From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Sun Mar  2 00:06:37 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 09:06:37 -0500
Subject: [pups] 2.11 on an 11/44
Message-ID: <200303011407.h21E7Fn42846@minnie.tuhs.org>

It seems to me it's time to go back to basics:

Tell us what happens if you do
	ls -l /dev/rl2a
and, if that file exists (as seems likely),
	od /dev/rl2a

Diagnosing a problem of this sort solely by the mutterings
of the mount command is a bit like trying to decide what
is causing your back pain and therefore how to treat it
by the tone of your voice when you say `ouch.'  (Hmm,
perhaps I have just invented a lucrative new paramedical
discipline, on a par with chiropractic and cold-laser
therapy and homeopathy and software consulting.)

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON


From cmcnabb at vt.edu  Sun Mar  2 01:01:50 2003
From: cmcnabb at vt.edu (Christopher McNabb)
Date: 01 Mar 2003 10:01:50 -0500
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD and Top
Message-ID: <1046530910.10110.11.camel@www.4mcnabb.net>

Does anyone know if there is a command like 'top' for 2.11 BSD?

-- 
Christopher L McNabb              Tel:   540 231 7554
Operating Systems Analyst         Email: cmcnabb at vt.edu
Virginia Tech                     ICBM:  37.205622N 80.414595W
GMRS: WPSR255                     ARS:   N2UX  Grid Sq: EM97SD


From robinb at ruffnready.co.uk  Sun Mar  2 07:36:05 2003
From: robinb at ruffnready.co.uk (Robin Birch)
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 21:36:05 +0000
Subject: [pups] 2.11 on an 11/44
In-Reply-To: <20030227093041.Y43050-100000@server1.cs.uofs.edu>
References: <20030227093041.Y43050-100000@server1.cs.uofs.edu>
Message-ID: <EX8aXECFfSY+EwAC@falstaf.demon.co.uk>

I haven't got a live 2.11 system anywhere near but the following occurs 
to me.

1) I think that the GENERIC kernel only has 2 RL02s configured and will 
expect these on device selects 0 and 1.  The idea is to get the generic 
going and then rebuild for your specific config.

2) Are all of your RL02s on one controller?.  If not then two things 
occur. The first is that I think the GENERIC kernel is only configured 
for one controller.  Secondly, if the second drive is on the second 
controller then the physical select will probably be 8 and the device 
will probably be rl8a.

3) If the SCSI controller emulates an MSCP device then I think that 2 
MSCP discs are configured for the GENERIC kernel.  Again, if you need 
more then you will need to rebuild the kernel.

Although the generic kernel is configured for a lot of devices they will 
not necessarily be attached if the appropriate file in /etc doesn't have 
the rems taken out.  Can't remember the file name but that will need the 
appropriate controllers to have the rems taken out.

I assume that you can mount rl0 and rl1 from your note.  Load the kernel 
sources onto these two discs, You should be able to get everything 
except the usr src onto the two rl02s.  Then create a kernel that has 
only the devices that you need and then you should see everything that 
you have.

The autoconfig system is not as informative as newer OS's but it will 
tell you if something is detected that the kernel is configured for.  If 
it exists but the kernel knows nothing about it then autoconfig will not 
display it.

If I am attempting to teach my grandmother to suck eggs then forgive me.

Cheers

Robin


In message <20030227093041.Y43050-100000 at server1.cs.uofs.edu>, Bill 
Gunshannon <bill at cs.scranton.edu> writes
>
>I am trying to put 2.11 on one of my 11/44's.  I picked up the RL02/RK
>images from the archive.  I put the RL02 images on real RL02's (Yes,
>some of us still have and use them!! :-)  My intent was to boot this
>and then use it to build a system on a bigger disk and then go on from
>there.
>
>Here's my configuration:
>
>  11/44 CPU
>  CIS
>  EIS
>  FP11
>  4M memory (actually 3840KB)
>  MMU
>
>  3 RL02 disks
>  A CDU/720-TM SCSI Controller with 4 MAXTOR 340M disks and a QIC tape
>
>Now the problem.
>The system boots fine.  And it will mount /dev/rl1a.  But it won't mount
>/dev/rl2a.  I get "/dev/rl2a on /vol2: No such device or address".
>I get the same error when I try to do a disklabel.  What's more, I also
>get this same error when I try to access any of the RA devices.  I am
>using the GENERIC Kernel which I assume has all the devices in it.
>
>Anybody have any suggestions??
>
>Of course, if I find that the SCSI Controller isn't going to work
>I have another controller and a FUJI Eagle I could use too. But I
>am certain I will need to get all three RL's working in order to
>have enough of a system to do this.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>
>bill
>

-- 
Robin Birch



From j.r.engdahl at adelphia.net  Mon Mar  3 05:36:09 2003
From: j.r.engdahl at adelphia.net (Jonathan Engdahl)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 14:36:09 -0500
Subject: [pups] max hard drive size in 2.11BSD
References: <1046530910.10110.11.camel@www.4mcnabb.net>
Message-ID: <000f01c2e0f2$f9d3ccf0$8a00a8c0@arctura>

I looked around a little, but couldn't find this easily: is there a limit on
the size of hard drive I can hook up to a PDP-11 running 2.11BSD? The
proposed configuration is a Qbus SCSI controller and a 10 gig HD.

--
Jonathan Engdahl
http://users.safeaccess.com/engdahl

"The things which are seen are temporary,
 but the things which are not seen are eternal."  II Cor. 4:18



From sms at 2BSD.COM  Mon Mar  3 16:42:00 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 22:42:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2.11 on an 11/44
Message-ID: <200303030642.h236g0011874@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: Bill Gunshannon <bill at cs.scranton.edu>
> Well, the fun continues. I guess it's not going to be as simple as
> 
> When I try to build a custom kernel I get this:
> 
> cc -O -DKERNEL -DUOFS -I. -I../h -S ../sys/kern_clock.c
> /bin/ed - < SPLFIX kern_clock.s
> ?
> ?
> ?
> ?
> ?
> ----------------------

> And the "?" go on forever. Can't even break out of it.  Have to
> kill the simulation and start all over.  Anybody run into this??

	I have an extremely vague memory I might have seen it eons upon 
	eons ago but I might be imaginging it.

> Seems to be in the clock code.  Is there something I might have

	Hmmm, '?' is "ed"s error indication.   I wonder if the '?' is
	coming out of ed and not SIMH?

> missed in the CONFIG file that could cause this??  All I basicly

	Not at this stage of the build - a config file error wouldn't allow
	the first few compiles to succeed and then start causing errors
	on kern_clock.c

	One thing I did notice though was the use of 'ed' - that tells me
	the patchlevel of the system is very low (i.e. old).   'ed' was
	replaced with 'sed' which sped things up a _lot_ - and that took
	place back around #325 in 1996.

	Have you tried P11 instead of SIMH?  When I'm too lazy to fire up
	the 11/73 I use P11 to do the testing/patching and so on.   It's a
	bit a pain to configure (really arcane configfile syntax) but it works
	very well - never had a problem with it.

	Good Luck.

