speak for John's emulator (only runs on top of DOS and my
	place is a MS-free zone ;)) but I have booted up 2.11BSD under Bob's.
	Only went to the single user state and ran a couple simple commands.
	Seems to work ok that far, but 'vi' doesn't run right - I suspect it's
	something to do with overlaid programs flipping MMU registers about
	but haven't had the time to look into it further (besides which I've
	a 11/73 and a 11/93 to use).

> worked on (23, 34, 45) as well as those I'd like to have had (70) without
> the hassle and expense of maintaining the actual hardware.

	A Q-bus system such as an 11/83 combines the best of both worlds - it's
	got the address space and the speed (cpuwise) of a 70 but the 
	convenience of no UNIBUS map (like the 45).  Maintenance thus far
	over the last 6 years has consisted of replacing an M8192 when the
	cache developed a parity error.

	Well, I suppose I should get back to work before the boss wanders by
	and sees me having fun instead of getting his work done ;-)

	Steven Schultz



From djenner at halcyon.com  Mon Oct 13 08:49:22 1997
From: djenner at halcyon.com (David C. Jenner)
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 15:49:22 -0700
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
References: <01bcd58c$ce268560$488904c7@seeker.prodigy.com>
Message-ID: <344153F2.A3EAF2B5@halcyon.com>

OK, Frank is likely correct.  But I still don't think you'll find it
anywhere
on the 'net!  It would be nice if it were in the PUP archives, though. 
Getting
it there might be hard because MS might still have some rights to it.

I did some digging, and here are some relevant dates:

 8/25/80   Microsoft announced DEC PDP-11 XENIX (along with versions for
several
           other machines--Intel 8086, Zilog Z8000, and Motorola
M68000).
           [This would have to be Version 7 based.]

10/01/80   Microsoft notes PDP-11 XENIX is "scheduled for release".
[It's not
           clear if this means it was actually released on that date.]

12/08/81   Microsoft and SCO signed a letter of intent for SCO to be a
second-
           source of XENIX.  [No mention of PDP-11; just that XENIX was
being
           upgraded to System III at that time.]

 1/22/85   Microsoft and AT&T announce plans for compatible future
releases
           of XENIX and UNIX [based on System V].

 1/31/86   Microsoft and SCO announce new agreements for SCO to be prime
distrubutor
           of XENIX System V to VAR and VAD channels.

 2/15/89   Microsoft makes 20% minority investment in SCO.  [I seem to
recall that
           SCO got (all?) XENIX rights at this time.]

So it looks like there was a window of about a year when a Version 7
based XENIX
was probably available.  Certainly starting in 1983 Microsoft announced
all sorts
of versions of XENIX for other hardware, including IBM System 9000 (yes,
there
really was a HAL 9000 (Motorola MC68000-based)--I had a couple), IBM
PC/AT, AT&T
UNIX PC and PC 6300, and Compaq machines.

Dave

Frank Wortner wrote:
> 
> Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to
> explain.
> 
> Way back when --- about 1981 or 82 --- I worked for a small (now defunct)
> software company.  We owned 2 PDP-11/23s.  Initially,  we ran a distribution
> of the Sixth Edition on them.  That came from a company in New York ---
> that's where I am geographically,  BTW --- called Yourdon.  The system was
> called UV6.
> 
> After a while,  we decided to upgrade to V7.  At the time,  we had begun a
> relationship with another (now defunct) firm called Lifeboat Associates
> (also in New York,  later in Tarrytown, NY).  They distributed microcomputer
> software,  principally CP/M-based.  They were a Microsoft distributor.
> Microsoft had just started Unix development at the time.  Lifeboat sold us a
> V7 system:  Microsoft PDP-11 Xenix.  I know it was Microsoft because the
> tape lables said so, and I remember that the line printer printed release
> notes contained a banner page that indicated that they came from Microsoft's
> DEC 20(!) (cheerfully named "Microsoft Heating Plant").
> 
> PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.

snip

> BTW,  if John or Bob reads this list,  l'd like to say "Thank you" to both
> of them.  Also thanks to Warren for his work preserving the old Unix
> software.  It's a great deal of fun to see old "friends" again,  and I think
> it will be just as much fun to see software and "hardware" combinations that
> I didn't have access to in the "good old days."  Thanks also to SCO for
> binary licenses for these "historic" systems;  I hope that they will be able
> to license source code in the near future.
> 
> Sorry for the long ramble and thanks for reading!
> 
> Frank
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vcard.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 330 bytes
Desc: Card for David C. Jenner
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/19971012/45773395/attachment.vcf>

From wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au  Mon Oct 13 09:03:37 1997
From: wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:03:37 +1000 (EST)
Subject: No word from SCO yet
Message-ID: <199710122303.JAA11624@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>

All,
	I've just mailed a `you still alive?' message to Dion who is our
contact at SCO about the status of the PDP-11 Unix source licenses. He
usually replies within a day or so. I'll let you know when I hear from him.