	Steven Schultz


From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Tue Mar  4 03:38:23 2003
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:38:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] CDROM drives and PDP-11s
Message-ID: <200303031738.JAA01869@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> To: "Gregg C Levine" <hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net>, <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
> Subject: Re: [pups] CDROM drives and PDP-11s
> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 08:52:54 -0800
> 
> John Wilson's PUTR program might be jut the tool - http://www.dbit.com.  I'm
> guessing it might be ODS-2; worst case, I have an InfoServer that can read
> that, and a TK-50 I could dump it to...  :-)  -- Ian
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregg C Levine" <hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net>
> To: <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 11:46 PM
> Subject: [pups] CDROM drives and PDP-11s
> 
> Hello from Gregg C Levine
> Here's the problem. I have several CDs containing programs, and such
> like from Tim Shoppa. Two of them say they contain portions which are
> readable only by a CDROM Drive attached to a PDP-11. One of them is
> split in half. Half is readable on either of the two computers here,
> the other half, is in a format that's native to the PDP-11. The other
> is all in that proprietary format. So, has anyone managed to get them
> read to their machines? Or failing that to the appropriate simulators,
> or even emulators? Any suggestions?

When I look at "readme.txt" on my RT11 disk from Tim Shoppa I find the
following paragraph:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
The second part of the disk is seven RT-11 partitions.  Each is a 65536
block RT-11 device that is accessible on a PDP-11 machine with a SCSI
host adapter and a SCSI CD-ROM drive.  They appear as RT-11
DU partitions 13 through 19.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

The implication to me is that any of these partitions could be copied
to a 32MB file on a hard drive, and then attached to the PDP11 simulator
of your choice and read as an RT-11 drive.

The tool I would use for copying the partition is dd(1).

	dd if=/mnt/cdrom bs=32M skip=13 count=1 of=dskimg

This requires that you have 32MB available RAM for the dd "copy in"
and 32MB available disk space for the dd "copy out".  You could
trade off a smaller "bs" for a more complicated calculation of the "skip".
I suppose I am making the assumption that this work is being done on
a Unix-like system, which seems reasonable in the PUPS context.

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


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Mar  5 10:23:33 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 19:23:33 -0500
Subject: [pups] Blinky lights, and E-11
Message-ID: <002101c2e2ad$75301460$16c7580c@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
In the documentation for E-11, John Wilson, describes the "blinky
lights", essentially eight LEDs attached to the printer port of an
IBM-PC that's running his emulator. 

Has anyone ever built one of those things, using either a PC board
blank from John Wilson, or decided to build one on his own? For that
matter, has anyone actually used it, to assist in the debugging of a
program, running on his emulator?

I'll probably e-mail John Wilson about this one directly, but, has
anyone written a custom plug-in, that would have the printer port,
pose as an I/O port for the emulator?
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



From djenner at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  5 11:13:55 2003
From: djenner at earthlink.net (David C. Jenner)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:13:55 -0800
Subject: [pups] Blinky lights, and E-11
References: <002101c2e2ad$75301460$16c7580c@who5>
Message-ID: <3E654F53.A6125017@earthlink.net>

Gregg,

See the ultimate case of blinking the lights
  at http://home.hetnet.nl/~tshaj/pdpsite/pdpstartpage.html
Click on the "Homebrew PDP-11" in the left frame.

Also, see the KY11 interface
  at http://www.sparetimegizmos.com/Hardware/KY11_Interface.htm

John has a lot of friends!

Dave

Gregg C Levine wrote:
> 
> Hello from Gregg C Levine
> In the documentation for E-11, John Wilson, describes the "blinky
> lights", essentially eight LEDs attached to the printer port of an
> IBM-PC that's running his emulator.
> 
> Has anyone ever built one of those things, using either a PC board
> blank from John Wilson, or decided to build one on his own? For that
> matter, has anyone actually used it, to assist in the debugging of a
> program, running on his emulator?
> 
> I'll probably e-mail John Wilson about this one directly, but, has
> anyone written a custom plug-in, that would have the printer port,
> pose as an I/O port for the emulator?
> -------------------
> Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
> "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
> (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
> (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups

-- 
David C. Jenner
djenner at earthlink.net


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Mar  5 14:56:32 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 23:56:32 -0500
Subject: [pups] Blinky lights, and E-11
In-Reply-To: <3E654F53.A6125017@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000001c2e2d3$981fe880$89c4580c@who5>

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
Looks good. However, I meant to use the printer-port as an I/O port,
as one would use one of the dedicate boards that the original PDP-11
wore. 

Granted, it would be difficult to apply it, but according to a book on
the subject of PC interfacing, it can be done.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of David C. Jenner
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 8:14 PM
> To: Gregg C Levine
> Cc: pups at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [pups] Blinky lights, and E-11
> 
> Gregg,
> 
> See the ultimate case of blinking the lights
>   at http://home.hetnet.nl/~tshaj/pdpsite/pdpstartpage.html
> Click on the "Homebrew PDP-11" in the left frame.
> 
> Also, see the KY11 interface
>   at http://www.sparetimegizmos.com/Hardware/KY11_Interface.htm
> 
> John has a lot of friends!
> 
> Dave
> 
> Gregg C Levine wrote:
> >
> > Hello from Gregg C Levine
> > In the documentation for E-11, John Wilson, describes the "blinky
> > lights", essentially eight LEDs attached to the printer port of an
> > IBM-PC that's running his emulator.
> >
> > Has anyone ever built one of those things, using either a PC board
> > blank from John Wilson, or decided to build one on his own? For
that
> > matter, has anyone actually used it, to assist in the debugging of
a
> > program, running on his emulator?
> >
> > I'll probably e-mail John Wilson about this one directly, but, has
> > anyone written a custom plug-in, that would have the printer port,
> > pose as an I/O port for the emulator?
> > -------------------
> > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
> > "Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
> > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
> > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PUPS mailing list
> > PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups
> 
> --
> David C. Jenner
> djenner at earthlink.net
> _______________________________________________
> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups



From franco.tassone at inwind.it  Fri Mar 14 08:30:08 2003
From: franco.tassone at inwind.it (Franco Tassone)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:30:08 +0100
Subject: [pups] Installing Venix or 2.9bsdpro on a DEC PRO350
Message-ID: <001301c2e9b0$1b6f7380$32d7623e@tassone>

Hi all,

after having downloaded both distributions from a PUPS mirror, I was trying
to install Venix or 2.9bsd modified for the PRO350.
I've created for both distributions the installations floppy using a mvaxII
with an rx50 floppy. The mvaxII actually runs netbsd, so I did a dd
if=floppy.img of=/dev/rx0a for all the floppy images of the distributions,
but when I go and try to boot the bot floppies of venix (and 2.9bsd too) on
the PRO350, they fail to boot. The drive seems to try a little then the
machine hangs, no messages on the console, except a nice capital DIGITAL, no
messages on the serial terminale connected to the printer port with the
maintenance cable.
With venix floppy instead, after failing to boot, after a litle P/OS starts
from hd.
What am I missing, what did I wrong ?
Any hint will be greatly appreciated.
P.S. I definitively want to install an ancient unix on my dec pro350...,
help me !
...
Franco Tassone



From bpechter at monmouth.com  Sat Mar 15 02:01:09 2003
From: bpechter at monmouth.com (Bill Pechter)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 11:01:09 -0500
Subject: [pups] Re: PUPS digest, Vol 1 #148 - 1 msg
In-Reply-To: <200303140207.h2E275n38901@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <200303140207.h2E275n38901@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <3E71FCC5.8010705@monmouth.com>

pups-request at minnie.tuhs.org wrote:

>Send PUPS mailing list submissions to
>	pups at minnie.tuhs.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	pups-request at minnie.tuhs.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of PUPS digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Installing Venix or 2.9bsdpro on a DEC PRO350 (Franco Tassone)
>
>--__--__--
>
>Message: 1
>From: "Franco Tassone" <franco.tassone at inwind.it>
>To: <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
>Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:30:08 +0100
>Subject: [pups] Installing Venix or 2.9bsdpro on a DEC PRO350
>
>Hi all,
>
>after having downloaded both distributions from a PUPS mirror, I was trying
>to install Venix or 2.9bsd modified for the PRO350.
>I've created for both distributions the installations floppy using a mvaxII
>with an rx50 floppy. The mvaxII actually runs netbsd, so I did a dd
>if=floppy.img of=/dev/rx0a for all the floppy images of the distributions,
>but when I go and try to boot the bot floppies of venix (and 2.9bsd too) on
>the PRO350, they fail to boot. The drive seems to try a little then the
>machine hangs, no messages on the console, except a nice capital DIGITAL, no
>messages on the serial terminale connected to the printer port with the
>maintenance cable.
>With venix floppy instead, after failing to boot, after a litle P/OS starts
>from hd.
>What am I missing, what did I wrong ?
>Any hint will be greatly appreciated.
>P.S. I definitively want to install an ancient unix on my dec pro350...,
>help me !
>...
>Franco Tassone
>  
>

I think those may be teledisk images so DD probably wouldn't work.
You need an IBM PC with 80 track drives, IIRC to recreate the images...

It's been a long time since I looked at those images.

Bill



From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Sat Mar 15 04:00:47 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:00:47 -0500
Subject: Subject: [pups] Installing Venix or 2.9bsdpro on a DEC PRO350
In-Reply-To: <3E71FCC5.8010705@monmouth.com>
Message-ID: <001101c2ea53$a4be1120$60a1580c@who5>

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
If the Venix images, are indeed the same ones that I saw roosting on
the server formerly known as Sunsite, then yes they are, and yes you
will. I don't know about the ones for 2.9bsdpro. That's a special
case, and I'm not too clear on that.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of Bill Pechter
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 11:01 AM
> To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: [pups] Re: PUPS digest, Vol 1 #148 - 1 msg
> 
> pups-request at minnie.tuhs.org wrote:
> 
> >Send PUPS mailing list submissions to
> >	pups at minnie.tuhs.org
> >
> >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >	http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups
> >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >	pups-request at minnie.tuhs.org
> >
> >You can reach the person managing the list at
> >	pups-admin at minnie.tuhs.org
> >
> >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >than "Re: Contents of PUPS digest..."
> >
> >
> >Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. Installing Venix or 2.9bsdpro on a DEC PRO350 (Franco
Tassone)
> >
> >--__--__--
> >
> >Message: 1
> >From: "Franco Tassone" <franco.tassone at inwind.it>
> >To: <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
> >Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:30:08 +0100
> >Subject: [pups] Installing Venix or 2.9bsdpro on a DEC PRO350
> >
> >Hi all,
> >
> >after having downloaded both distributions from a PUPS mirror, I
was trying
> >to install Venix or 2.9bsd modified for the PRO350.
> >I've created for both distributions the installations floppy using
a mvaxII
> >with an rx50 floppy. The mvaxII actually runs netbsd, so I did a dd
> >if=floppy.img of=/dev/rx0a for all the floppy images of the
distributions,
> >but when I go and try to boot the bot floppies of venix (and 2.9bsd
too) on
> >the PRO350, they fail to boot. The drive seems to try a little then
the
> >machine hangs, no messages on the console, except a nice capital
DIGITAL, no
> >messages on the serial terminale connected to the printer port with
the
> >maintenance cable.
> >With venix floppy instead, after failing to boot, after a litle
P/OS starts
> >from hd.
> >What am I missing, what did I wrong ?
> >Any hint will be greatly appreciated.
> >P.S. I definitively want to install an ancient unix on my dec
pro350...,
> >help me !
> >...
> >Franco Tassone
> >
> >
> 
> I think those may be teledisk images so DD probably wouldn't work.
> You need an IBM PC with 80 track drives, IIRC to recreate the
images...
> 
> It's been a long time since I looked at those images.
> 
> Bill
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups



From iking at killthewabbit.org  Mon Mar 17 16:13:55 2003
From: iking at killthewabbit.org (Ian King)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:13:55 -0800
Subject: [pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big
Message-ID: <000a01c2ec4c$63e5cf30$450010ac@dawabbit>

Steven,

I'm building a 2.11BSD kernel on my 11/73 (so I can include the networking
code and put my machine on the LAN!), and I'm seeing the error "too big for
type 431".  Through the wonders of Google, I saw your discussion of this
error and followed your advice (from 1996!).  However, when I ask 'size
unix.o', I get a size comfortably within the limits for base - 50112, well
below the 57344 you cite.  None of the overlays exceeds 8192, and the 'total
text' figure is well below your example, too.  FWIW, I did a 'naive build'
first, copying GENERIC and changing a few parameters; after seeing the error
'text segment too big' I went through the config file with a little more
thought and eliminated drivers I clearly didn't need (I don't have RL01/02s,
for instance).  Then I started getting this error.  I did a 'make clean'
just to be sure, but still make gives me the 'too big for type 431' error.
(Yes, I RTFM on ld.)

I am standing here beside myself.  :-)  And I am humbly soliciting
suggestions....  -- Ian

PS: I'm at patch level 431, per the VERSION file.



From sms at 2BSD.COM  Mon Mar 17 17:36:02 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 23:36:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big
Message-ID: <200303170736.h2H7a2w22625@moe.2bsd.com>

> From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> I'm building a 2.11BSD kernel on my 11/73 (so I can include the networking
> code and put my machine on the LAN!), and I'm seeing the error "too big for
> type 431".  Through the wonders of Google, I saw your discussion of this
> error and followed your advice (from 1996!).  However, when I ask 'size

	I'd have, up to now, sworn that the overlay setup was in the 
	documentation (one of the appendices) but it could well be that it's
	still off in a file somewhere in the mess I call my filesystem ;)

> unix.o', I get a size comfortably within the limits for base - 50112, well
> below the 57344 you cite.  None of the overlays exceeds 8192, and the 'total
> text' figure is well below your example, too.  FWIW, I did a 'naive build'

	Do you have any 0 length overlays?   There can't be any gaps in the
	overlay structure.

	For example, this is legal:

		overlays: 8128,7552,8000,7296,8192,7424,5824,6784,3520

	but this is not:
		
		overlays: 8128,7552,8000,7296,8192,0,5824,6784,3520

> first, copying GENERIC and changing a few parameters; after seeing the error
> 'text segment too big' I went through the config file with a little more
> thought and eliminated drivers I clearly didn't need (I don't have RL01/02s,

	You might need to go thru the Makefile too.  Good idea to eliminate
	drivers you don't have (save their D-space requirements) but that
	can create empty overlays and that does not work.

> for instance).  Then I started getting this error.  I did a 'make clean'
> just to be sure, but still make gives me the 'too big for type 431' error.
> (Yes, I RTFM on ld.)