I also asked him if SCO owns Xenix completely. If so, the SCO source license
should cover the PDP-11 versions of Xenix, up to but not including System III.
Now we've just got to find one :-)

Cheers,
	Warren

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA24738
	for pups-liszt; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:51:01 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From grog at lemis.com  Mon Oct 13 09:50:43 1997
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:20:43 +0930
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
In-Reply-To: <344153F2.A3EAF2B5@halcyon.com>; from David C. Jenner on Sun, Oct 12, 1997 at 03:49:22PM -0700
References: <01bcd58c$ce268560$488904c7@seeker.prodigy.com> <344153F2.A3EAF2B5@halcyon.com>
Message-ID: <19971013092043.40710@lemis.com>

On Sun, Oct 12, 1997 at 03:49:22PM -0700, David C. Jenner wrote:

(excuse me if I reformat it; your mailer has jagged the paragraphs)
> Frank Wortner wrote:
>>
>> Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to
>> explain.
>>
>> Way back when --- about 1981 or 82 --- I worked for a small (now defunct)
>> software company.  We owned 2 PDP-11/23s.  Initially,  we ran a distribution
>> of the Sixth Edition on them.  That came from a company in New York ---
>> that's where I am geographically,  BTW --- called Yourdon.  The system was
>> called UV6.
>>
>> After a while,  we decided to upgrade to V7.  At the time,  we had begun a
>> relationship with another (now defunct) firm called Lifeboat Associates
>> (also in New York,  later in Tarrytown, NY).  They distributed microcomputer
>> software,  principally CP/M-based.  They were a Microsoft distributor.
>> Microsoft had just started Unix development at the time.  Lifeboat sold us a
>> V7 system:  Microsoft PDP-11 Xenix.  I know it was Microsoft because the
>> tape lables said so, and I remember that the line printer printed release
>> notes contained a banner page that indicated that they came from Microsoft's
>> DEC 20(!) (cheerfully named "Microsoft Heating Plant").
>>
>> PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.
>
> snip
>
>> BTW,  if John or Bob reads this list,  l'd like to say "Thank you" to both
>> of them.  Also thanks to Warren for his work preserving the old Unix
>> software.  It's a great deal of fun to see old "friends" again,  and I think
>> it will be just as much fun to see software and "hardware" combinations that
>> I didn't have access to in the "good old days."  Thanks also to SCO for
>> binary licenses for these "historic" systems;  I hope that they will be able
>> to license source code in the near future.
>
> OK, Frank is likely correct.  But I still don't think you'll find it
> anywhere on the 'net!  It would be nice if it were in the PUP
> archives, though.  Getting it there might be hard because MS might
> still have some rights to it.

> I did some digging, and here are some relevant dates:

>  8/25/80 Microsoft announced DEC PDP-11 XENIX (along with versions
> for several other machines--Intel 8086, Zilog Z8000, and Motorola
> M68000).  [This would have to be Version 7 based.]

> 10/01/80 Microsoft notes PDP-11 XENIX is "scheduled for release".
> [It's not clear if this means it was actually released on that
> date.]

Somewhere in this time frame, Microsoft's Robert Greenberg wrote an
extensive article about XENIX for Byte ("The UNIX Operating System and
the XENIX Standard Operating Environment"), which was published in the
June 1981 issue.

Some quotes: 

  The XENIX operating environment combines two key elements: the
  design of the widely acclaimed UNIX operating system and the
  inclusion of the major high-level languages that are standard within
  th 8-bit micormcomputer world (see figure 1).  Microfosft's
  transport of the XENIX system to major 16-bit microprocessors has
  made it the first hardware-independent operating system.

  ...

  It had become clear that the support of a commercial software
  company was essential if UNIX was to become a software standard.  In
  August of 1980, Microsoft announced that it would offer and support
  XENIX, a commercial version of the operating system, on 16-bit
  microprocessors.  Working closely with Western Electric and a newly
  formed commercial users' organization, Microsoft intends to
  establish a standard industry version of UNIX that can provide a
  chightly productive environment worthy of meeting the challenges of
  software development in the 1980s.

> 12/08/81 Microsoft and SCO signed a letter of intent for SCO to be a
> second- source of XENIX.  [No mention of PDP-11; just that XENIX was
> being upgraded to System III at that time.]

This is interesting.  I had thought that SCO was Microsoft's UNIX
operation that gradually became disowned as DOS became predominant.  I
know that Microsoft maintained a significant interest (controlling?)
in SCO for a long time.  Do you have any indication of the
relationship between Microsoft and SCO at the time?

>  1/22/85 Microsoft and AT&T announce plans for compatible future
> releases of XENIX and UNIX [based on System V].

>  1/31/86 Microsoft and SCO announce new agreements for SCO to be
> prime distrubutor of XENIX System V to VAR and VAD channels.

>  2/15/89 Microsoft makes 20% minority investment in SCO.  [I seem to
> recall that SCO got (all?) XENIX rights at this time.]

> So it looks like there was a window of about a year when a Version 7
> based XENIX was probably available.  Certainly starting in 1983
> Microsoft announced all sorts of versions of XENIX for other
> hardware, including IBM System 9000 (yes, there really was a HAL
> 9000 (Motorola MC68000-based)--I had a couple), IBM PC/AT, AT&T UNIX
> PC and PC 6300, and Compaq machines.

Greg


From djenner at halcyon.com  Tue Oct 14 05:01:24 1997
From: djenner at halcyon.com (David C. Jenner)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:01:24 -0700
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
References: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <34427004.3F1EADC6@halcyon.com>

I guess I forgot to respond to the VENIX side of this thread.  (I
followed up on the XENIX side!)

I have hardcopy docs for VENIX/11 and VENIX/86.  I have never seen
disks or a tape of either.  I would like to get ahold of a copy of
them.  I doubt they are on the net anywhere, but if anyone knows,
please let us know.

This is another situation where a 2nd party bought a license from AT&T
(like Microsoft did) for Version 7 and then customized it.  Although
AT&T (well, SCO really) may be willing to donate hobbyist rights, it's
doubtful that the second party (Microsoft, VentureCom) would be
willing.  VentureCom apparently OKayed the use of the PRO version of
VENIX by "hobbyists", but I don't think there is a paper trail to that
effect.  The one time I contacted VentureCom (who still exists but
doesn't support VENIX anymore), they didn't know what I was talking
about and were worried about copyrights.

Dave

Allison J Parent wrote:
> 
> Dave,
> 
> <I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
> <anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
> <was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
> <collected everything else.)
> 
> Your right, drain beth,  err brain death. Sometimes all those *nixs are the
> same to me.  Especially after configuring three vaxen for VMS and installing
> it.  I know heresy but, Netbsd has proven uninstallable here on all four
> systems.
> 
> <DEC Pro350/380, which is, essentially, a PDP-11.  There was also a VENIX
> <for "real" PDP-11s.
> 
> Well venix on the pro350 runs far better than POS!  In fact it's the only
> *nix running here as even slackware has had problems (bad CD!).
> 
> That however is news! Is there a version of venix for "real" PDP-11s? on
> the net?
> 
> Allison
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vcard.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 330 bytes
Desc: Card for David C. Jenner
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/19971013/80e006d2/attachment.vcf>

From wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au  Tue Oct 14 09:39:57 1997
From: wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:39:57 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Email from SCO
Message-ID: <199710132339.JAA06559@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>

All,
	Dion at SCO mailed me back straight away on the Unix src license
issue. Here's his email. Please treat this as `your eyes only'.

----- Forwarded message from Dion -----
I am still dickering with the legal folks in NJ. I fired another salvo
last Friday.  I may have to escalate back to the VP level to get
them off the dime.  Sorry it's taken so long.  The legal people
don't really know what is the ownership and rights issues for some
of those other versions of UNIX.  Also, they are reluctant on the 32V.

As for the PDP-11 XENIX, I will look into it.  However, the NJ
legal folks and I have had an understanding that we'd exclude
anything that was System III or later from the license.  Adding a
System III component into the mix will delay things.

I will try to have some news this week!
Thanks for your patience.
----- End of forwarded message from Dion -----

I replied saying I appreciated that the delays were elsewhere, that we'd
be happy with the V7-based versions of Xenix, SysIII and onwards can be
left out, but we really would like 32V for several reasons.

More updates as I receive them.

	Warren


From ssigala at globalnet.it  Fri Oct 10 02:20:41 1997
From: ssigala at globalnet.it (S. Sigala)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:20:41 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject: PDP-11, VAX, etc. hardware in Italy or near
In-Reply-To: <199710081809.EAA11819@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.971009181629.1760B-100000@athena.milk.it>

Hi, I'm interested in buying old hardware like PDP-11, VAX,
Sun, etc., if possible near Italy (or in E.U.).  Can someone
subscribed to this list suggest me [someone|a company|a university] that
sells this type of hardware, please?

Regards,
	Sandro


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA15858
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:00:59 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au  Fri Oct 10 09:00:59 1997
From: wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:00:59 +1000 (EST)
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
Message-ID: <199710092300.JAA02541@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>

I just received this email from Frank Wortner. Anybody have a copy of PDP-11
Xenix?

	Warren

----- Forwarded message from Frank Wortner -----

From: "Frank Wortner" <fwortner at prodigy.net>
To: <wkt at cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Request to Join PUPS

I've sent off email to a friend of mine who preserved some materials from a
now-defunct software company we used to work for.  He *might* have that
tape.  I regret not keeping track of it,  but fifteen years have elapsed
since I last booted it.

Too bad.  PDP-11 Xenix had a number of nice features.

o It was based on the Seventh Edition.
o It ran on everything from a PDP-11/23 on up.
o It could simulate split instruction and data space on non I&D machines.
(*)
o It had a complete shutdown procedure (an elaborate /etc/shutdown script)
o The kernel was delivered as an archive library (".a" file),  so you could
reconfigure without source.

Perhaps someone at SCO (or Microsoft) may still have a tape of it.  Most
software firms archive their products in secure vaults,  so it might still
exist in some warehouse.