	Hmmm, patch level 431 is recent enough I'd have thought to avoid
	a 'ld' problem (current is 444 but nothing recently has touched
	ld).

	What is the output from 'size unix.o'?

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Tue Mar 18 00:45:39 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 09:45:39 -0500
Subject: [pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big
In-Reply-To: <200303170736.h2H7a2w22625@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 11:36:02PM -0800
References: <200303170736.h2H7a2w22625@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030317094539.B16260@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 11:36:02PM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> 	I'd have, up to now, sworn that the overlay setup was in the 
> 	documentation (one of the appendices) but it could well be that it's
> 	still off in a file somewhere in the mess I call my filesystem ;)
> 

  I don't recall seeing any overlay info when I set up my 11/73 back in
January.  I even asked the dreaded overlay FAQ here!  :)  I was also at
431.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Tue Mar 18 02:38:06 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 08:38:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big
Message-ID: <200303171638.h2HGc6401078@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> 
>   I don't recall seeing any overlay info when I set up my 11/73 back in
> January.  I even asked the dreaded overlay FAQ here!  :)  I was also at 431.

	Ok, I probably only thought about including the writeup in the
	documentation.   I know I did write up a moderately lengthy 
	article about dealing with the overlay setup in response to a
	problem someone was having.  I just never went and incorporated it 
	into the setup/installatino documentation ;(

	One thing, obvious now that I think of it, I forgot to mention last
	night is that "too big for type 431" can also happen if the D space
	total is too large.   If 'MAXUSERS' is set too high for example
	then more than 48KB of D space will be needed and the linker will
	complain.    Look at the sum of the DATA and BSS segments (it might
	be necessary to sum up the .o files individually) - if it's pushing
	48KB then that's the problem.

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From j.r.engdahl at adelphia.net  Wed Mar 19 12:24:34 2003
From: j.r.engdahl at adelphia.net (Jonathan Engdahl)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:24:34 -0500
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
References: <200303171638.h2HGc6401078@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <00be01c2edbe$aea2cff0$b800a8c0@arctura>

I'm running essentially the CURLY 2.11BSD system with networking on a
PDP-11/53. When I go to rebuild unix with "make all", the build will run for
a while, then quit with "Error 141". If I type "make all" again, it keeps on
going for a while. After several iterations of this, eventually the make
completes, and the system will boot the result. What is this "Error 141"
business?

I've not looked for the cause of this yet. I'm being lazy, and hoping
someone has seen this before and can give me a quick answer, before I go
digging.

--
Jonathan Engdahl
http://users.safeaccess.com/engdahl

"The things which are seen are temporary,
 but the things which are not seen are eternal."  II Cor. 4:18



From iking at killthewabbit.org  Wed Mar 19 17:44:58 2003
From: iking at killthewabbit.org (Ian King)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 23:44:58 -0800
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <000901c2edeb$70942650$450010ac@dawabbit>

Well, given the excellent advice I received here (especially from Steven
Schultz), I got the networking kernel to build after moving a few modules
around between overlays.  It was indeed the overage on DATA/BSS that was
killing my build.  I did a 'make install' and sync'ed, then restarted.

<sigh>

Now, when I respond to the boot prompt with 'ra(0,0)unix', I'm getting the
following:

<banner for the image, date, time, etc.>
panic: iinit
no fs on 5/0

I'm booting from an RD54, and checking both 'ls -l /dev/ra*' and
/dev/MAKEDEV, it sure looks to me that the major device number for this
drive is 5 - am I missing anything yet?  That's what I called out as the
ROOTDEV in my config file (in sys/conf), with '5,1' as the SWAPDEV.  (I
snuck a peek at the CURLY config file as well, and it shows major device 5
for ra.)  Note that this is exactly the same device as I have been using all
along with the GENERIC kernel, so I know there's really a filesystem there.
(FWIW, I didn't define an autoboot device.)  In ufs_subr.c, I see where this
message is apparently generated in the getfs() function, but I can't really
tell from that where it's biting me.

Hey, if it wasn't a challenge, it wouldn't be fun, right?  Right?  TIA --
Ian

PS: I'm really glad I followed the advice to copy my old (GENERIC) kernel
image to 'oldunix' - so I can still boot!



From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 02:29:34 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 08:29:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
Message-ID: <200303191629.h2JGTYY02048@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: "Jonathan Engdahl" <j.r.engdahl at adelphia.net>
> I'm running essentially the CURLY 2.11BSD system with networking on a

	Ah, yes - the 'master reference 2.11BSD system' ('SHEMP' is a virtual
	pdp-11 running under P11 ;)).

> PDP-11/53. When I go to rebuild unix with "make all", the build will run for
> a while, then quit with "Error 141". If I type "make all" again, it keeps on

	Yep, I've been seeing that for years and aside from some kernel
	hackery to assist in the debugging I haven't done much other than
	to come up with a workaround.

> going for a while. After several iterations of this, eventually the make
> completes, and the system will boot the result. What is this "Error 141"
> business?

	It's the exit status of the assembler.   On _some_ modules, the 
	assembler ('as') jumps off into the weeds and executes an 'exit'
	system call with a non-zero value in R0.   141 is a lower case 'a'
	as I recall.

	Now for the interesting part.  If you do something like

		setenv FOOBAR abcdef

	and run the make the assembler won't "exit 'a".   ALSO, if you run
	the pipeline of the failing command manually, using temp files, it
	won't fail.  Makes it very hard to debug.
	
> I've not looked for the cause of this yet. I'm being lazy, and hoping
> someone has seen this before and can give me a quick answer, before I go

	I'm lazy too (I hear that being lazy is a virtue in programmers ;))
	so I just pad the environment with "FOO abc" or something and the
	make works.

	The only idea I've come up with to try and track the problem down
	is a hack to the 'exit' logic in the kernel to create a coredump
	of a program that exits with 'non-zero' status.  Then at least
	there'd be something to postmortem.   An added complication is that
	the assembler has this nasty habit of using 'jmp' to move around
	rather than 'jsr' so it's hard to find out where the program was
	at times.   A long time ago I did make a few changes to 'as' to reduce
	the usage of 'jmp' in an attempt to track this down but then, when
	even I ran the program under the debugger it never failed - a typical
	Heisenberg type of bug ;(

	Good Luck.

	Steven Schultz


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 02:38:15 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:38:15 -0500
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
In-Reply-To: <200303191629.h2JGTYY02048@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 08:29:34AM -0800
References: <200303191629.h2JGTYY02048@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030319113815.D16906@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 08:29:34AM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> 	It's the exit status of the assembler.   On _some_ modules, the 
> 	assembler ('as') jumps off into the weeds and executes an 'exit'
> 	system call with a non-zero value in R0.   141 is a lower case 'a'
> 	as I recall.
> 
 
  Ugh.

  Am I naive to suggest a rewrite of as?  :)

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Thu Mar 20 02:52:24 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:52:24 -0500
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
Message-ID: <200303191652.h2JGqqVJ025026@minnie.tuhs.org>

Steven M. Schultz:

	It's the exit status of the assembler.   On _some_ modules, the 
	assembler ('as') jumps off into the weeds and executes an 'exit'
	system call with a non-zero value in R0.   141 is a lower case 'a'
	as I recall.