(*) The scheme involved paging the instructions while the data remained
resident.  The first 8K of the program was always resident and contained a
jump table and supporting software.  The next 8K held whatever instructions
were executing at the time,  while the remaining 48K was reserved for the
data and stack segments.  Building a simulated I&D executable required the
user to link once as a pure executable,  once as a split executable, and
finally running both executables through a program which built the final
simulated split I&D executable.  The compiler had an option ('-j' if I
recall correctly) that performed these three links automatically.

Sorry for the rambling note,  but I'm just a bit overwhelmed by nostalgia.
;-)

Frank
----- End of forwarded message from Frank Wortner -----

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA16074
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 10:58:50 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From allisonp at world.std.com  Fri Oct 10 10:58:40 1997
From: allisonp at world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 20:58:40 -0400
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
Message-ID: <199710100058.AA13113@world.std.com>

<I just received this email from Frank Wortner. Anybody have a copy of PDP-1
<Xenix?
<
<	Warren

Well yes, sorta.  It's on the net, John Wilson has it on ftp.dbit.com.  The 
however is it's for the PRO350/380 systems.  I don't know if it can be moved 
to more standard PDP-11 configurations.

Allison


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA16364
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 13:20:26 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From djenner at halcyon.com  Fri Oct 10 13:20:01 1997
From: djenner at halcyon.com (David C. Jenner)
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 20:20:01 -0700
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
References: <199710100058.AA13113@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <343D9EE1.1E1F32E4@halcyon.com>

I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
collected everything else.)

There is, however, VENIX (no commercial relation to XENIX other than a
common parent) on ftp.update.uu.se.  This version of XENIX is for the
DEC Pro350/380, which is, essentially, a PDP-11.  There was also a VENIX
for "real" PDP-11s.

Dave

Allison J Parent wrote:
> 
> <I just received this email from Frank Wortner. Anybody have a copy of PDP-1
> <Xenix?
> <
> <       Warren
> 
> Well yes, sorta.  It's on the net, John Wilson has it on ftp.dbit.com.  The
> however is it's for the PRO350/380 systems.  I don't know if it can be moved
> to more standard PDP-11 configurations.
> 
> Allison
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vcard.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 330 bytes
Desc: Card for David C. Jenner
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/19971009/b82577c3/attachment-0001.vcf>

From allisonp at world.std.com  Fri Oct 10 14:12:45 1997
From: allisonp at world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 00:12:45 -0400
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
Message-ID: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>

Dave,

<I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
<anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
<was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
<collected everything else.)

Your right, drain beth,  err brain death. Sometimes all those *nixs are the 
same to me.  Especially after configuring three vaxen for VMS and installing 
it.  I know heresy but, Netbsd has proven uninstallable here on all four 
systems.

<DEC Pro350/380, which is, essentially, a PDP-11.  There was also a VENIX
<for "real" PDP-11s.

Well venix on the pro350 runs far better than POS!  In fact it's the only 
*nix running here as even slackware has had problems (bad CD!).

That however is news! Is there a version of venix for "real" PDP-11s? on 
the net?

Allison


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA16515
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:46:48 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From grog at lemis.com  Fri Oct 10 14:46:33 1997
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 14:16:33 +0930
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
In-Reply-To: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>; from Allison J Parent on Fri, Oct 10, 1997 at 12:12:45AM -0400
References: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <19971010141633.30732@lemis.com>

On Fri, Oct 10, 1997 at 12:12:45AM -0400, Allison J Parent wrote:
> Dave,
>
> <I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
> <anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
> <was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
> <collected everything else.)

I thought SCO developed XENIX right from the word go, only in those
days they belonged to Microsoft.

> Your right, drain beth,  err brain death. Sometimes all those *nixs are the
> same to me.  Especially after configuring three vaxen for VMS and installing
> it.  I know heresy but, Netbsd has proven uninstallable here on all four
> systems.

Interesting.  What was the problem?

Greg

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA17679
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 01:02:58 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From fwortner at prodigy.net  Sat Oct 11 00:57:18 1997
From: fwortner at prodigy.net (Frank Wortner)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 10:57:18 -0400
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
Message-ID: <01bcd58c$ce268560$488904c7@seeker.prodigy.com>

Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to
explain.

Way back when --- about 1981 or 82 --- I worked for a small (now defunct)
software company.  We owned 2 PDP-11/23s.  Initially,  we ran a distribution
of the Sixth Edition on them.  That came from a company in New York ---
that's where I am geographically,  BTW --- called Yourdon.  The system was
called UV6.

After a while,  we decided to upgrade to V7.  At the time,  we had begun a
relationship with another (now defunct) firm called Lifeboat Associates
(also in New York,  later in Tarrytown, NY).  They distributed microcomputer
software,  principally CP/M-based.  They were a Microsoft distributor.
Microsoft had just started Unix development at the time.  Lifeboat sold us a
V7 system:  Microsoft PDP-11 Xenix.  I know it was Microsoft because the
tape lables said so, and I remember that the line printer printed release
notes contained a banner page that indicated that they came from Microsoft's
DEC 20(!) (cheerfully named "Microsoft Heating Plant").

PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.
Processor support included all models of PDP-11 with MMUs:  23s, 34s, 40s,
45s, 55s, 60s, and 70s.  It had split I&D space emulation --- borrowed,  I
believe from 2.something BSD.  That emulation required a grand total of
three(!) link passes,  but the compiler driver was modified to do this
automatically if you specified the "-j" option.  Instead of source,  the
kernel was delivered mostly as .o files and .a libraries,  so you could
reconfigure the OS without source.  The reconfigure programs just spat out
some assembly language and C "glue" that you compiled and linked with the .o
and .a files.  In fact,  this was pretty much automated.  The system also
had a rather extensive /etc./shutdown shell script which calmly and
thoroughly brought the system to a quiescent state and could optionally
reboot or halt it.  Although the OS was pretty big --- I find it amazing
that I thought of it as "big" ;-) --- you could,  with some effort build a
boot floppy on a RX02 diskette.  That could run exactly 1 (one) process ---
the RX02 system had *no* swap space.   I remember system recovery sessions
in which I constantly had to boot the floppy,  see the shell prompt,  and
then "exec fsck" and watch as fsck finished its run,  and init respawned the
shell!

Anyhow,  I know I *used to have* the release notes and I *might* have had
the tape,  but both,  sadly,  are probably lost.  I was wondering if anyone
else might have seen or,  even better,  still has a tape of this rare
version of V7.  Perhaps there's an archive at Microsoft or SCO that harbors
a tape.  Most software firms do have some sort of policy about placing
products in escrow with a third party.  Maybe this still exists.  If not,
that's OK.  If SCO is kind enough to allow source licensing to individuals
for noncommercial use,  then this largely becomes a moot issue.

Full source V7 (or even better 2BSD) is probably a more "interesting" system
from a hobbyist or preservationist point of view,  particularly if you're
like me and don't have or care to own actual PDP-11 hardware.  I'm quite
happy to run John Wilson's and Bob Supnick's wonderful emulator programs
with whatever software I can obtain.  They let me have the PDP-11 models I
worked on (23, 34, 45) as well as those I'd like to have had (70) without
the hassle and expense of maintaining the actual hardware.

BTW,  if John or Bob reads this list,  l'd like to say "Thank you" to both
of them.  Also thanks to Warren for his work preserving the old Unix
software.  It's a great deal of fun to see old "friends" again,  and I think
it will be just as much fun to see software and "hardware" combinations that
I didn't have access to in the "good old days."  Thanks also to SCO for
binary licenses for these "historic" systems;  I hope that they will be able
to license source code in the near future.

Sorry for the long ramble and thanks for reading!

Frank



Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA17931
	for pups-liszt; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 03:15:43 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From sms at moe.2bsd.com  Sat Oct 11 02:55:45 1997
From: sms at moe.2bsd.com (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 09:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
Message-ID: <199710101655.JAA20665@moe.2bsd.com>

Howdy -

> From: "Frank Wortner" <fwortner at prodigy.net>
> Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to

	And I hate to see a fellow talk to himself without interruption ;-)

> PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.
> Processor support included all models of PDP-11 with MMUs:  23s, 34s, 40s,

	I remember (not terribly fondly) running V7 on an 11/23.  We hacked
	in an overlay scheme to the kernel (but not user programs).  Just
	enough resources to run 1 user and a couple processes - do an "ls" and
	the shell got swapped out, when 'ls' finished the shell would get
	swapped back in.  Wheee! ;)

> 45s, 55s, 60s, and 70s.  It had split I&D space emulation --- borrowed,  I
> believe from 2.something BSD.  That emulation required a grand total of

	Not having used Xenix I'd never heard the term "split I&D space
	emulation".   What we hacked in to V7 and BSD later implemented
	was an even older concept:  overlays.

	2.9 was the first version I know of that had 'overlay' support.  The
	overlays were memory resident and switching between them was done
	by flipping MMU registers.  

	It is (present tense since 2.11BSD uses the same method today) done
	with a single link phase (no "-j" option or multiple link edits).  In
	2.9 there was a limit of 7 overlay segments plus the base segment. Later
	on (the 1985 update to 2.9) the limit was increased to 15 overlays
	which has proven to be adequate since then.  For the kernel the overlays
	could only be 8kb (1 page register) but user mode programs could have
	larger (but still multiple of 8kb) overlays.

	In 2.9 there was a separate libc.a that you did need to link with
	because the callframe had an extra word (the overlay number) and
	'csv, cret' had a couple extra instructions to switch overlays.  Later
	(2.10 and up) the callframe was changed to always have the extra word
	This made life easier (at the expense of an extra 3microseconds per
	function call) by not having to maintain/build two versions of all
	the libraries.

> three(!) link passes,  but the compiler driver was modified to do this
> automatically if you specified the "-j" option.  Instead of source,  the
> kernel was delivered mostly as .o files and .a libraries,  so you could

	A multiphase link IS currently used to build the 2.11 networking though.
	The networking code (4.3BSD's TCP/IP stack) runs in supervisor mode.
	The kernel, at boot time, loads /netnix into supervisor space.  The
	/netnix image is built in a similar manner to what was mentioned for
	Xenix's emulated I&D space - first build the unix image (with undefined
	references to the networking code), then build the netnix image
	(with undefined references to the kernel code), then cross reference
	the two images for undefineds and create .s stub files to satisfy 
	the undefineds.  Assemble the two .s files and then link unix with
	d.netnix.o and netnix with d.unix.o and voila a kernel and an image
	it can load into supervisor space.