0141 (octal) is 'a.  141 decimal is 0215 octal, i.e. carriage return with
parity.

What seems more likely is that 141 decimal is 0200 + 13 decimal.  If a
simple value returned by wait, that means SIGPIPE + core image, which
seems unlikely.  If an exit status as displayed by the shell, it just
means SIGPIPE (128 + signal number).  Or is signal 13 different in 2.11
than in V7?  (That seems even less likely.)

SIGPIPE doesn't seem entirely unreasonable as an accident that could
happen if something goes wrong in the assembly-language-code-tweaking
part of the kernel build.

Of course if it's a random value handed to sys exit, all rules are off.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 03:36:58 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:36:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303191736.h2JHaw302449@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> Well, given the excellent advice I received here (especially from Steven
> Schultz), I got the networking kernel to build after moving a few modules
> around between overlays.  It was indeed the overage on DATA/BSS that was

	Hmmm, if it was an overage on the DATA/BSS (which is hard to do unless
	you overdeclare MAXUSERS or the number of tty devices) then
	shuffling overlays wouldn't have made any difference since overlays
	affect only code and not data allocation.

> Now, when I respond to the boot prompt with 'ra(0,0)unix', I'm getting the
> following:
> 
> <banner for the image, date, time, etc.>
> panic: iinit
> no fs on 5/0

	That says the kernel was not able to mount the root filesystem.  The
	earlier messages about the kernel build date, etc appear because 
	the kernel prints those directly from internal strings  (and the
	kernel is loaded by /boot who doesn't "mount" the root filesystem).

> I'm booting from an RD54, and checking both 'ls -l /dev/ra*' and
> /dev/MAKEDEV, it sure looks to me that the major device number for this
> drive is 5 - am I missing anything yet?  That's what I called out as the

	You're not missing anything so far ;)

	Are there other devices/controllers on the system?   That should work
	(works on my system) but I'm trying to get a handle on what might be
	confusing the kernel.

> for ra.)  Note that this is exactly the same device as I have been using all
> along with the GENERIC kernel, so I know there's really a filesystem there.

	That's the puzzling part - why the old one works but the new one
	doesn't.   

> (FWIW, I didn't define an autoboot device.)  In ufs_subr.c, I see where this
> message is apparently generated in the getfs() function, but I can't really

	mountfs() calls getfs().   mountfs() is called out of main() in
	init_main.c

	The panic "iinit" is in init_main.c after mountfs() has returned
	NULL

	The times I have seen the 'iinit' panic it's meant that the disklabel
	was either missing _or_ that the root ('a') partition was not of
	type FS_V71K.   I SUPPOSE it's far fetched, but possible, that the
	old kernel predates the check for the filesystem type, thus it ignores
	the type of partition 'a' and assumes it's a valid filesystem.  

	If you have a copy of the standalone 'disklabel' program installed
	in / you can boot that with

		ra(0,0)disklabel

	and examine the label that way.   Or boot the tape and load the
	utility that way.   Using the old kernel and running disklabel
	would work too.   If the 'type' for the 'a' partition is not 'FS_V71K'
	that's the problem.

> PS: I'm really glad I followed the advice to copy my old (GENERIC) kernel
> image to 'oldunix' - so I can still boot!

	Ah, glad to hear that the advice came in handy.   The other thing
	that comes in useful is a bootable Zip disk (complete 2BSD system
	fits on a Zip disk if one has a SCSI adaptor around) - came in handy
	when I corrupted/broke 'init' ...

	Steve


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 03:46:18 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:46:18 -0500
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <200303191736.h2JHaw302449@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:36:58AM -0800
References: <200303191736.h2JHaw302449@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030319124618.A17077@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:36:58AM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> > PS: I'm really glad I followed the advice to copy my old (GENERIC) kernel
> > image to 'oldunix' - so I can still boot!
> 
> 	Ah, glad to hear that the advice came in handy.

  This came in handy for me too when I went the route of messed up MAXUSERS
screwage.

> The other thing
> 	that comes in useful is a bootable Zip disk (complete 2BSD system
> 	fits on a Zip disk if one has a SCSI adaptor around) - came in handy
> 	when I corrupted/broke 'init' ...
> 

  I should track down the half-bezel so that I can mount this SCSI Zip drive I
have in my BA123.  That would look so weird...

  On another note, were there any SCSI adapters that made use of the BA23/
BA123 RD disk control buttons?  Would be nifty to swap in a new ra0 by
simply taking a disk offline/online.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 03:46:51 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:46:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
Message-ID: <200303191746.h2JHkpQ02570@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
>   Ugh.
> 
>   Am I naive to suggest a rewrite of as?  :)

	Just a little bit <g>

	It's a thought that used to occur to me fairly often a long time 
	ago.  I cured myself of it though after I did the rewrite into
	its current form (if you think it's bad now you should have seen it
	before ;)).

	The biggest problem are the SDI (Span Dependent Instructions).  The
	PDP-11 has 'jmp' (non conditional but no range limit) and 'br' (many
	flavors of conditional branches but with a +/- 128 byte range).  
	The compiler generates pseudo instructions like 'jeq' and leaves it
	up to the assembler to figure out if a branch will reach or if a
	branch around a jump is needed.   That's a PITA to handle and is
	I believe the cause of much ugliness in the assembler.

	So I'm fought the urge to rewrite the assembler and 'won' - I no longer
	feel the rewrite urges ;)

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 03:40:30 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:40:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Re: Condition of 2BSD
Message-ID: <200303191740.h2JHeUf02457@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

	I received a mail item from Johnny Billquist but the fine folks
	at Update.UU.SE don't seem to recognize that networks can be
	subdivided and that _my_ portion has never sent or relayed spam

	Hope Johnny doesn't mind the reply going here instead.

   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
bqt at update.uu.se
    (reason: 553 5.3.0 <bqt at update.uu.se>... SMTP from 64.32.150.18 blocked by Update due to spam sent/relayed from this network;contact postmaster at Update.UU.SE for details)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to tempo.update.uu.se.:
>>> RCPT To:<bqt at update.uu.se>
<<< 553 5.3.0 <bqt at update.uu.se>... SMTP from 64.32.150.18 blocked by Update due to spam sent/relayed from this network;contact postmaster at Update.UU.SE for details
550 5.1.1 bqt at update.uu.se... User unknown

Hi!

> I have a small question, which I hope you can clarify for me. I'm in a
> little argument with a person involved in NetBSD.

	Ummm, I'm not a lawyer of course...

> He claims that NetBSD is the oldest free BSD still alive, which I reacted
> to since it was my belief that 2BSD now is free.

	But is 2BSD free?   That I don't know.  It is more free than it was
	a long time ago but 

> This have resulted in the claim that Berkley is the one that is
> restricting 2BSD, which was news to me. Is this in any way correct? The

> 
>  * Copyright (c) 1986 Regents of the University of California.
>  * All rights reserved.  The Berkeley software License Agreement
>  * specifies the terms and conditions for redistribution.

	That was the earlier version of the BSD license - when you had to have
	a ATT/USL/BellLabs license in order to obtain BSD at all.

	I am not sure I have a copy of the original UCB license but I think
	part of it involved having a ATT/USL license.