> reboot or halt it.  Although the OS was pretty big --- I find it amazing
> that I thought of it as "big" ;-) --- you could,  with some effort build a

	Even V7 had trouble fitting on a non split I/D machine.  The problem
	is that the kernel has to map the I/O page which removes an extra
	MMU page from being used for data.  Then the 'u' area needs a page
	(for the kernel stack and per process context).  And you need a page
	to perform copyin/copyout with (and to map the buffer cache if that
	has been moved external to the kernel) - that leaves only 40kb for
	everything else (and on a nonsplit I/D machine with overlays you'd
	need two or three pages for the base segment and an overlay, that leaves
	just 2 pages or 16kb for all the data).

> Full source V7 (or even better 2BSD) is probably a more "interesting" system
> from a hobbyist or preservationist point of view,  particularly if you're
> like me and don't have or care to own actual PDP-11 hardware.  I'm quite

	An 11/73 takes up less space than some PC tower cases and uses about
	the same amount of electricity.

> happy to run John Wilson's and Bob Supnick's wonderful emulator programs
> with whatever software I can obtain.  They let me have the PDP-11 models I

	I can't speak for John's emulator (only runs on top of DOS and my
	place is a MS-free zone ;)) but I have booted up 2.11BSD under Bob's.
	Only went to the single user state and ran a couple simple commands.
	Seems to work ok that far, but 'vi' doesn't run right - I suspect it's
	something to do with overlaid programs flipping MMU registers about
	but haven't had the time to look into it further (besides which I've
	a 11/73 and a 11/93 to use).

> worked on (23, 34, 45) as well as those I'd like to have had (70) without
> the hassle and expense of maintaining the actual hardware.

	A Q-bus system such as an 11/83 combines the best of both worlds - it's
	got the address space and the speed (cpuwise) of a 70 but the 
	convenience of no UNIBUS map (like the 45).  Maintenance thus far
	over the last 6 years has consisted of replacing an M8192 when the
	cache developed a parity error.

	Well, I suppose I should get back to work before the boss wanders by
	and sees me having fun instead of getting his work done ;-)

	Steven Schultz



From djenner at halcyon.com  Mon Oct 13 08:49:22 1997
From: djenner at halcyon.com (David C. Jenner)
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 15:49:22 -0700
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
References: <01bcd58c$ce268560$488904c7@seeker.prodigy.com>
Message-ID: <344153F2.A3EAF2B5@halcyon.com>

OK, Frank is likely correct.  But I still don't think you'll find it
anywhere
on the 'net!  It would be nice if it were in the PUP archives, though. 
Getting
it there might be hard because MS might still have some rights to it.

I did some digging, and here are some relevant dates:

 8/25/80   Microsoft announced DEC PDP-11 XENIX (along with versions for
several
           other machines--Intel 8086, Zilog Z8000, and Motorola
M68000).
           [This would have to be Version 7 based.]

10/01/80   Microsoft notes PDP-11 XENIX is "scheduled for release".
[It's not
           clear if this means it was actually released on that date.]

12/08/81   Microsoft and SCO signed a letter of intent for SCO to be a
second-
           source of XENIX.  [No mention of PDP-11; just that XENIX was
being
           upgraded to System III at that time.]

 1/22/85   Microsoft and AT&T announce plans for compatible future
releases
           of XENIX and UNIX [based on System V].

 1/31/86   Microsoft and SCO announce new agreements for SCO to be prime
distrubutor
           of XENIX System V to VAR and VAD channels.

 2/15/89   Microsoft makes 20% minority investment in SCO.  [I seem to
recall that
           SCO got (all?) XENIX rights at this time.]

So it looks like there was a window of about a year when a Version 7
based XENIX
was probably available.  Certainly starting in 1983 Microsoft announced
all sorts
of versions of XENIX for other hardware, including IBM System 9000 (yes,
there
really was a HAL 9000 (Motorola MC68000-based)--I had a couple), IBM
PC/AT, AT&T
UNIX PC and PC 6300, and Compaq machines.

Dave

Frank Wortner wrote:
> 
> Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to
> explain.
> 
> Way back when --- about 1981 or 82 --- I worked for a small (now defunct)
> software company.  We owned 2 PDP-11/23s.  Initially,  we ran a distribution
> of the Sixth Edition on them.  That came from a company in New York ---
> that's where I am geographically,  BTW --- called Yourdon.  The system was
> called UV6.
> 
> After a while,  we decided to upgrade to V7.  At the time,  we had begun a
> relationship with another (now defunct) firm called Lifeboat Associates
> (also in New York,  later in Tarrytown, NY).  They distributed microcomputer
> software,  principally CP/M-based.  They were a Microsoft distributor.
> Microsoft had just started Unix development at the time.  Lifeboat sold us a
> V7 system:  Microsoft PDP-11 Xenix.  I know it was Microsoft because the
> tape lables said so, and I remember that the line printer printed release
> notes contained a banner page that indicated that they came from Microsoft's
> DEC 20(!) (cheerfully named "Microsoft Heating Plant").
> 
> PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.