	The 'BSD' part of the UCB license permitted free sharing of the 
	UCB portions of the system.    The questionable parts involved
	the original ATT/USL code.  If the current owners say that the original
	(non-UCB) portions are free then that means the entire system is
	free.

> I believed that this was/is more or less the same as the current BSD
> license (except that it still have the clause that any software
> incorporating code from BSD must say so).

	At a later time the BSD license agreement added words about 
	redistributing the code with or without modification as long as
	credit was given.   

> But appearantly this other guy is claiming that Berkley hasn't let 2BSD
> free at all.

	I'm not sure UCB even knows what 2BSD is any more.

> Can you clarify this for me, please? :-)

	Does the current state of the Caldera/SCO/whatever license override
	any existing licenses?   THAT I do not know.   If that is the case
	then I would say that 2BSD is indeed free, on the other hand if people
	are still legally constrained by the earlier license then 2BSD is
	not totally free.    Earlier versions of NetBSD would not be free
	either because they contain "encumbered code" from the era when a
	ATT/USL license was required.

	I think it unlikely that anyone is going to send the 'software police'
	out to kick down a person's door because they're running 2BSD - sounds
	like that era is over at last.   That's free enough for most people
	I think.

	Steve


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 03:51:10 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:51:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303191751.h2JHpAX02576@moe.2bsd.com>

Howdy -

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> This came in handy for me too when I went the route of messed up MAXUSERS 
> screwage.

	That'll do it too ;)

>   I should track down the half-bezel so that I can mount this SCSI Zip drive I
> have in my BA123.  That would look so weird...

	It is tight on space but I can get a complete 2.11 system (with sources)
	and a small swap partition on a 96MB Zip disk.   Not suitable really
	for going multi-user but as a single user mode system for fixing
	up /etc/init or building a kernel it's nice.

	Might not look too weird - different of course, who knows but what
	you might like the new look ;)

>   On another note, were there any SCSI adapters that made use of the BA23/
> BA123 RD disk control buttons?  Would be nifty to swap in a new ra0 by
> simply taking a disk offline/online.

	Hmmm, those buttons/cabling are for RD/MSCP devices - not sure if it's
	possible to use them with SCSI devices.

	Steven Schultz


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 03:59:03 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:59:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
Message-ID: <200303191759.h2JHx3402619@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
> 0141 (octal) is 'a.  141 decimal is 0215 octal, i.e. carriage return with
> parity.

	And I remembered that (correctly as it turns out) without looking
	at ascii(7) <g>

> What seems more likely is that 141 decimal is 0200 + 13 decimal.  If a
> simple value returned by wait, that means SIGPIPE + core image, which
> seems unlikely.  If an exit status as displayed by the shell, it just

	It's, if I recall, being displayed by 'make'.   There's no coredump
	so the interpretation of 0141 is that of an exit status.  It's been
	a while since I've looked into the problem - it was quite annoying
	to run the sequence (that was causing make to cease) manually and not
	have it happen the same way.
	a 'shell'

> means SIGPIPE (128 + signal number).  Or is signal 13 different in 2.11
> than in V7?  (That seems even less likely.)

	Ah, ok - that makes sense too.  No, SIGPIPE is the same as it's always
	been since it was first defined as 13

> SIGPIPE doesn't seem entirely unreasonable as an accident that could
> happen if something goes wrong in the assembly-language-code-tweaking
> part of the kernel build.

	But something is causing the assembler to exit prematurely and break
	the pipe in the first place.

	SIGPIPE happens, of course, when a writer process writes to a pipe
	where the receiving/reading process has exited.   'as' is exiting
	prematurely - that can be determined by looking at the partially
	created (or empty) .s file that gets left behind.

> Of course if it's a random value handed to sys exit, all rules are off.

	What might be needed is a decent (or existent ;)) syscall tracing
	capability.  That combined with the capability to "coredump a non-0
	exit process) might be enough to track down what's causing 'as'
	to depart the scene prematurely.

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 04:08:16 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:08:16 -0500
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <200303191751.h2JHpAX02576@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:51:10AM -0800
References: <200303191751.h2JHpAX02576@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030319130816.B17120@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:51:10AM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> Howdy -
> 
> > From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> > This came in handy for me too when I went the route of messed up MAXUSERS 
> > screwage.
> 
> 	That'll do it too ;)
> 

  Fortunately /vmunix & /oldvmunix is a familiar procedure from back in
my PMAX device driver hacking days.

> >   On another note, were there any SCSI adapters that made use of the BA23/
> > BA123 RD disk control buttons?  Would be nifty to swap in a new ra0 by
> > simply taking a disk offline/online.
> 
> 	Hmmm, those buttons/cabling are for RD/MSCP devices - not sure if it's
> 	possible to use them with SCSI devices.
> 

  I was thinking of a SCSI adapter that plugged into the bulkhead somehow.
This is plainly rediculous, but a nifty idea nontheless.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From iking at killthewabbit.org  Thu Mar 20 04:24:22 2003
From: iking at killthewabbit.org (Ian King)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:24:22 -0800
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
References: <200303191736.h2JHaw302449@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <001201c2ee44$c3c15790$450010ac@dawabbit>

My MAXUSERS is most modest (the default 4) as is my number of ttys.  I
followed your advice on this, as the overall size of unix.o wasn't excessive
but I still got the 'type 431' error; after shuffling some pieces out,
unix.o linked and the build continued.  Maybe it's FM....  -- Ian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms at 2BSD.COM>
To: <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel


> Hi -
>
> > From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> > Well, given the excellent advice I received here (especially from Steven
> > Schultz), I got the networking kernel to build after moving a few
modules
> > around between overlays.  It was indeed the overage on DATA/BSS that was
>
> Hmmm, if it was an overage on the DATA/BSS (which is hard to do unless
> you overdeclare MAXUSERS or the number of tty devices) then
> shuffling overlays wouldn't have made any difference since overlays
> affect only code and not data allocation.
>
[snip]



From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Thu Mar 20 04:58:37 2003
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:58:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
Message-ID: <200303191858.h2JIwb726378@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms at 2BSD.COM>
> To: pups at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
> List-Archive: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/pups/>
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:46:51 -0800 (PST)
> 
> Hi -
> 
> > From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> >   Ugh.
> > 
> >   Am I naive to suggest a rewrite of as?  :)
> 
> 	Just a little bit <g>
> 
> 	It's a thought that used to occur to me fairly often a long time 
> 	ago.  I cured myself of it though after I did the rewrite into
> 	its current form (if you think it's bad now you should have seen it
> 	before ;)).
> 
> 	The biggest problem are the SDI (Span Dependent Instructions).  The
> 	PDP-11 has 'jmp' (non conditional but no range limit) and 'br' (many
> 	flavors of conditional branches but with a +/- 128 byte range).  
> 	The compiler generates pseudo instructions like 'jeq' and leaves it
> 	up to the assembler to figure out if a branch will reach or if a
> 	branch around a jump is needed.   That's a PITA to handle and is
> 	I believe the cause of much ugliness in the assembler.

That, of course, is a _neat feature_ of AS.  On the other hand, how
much code bloat would result if AS always emitted (bne;jmp) pairs for
'jeq', etc.  Maybe only generate (bne;jmp) for forward 'jeq' where the
span is not yet known.  I am sure there are pathological instabilities
in this kind of code generation, where expanding one branch/jump
instruction makes another one go out of span range.

Answer:  3:1 for each unnecessary pair.  But I have no idea of the
statistics for real code.

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


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 04:59:33 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:59:33 -0500
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <001201c2ee44$c3c15790$450010ac@dawabbit>; from iking@killthewabbit.org on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 10:24:22AM -0800
References: <200303191736.h2JHaw302449@moe.2bsd.com> <001201c2ee44$c3c15790$450010ac@dawabbit>
Message-ID: <20030319135933.A17289@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 10:24:22AM -0800, Ian King wrote:
> My MAXUSERS is most modest (the default 4) as is my number of ttys.

  I recall cranking MAXUSERS up a little, though I can't remember to
what and my PDP-11 is turned off at the monent.  A clarification of
how the whole Unibus map register business effects Qbus-based systems
would be nice.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu  Thu Mar 20 05:06:30 2003
From: cdl at mpl.ucsd.edu (Carl Lowenstein)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:06:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303191906.h2JJ6UW26427@opihi.ucsd.edu>

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> To: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms at 2BSD.COM>
> Cc: pups at minnie.tuhs.org
> Subject: Re: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:08:16 -0500
> 
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:51:10AM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> > Howdy -
> > 
> > > From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> > > This came in handy for me too when I went the route of messed up MAXUSERS 
> > > screwage.
> > 
> > 	That'll do it too ;)
> > 
> 
>   Fortunately /vmunix & /oldvmunix is a familiar procedure from back in
> my PMAX device driver hacking days.
> 
> > >   On another note, were there any SCSI adapters that made use of the BA23/
> > > BA123 RD disk control buttons?  Would be nifty to swap in a new ra0 by
> > > simply taking a disk offline/online.
> > 
> > 	Hmmm, those buttons/cabling are for RD/MSCP devices - not sure if it's
> > 	possible to use them with SCSI devices.
> > 
> 
>   I was thinking of a SCSI adapter that plugged into the bulkhead somehow.
> This is plainly rediculous, but a nifty idea nontheless.

You could put your SCSI drive into one of those pull-out
"mobile adapter" things.  But you probably should not pull
it out without idling the SCSI bus first.

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


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 05:14:41 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:14:41 -0500
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <200303191906.h2JJ6UW26427@opihi.ucsd.edu>; from cdl@mpl.ucsd.edu on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 11:06:30AM -0800
References: <200303191906.h2JJ6UW26427@opihi.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <20030319141441.A17320@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 11:06:30AM -0800, Carl Lowenstein wrote:
> > From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> >   I was thinking of a SCSI adapter that plugged into the bulkhead somehow.
> > This is plainly rediculous, but a nifty idea nontheless.
> 
> You could put your SCSI drive into one of those pull-out
> "mobile adapter" things.  But you probably should not pull
> it out without idling the SCSI bus first.
> 

  True.  I'm not actually dying to do this, BTW, but was just wondering
whether anyone in the past chose to take advantage of the controls.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 05:09:58 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:09:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303191909.h2JJ9wH03298@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
>   I recall cranking MAXUSERS up a little, though I can't remember to

	Good Idea because the default is only suitable for single user mode
	and building a new/custom kernel.   Quite a few kernel tables
	are sized based on 'maxusers' - in particular the coremap and swapmap
	tables (which track the fragments of memory and swap space) will be
	exhausted easily if you bring up a network'd kernel and start up
	the various daemons.

> what and my PDP-11 is turned off at the monent.  A clarification of
> how the whole Unibus map register business effects Qbus-based systems
> would be nice.

	It really doesn't - not having UMRs to deal with is a Nice Thing about 
	the Qbus ;)   The kernel (and the standalone utilities of course)
	need to know if they're on a U or Q-bus system but once a Q system
	is found then the UMR handling is bypassed.

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 05:30:48 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:30:48 -0500
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <200303191909.h2JJ9wH03298@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 11:09:58AM -0800
References: <200303191909.h2JJ9wH03298@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030319143048.A17336@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 11:09:58AM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> 	It really doesn't - not having UMRs to deal with is a Nice Thing about 
> 	the Qbus ;)   The kernel (and the standalone utilities of course)
> 	need to know if they're on a U or Q-bus system but once a Q system
> 	is found then the UMR handling is bypassed.
> 

  OK.  From what I recall (that turned-off machine again...) the entire
discussion on tuning MAXUSERS and friends is based on allocation of UMRs.
Might be a good idea to slip in a note about what to do when you don't have
them.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From djenner at earthlink.net  Thu Mar 20 06:12:31 2003
From: djenner at earthlink.net (David C. Jenner)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:12:31 -0800
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
References: <200303191906.h2JJ6UW26427@opihi.ucsd.edu>
Message-ID: <3E78CF2F.C90A7EAD@earthlink.net>

Carl Lowenstein wrote:
>
> You could put your SCSI drive into one of those pull-out
> "mobile adapter" things.  But you probably should not pull
> it out without idling the SCSI bus first.

This is exactly what I am doing at the moment for my 11/73.
I got a "CD SCSI RACK" real cheap surplus that has hardware
for 8 half-height drives (originally CDs).  I'm putting
several SCSI "disk trays" into it, as well as a couple of
fixed harddrives and a tape drive.  I may even try to put my
RX floppy drives into it, although I'll have to figure out
how to properly cable the RQDX3 to the drives without a
BA chassis.

Dave
-- 
David C. Jenner
djenner at earthlink.net



From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Thu Mar 20 07:26:06 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 07:26:06 +1000
Subject: [pups] 2.11BSD "make unix" aborts Error 141
In-Reply-To: <200303191759.h2JHx3402619@moe.2bsd.com>
References: <200303191759.h2JHx3402619@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030319212606.GA27436@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:59:03AM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
[lamenting a difficult bug in as]
> 	What might be needed is a decent (or existent ;)) syscall tracing
> 	capability.  That combined with the capability to "coredump a non-0
> 	exit process) might be enough to track down what's causing 'as'
> 	to depart the scene prematurely.

This might sound weird, but my Apout user-mode PDP-11 simulator might just
be the tool for this. It would be trivial to put some syscall tracing code
into the simulator, and I have rebuilt a 2.11BSD kernel with Apout several
times.

	Warren


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 09:08:46 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:08:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303192308.h2JN8kD04865@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> 
>   OK.  From what I recall (that turned-off machine again...) the entire
> discussion on tuning MAXUSERS and friends is based on allocation of UMRs.
> Might be a good idea to slip in a note about what to do when you don't have

	It is less a matter of MAXUSERS than it is of NBUF.   NBUF sets
	the number of disc cache buffers.   MAXUSERS affects the size of the
	proc table, file table, and other tables which are in the permanent
	(not mapped in/out) portion of the kernel's address space but does 
	not affect the disc buffer cache which is the entity requiring UMRs
	on a UNIBUS system.

	The buffer cache must be entirely mapped by UMRs - so if you have a 
	32KB buffer the kernel will reserve 4 UMRs on a UNIBUS system.   
	Realistically a 64KB buffer cache is about the maximum a UNIBUS system 
	can have because that takes 8 of the UMRs.  

	With the old (thankfully no longer in use, etc) 3Com ethernet boards
	you had to disable 4 UMRs so the system could access the memory in the
	card - that made for a very tight fit.