snip

> BTW,  if John or Bob reads this list,  l'd like to say "Thank you" to both
> of them.  Also thanks to Warren for his work preserving the old Unix
> software.  It's a great deal of fun to see old "friends" again,  and I think
> it will be just as much fun to see software and "hardware" combinations that
> I didn't have access to in the "good old days."  Thanks also to SCO for
> binary licenses for these "historic" systems;  I hope that they will be able
> to license source code in the near future.
> 
> Sorry for the long ramble and thanks for reading!
> 
> Frank
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vcard.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 330 bytes
Desc: Card for David C. Jenner
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/19971012/45773395/attachment-0001.vcf>

From wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au  Mon Oct 13 09:03:37 1997
From: wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:03:37 +1000 (EST)
Subject: No word from SCO yet
Message-ID: <199710122303.JAA11624@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>

All,
	I've just mailed a `you still alive?' message to Dion who is our
contact at SCO about the status of the PDP-11 Unix source licenses. He
usually replies within a day or so. I'll let you know when I hear from him.

I also asked him if SCO owns Xenix completely. If so, the SCO source license
should cover the PDP-11 versions of Xenix, up to but not including System III.
Now we've just got to find one :-)

Cheers,
	Warren

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA24738
	for pups-liszt; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:51:01 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f

From grog at lemis.com  Mon Oct 13 09:50:43 1997
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg Lehey)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:20:43 +0930
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix (LONG)
In-Reply-To: <344153F2.A3EAF2B5@halcyon.com>; from David C. Jenner on Sun, Oct 12, 1997 at 03:49:22PM -0700
References: <01bcd58c$ce268560$488904c7@seeker.prodigy.com> <344153F2.A3EAF2B5@halcyon.com>
Message-ID: <19971013092043.40710@lemis.com>

On Sun, Oct 12, 1997 at 03:49:22PM -0700, David C. Jenner wrote:

(excuse me if I reformat it; your mailer has jagged the paragraphs)
> Frank Wortner wrote:
>>
>> Since I'm the one that started this --- albeit indirectly --- let me try to
>> explain.
>>
>> Way back when --- about 1981 or 82 --- I worked for a small (now defunct)
>> software company.  We owned 2 PDP-11/23s.  Initially,  we ran a distribution
>> of the Sixth Edition on them.  That came from a company in New York ---
>> that's where I am geographically,  BTW --- called Yourdon.  The system was
>> called UV6.
>>
>> After a while,  we decided to upgrade to V7.  At the time,  we had begun a
>> relationship with another (now defunct) firm called Lifeboat Associates
>> (also in New York,  later in Tarrytown, NY).  They distributed microcomputer
>> software,  principally CP/M-based.  They were a Microsoft distributor.
>> Microsoft had just started Unix development at the time.  Lifeboat sold us a
>> V7 system:  Microsoft PDP-11 Xenix.  I know it was Microsoft because the
>> tape lables said so, and I remember that the line printer printed release
>> notes contained a banner page that indicated that they came from Microsoft's
>> DEC 20(!) (cheerfully named "Microsoft Heating Plant").
>>
>> PD.-11 Xenix was essentially V7,  but it had a few added features.
>
> snip
>
>> BTW,  if John or Bob reads this list,  l'd like to say "Thank you" to both
>> of them.  Also thanks to Warren for his work preserving the old Unix
>> software.  It's a great deal of fun to see old "friends" again,  and I think
>> it will be just as much fun to see software and "hardware" combinations that
>> I didn't have access to in the "good old days."  Thanks also to SCO for
>> binary licenses for these "historic" systems;  I hope that they will be able
>> to license source code in the near future.
>
> OK, Frank is likely correct.  But I still don't think you'll find it
> anywhere on the 'net!  It would be nice if it were in the PUP
> archives, though.  Getting it there might be hard because MS might
> still have some rights to it.

> I did some digging, and here are some relevant dates:

>  8/25/80 Microsoft announced DEC PDP-11 XENIX (along with versions
> for several other machines--Intel 8086, Zilog Z8000, and Motorola
> M68000).  [This would have to be Version 7 based.]

> 10/01/80 Microsoft notes PDP-11 XENIX is "scheduled for release".
> [It's not clear if this means it was actually released on that
> date.]

Somewhere in this time frame, Microsoft's Robert Greenberg wrote an
extensive article about XENIX for Byte ("The UNIX Operating System and
the XENIX Standard Operating Environment"), which was published in the
June 1981 issue.

Some quotes: 

  The XENIX operating environment combines two key elements: the
  design of the widely acclaimed UNIX operating system and the
  inclusion of the major high-level languages that are standard within
  th 8-bit micormcomputer world (see figure 1).  Microfosft's
  transport of the XENIX system to major 16-bit microprocessors has
  made it the first hardware-independent operating system.

  ...

  It had become clear that the support of a commercial software
  company was essential if UNIX was to become a software standard.  In
  August of 1980, Microsoft announced that it would offer and support
  XENIX, a commercial version of the operating system, on 16-bit
  microprocessors.  Working closely with Western Electric and a newly
  formed commercial users' organization, Microsoft intends to
  establish a standard industry version of UNIX that can provide a
  chightly productive environment worthy of meeting the challenges of
  software development in the 1980s.

> 12/08/81 Microsoft and SCO signed a letter of intent for SCO to be a
> second- source of XENIX.  [No mention of PDP-11; just that XENIX was
> being upgraded to System III at that time.]

This is interesting.  I had thought that SCO was Microsoft's UNIX
operation that gradually became disowned as DOS became predominant.  I
know that Microsoft maintained a significant interest (controlling?)
in SCO for a long time.  Do you have any indication of the
relationship between Microsoft and SCO at the time?

>  1/22/85 Microsoft and AT&T announce plans for compatible future
> releases of XENIX and UNIX [based on System V].

>  1/31/86 Microsoft and SCO announce new agreements for SCO to be
> prime distrubutor of XENIX System V to VAR and VAD channels.

>  2/15/89 Microsoft makes 20% minority investment in SCO.  [I seem to
> recall that SCO got (all?) XENIX rights at this time.]

> So it looks like there was a window of about a year when a Version 7
> based XENIX was probably available.  Certainly starting in 1983
> Microsoft announced all sorts of versions of XENIX for other
> hardware, including IBM System 9000 (yes, there really was a HAL
> 9000 (Motorola MC68000-based)--I had a couple), IBM PC/AT, AT&T UNIX
> PC and PC 6300, and Compaq machines.

Greg


From djenner at halcyon.com  Tue Oct 14 05:01:24 1997
From: djenner at halcyon.com (David C. Jenner)
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 12:01:24 -0700
Subject: PDP-11 Xenix
References: <199710100412.AA13660@world.std.com>
Message-ID: <34427004.3F1EADC6@halcyon.com>

I guess I forgot to respond to the VENIX side of this thread.  (I
followed up on the XENIX side!)

I have hardcopy docs for VENIX/11 and VENIX/86.  I have never seen
disks or a tape of either.  I would like to get ahold of a copy of
them.  I doubt they are on the net anywhere, but if anyone knows,
please let us know.

This is another situation where a 2nd party bought a license from AT&T
(like Microsoft did) for Version 7 and then customized it.  Although
AT&T (well, SCO really) may be willing to donate hobbyist rights, it's
doubtful that the second party (Microsoft, VentureCom) would be
willing.  VentureCom apparently OKayed the use of the PRO version of
VENIX by "hobbyists", but I don't think there is a paper trail to that
effect.  The one time I contacted VentureCom (who still exists but
doesn't support VENIX anymore), they didn't know what I was talking
about and were worried about copyrights.

Dave

Allison J Parent wrote:
> 
> Dave,
> 
> <I don't think John has it at ftp.dbit.com.  And I doubt that XENIX is
> <anywhere on the net.  I don't even know if there was a PDP-11 XENIX. (It
> <was originally MS, afterall.  They "sold" it to SCO way back, before SCO
> <collected everything else.)
> 
> Your right, drain beth,  err brain death. Sometimes all those *nixs are the
> same to me.  Especially after configuring three vaxen for VMS and installing
> it.  I know heresy but, Netbsd has proven uninstallable here on all four
> systems.
> 
> <DEC Pro350/380, which is, essentially, a PDP-11.  There was also a VENIX
> <for "real" PDP-11s.
> 
> Well venix on the pro350 runs far better than POS!  In fact it's the only
> *nix running here as even slackware has had problems (bad CD!).
> 
> That however is news! Is there a version of venix for "real" PDP-11s? on
> the net?
> 
> Allison
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vcard.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 330 bytes
Desc: Card for David C. Jenner
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/19971013/80e006d2/attachment-0001.vcf>

From wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au  Tue Oct 14 09:39:57 1997
From: wkt at henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:39:57 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Email from SCO
Message-ID: <199710132339.JAA06559@henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>

All,
	Dion at SCO mailed me back straight away on the Unix src license
issue. Here's his email. Please treat this as `your eyes only'.

----- Forwarded message from Dion -----
I am still dickering with the legal folks in NJ. I fired another salvo
last Friday.  I may have to escalate back to the VP level to get
them off the dime.  Sorry it's taken so long.  The legal people
don't really know what is the ownership and rights issues for some
of those other versions of UNIX.  Also, they are reluctant on the 32V.

As for the PDP-11 XENIX, I will look into it.  However, the NJ
legal folks and I have had an understanding that we'd exclude
anything that was System III or later from the license.  Adding a
System III component into the mix will delay things.

I will try to have some news this week!
Thanks for your patience.
----- End of forwarded message from Dion -----

I replied saying I appreciated that the delays were elsewhere, that we'd
be happy with the V7-based versions of Xenix, SysIII and onwards can be
left out, but we really would like 32V for several reasons.

More updates as I receive them.

	Warren