	The other constraint, even for Qbus systems, is the D space requirement.
	The 1KB portion of the disc buffer is "external" to the kernel (is 
	mapped in/out as needed) but there is a header structure which is
	part of the kernel's permanent address space.  Each buffer header is
	24 bytes so even without UMRs around it's not feasible to have a 200KB
	cache because that'd use 4800 bytes of kernel D space (which is always
	on the edge of being overflowed it seems).

	On a 11/73 I've used a 100KB buffer cache but when I was using 11/44s
	and /70s the max was 64KB.

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca  Thu Mar 20 09:15:16 2003
From: dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (David Evans)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 18:15:16 -0500
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <200303192308.h2JN8kD04865@moe.2bsd.com>; from sms@2BSD.COM on Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 03:08:46PM -0800
References: <200303192308.h2JN8kD04865@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030319181516.A18264@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 03:08:46PM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> >   OK.  From what I recall (that turned-off machine again...) the entire
> > discussion on tuning MAXUSERS and friends is based on allocation of UMRs.
> > Might be a good idea to slip in a note about what to do when you don't have
> 
> 	It is less a matter of MAXUSERS than it is of NBUF.   NBUF sets
> 	the number of disc cache buffers.

  Yeah, sorry, it was NBUF that I was thinking of.  It's been aboutn a month
since I've had a chance to fiddle with my /73.

> 	The other constraint, even for Qbus systems, is the D space requirement.
> 	The 1KB portion of the disc buffer is "external" to the kernel (is 
> 	mapped in/out as needed) but there is a header structure which is
> 	part of the kernel's permanent address space.  Each buffer header is
> 	24 bytes so even without UMRs around it's not feasible to have a 200KB
> 	cache because that'd use 4800 bytes of kernel D space (which is always
> 	on the edge of being overflowed it seems).
> 

  Cool, thanks.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual


From bqt at update.uu.se  Thu Mar 20 09:34:21 2003
From: bqt at update.uu.se (Johnny Billquist)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:34:21 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
In-Reply-To: <200303192308.h2JN8kD04865@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0303200030310.10410-100000@Tempo.Update.UU.SE>

On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Steven M. Schultz wrote:

> 	The buffer cache must be entirely mapped by UMRs - so if you have a 
> 	32KB buffer the kernel will reserve 4 UMRs on a UNIBUS system.   
> 	Realistically a 64KB buffer cache is about the maximum a UNIBUS system 
> 	can have because that takes 8 of the UMRs.  

Are the UMRs allocated and set up statically?
(I haven't looked inside 2BSD for a while now, and can't remember much of
the internals anymore.)

> 	With the old (thankfully no longer in use, etc) 3Com ethernet boards
> 	you had to disable 4 UMRs so the system could access the memory in the
> 	card - that made for a very tight fit.

How many UMRs does the system use? 8 for buffer cache, you might expect
one or two DH11s, that would require a few more, ethernet takes another
few, but it seems there shouldn't be such a shortage.

What did I miss?

	Johnny

Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at update.uu.se           ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol



From sms at 2BSD.COM  Thu Mar 20 09:52:15 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:52:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303192352.h2JNqFX05261@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: Johnny Billquist <bqt at update.uu.se>
> Are the UMRs allocated and set up statically?

	The clist and buffer cache UMRs are initialized at system boot time.

> (I haven't looked inside 2BSD for a while now, and can't remember much of
> the internals anymore.)

	And I haven't been around a UNIBUS system for a long time and the
	memory of having to deal with UMRs has faded.

> How many UMRs does the system use? 8 for buffer cache, you might expect
> one or two DH11s, that would require a few more, ethernet takes another
> few, but it seems there shouldn't be such a shortage.

	There are only 31 total - so a few allocated here, a few allocated
	there could result in not having enough.

> What did I miss?

	Swapping.  The kernel has to always be able to get UMRs to be
	able to swap out a process.   The memory is fuzzy but I think the
	kernel reserved 7 as to be able to swap 56KB at a time of a process
	but it could get by with less.   

	One UMR is 'reserved' by the hardware to cover the "I/O Page".

	The clist takes up 1 UMR for DMA terminal devices.

	Ethernet of course takes a UMR or two.  At one time a couple of the
	ethernet drivers (DEUNA) were a bit braindamaged and allocated more
	UMRs than they needed - I fixed that though.

	MSCP and TMSCP devices need UMRs to map their command and response
	rings.   The initial MSCP driver was definitely suboptimal in that
	regard - again, something I tended to (the problem showed up when
	more than 1 controller was present in a system).   Those UMRs are
	permanently allocated at boot time by the drivers when they initialize.

	Tape drivers need to have UMRs (although I don't know of too many
	folks with the old TE16 drives around on a UNIBUS system) available.

	It started adding up and on a system with several types of devices
	each of which wanted to reserve a couple UMRs the available pool for
	dynamic use (by tapes and swapping) was sometimes too small.

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz


From grog at lemis.com  Thu Mar 20 10:08:03 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 10:38:03 +1030
Subject: [pups] Re: Condition of 2BSD
In-Reply-To: <200303191740.h2JHeUf02457@moe.2bsd.com>
References: <200303191740.h2JHeUf02457@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <20030320000803.GD47194@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Wednesday, 19 March 2003 at  9:40:30 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
>
>> I have a small question, which I hope you can clarify for me. I'm in a
>> little argument with a person involved in NetBSD.
>
> 	Ummm, I'm not a lawyer of course...
>
>> He claims that NetBSD is the oldest free BSD still alive, which I reacted
>> to since it was my belief that 2BSD now is free.
>
> 	But is 2BSD free?   That I don't know.  It is more free than it was
> 	a long time ago but

After Caldera released the Ancient UNIX license last January, 2BSD
must be free, unless I'm missing something.

>> This have resulted in the claim that Berkley is the one that is
>> restricting 2BSD, which was news to me. Is this in any way correct? The
>
>>
>>  * Copyright (c) 1986 Regents of the University of California.
>>  * All rights reserved.  The Berkeley software License Agreement
>>  * specifies the terms and conditions for redistribution.
>
> 	That was the earlier version of the BSD license - when you had to have
> 	a ATT/USL/BellLabs license in order to obtain BSD at all.
>
> 	I am not sure I have a copy of the original UCB license but I think
> 	part of it involved having a ATT/USL license.

Right, but that's what Caldera released.

>> Can you clarify this for me, please? :-)
>
> 	Does the current state of the Caldera/SCO/whatever license override
> 	any existing licenses?   THAT I do not know.

My understanding (and I'm pretty sure it's correct) is that it
replaces the old AT&T license for the specified products, including
all AT&T precursors of [1-4]BSD.

>       If that is the case
> 	then I would say that 2BSD is indeed free, on the other hand if people
> 	are still legally constrained by the earlier license then 2BSD is
> 	not totally free.    Earlier versions of NetBSD would not be free
> 	either because they contain "encumbered code" from the era when a
> 	ATT/USL license was required.

They should now be free for the same reason.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030320/d0a7d285/attachment.sig>

From migieger at bawue.de  Thu Mar 20 12:27:51 2003
From: migieger at bawue.de (Michael Giegerich)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 07:57:51 +0530
Subject: [pups] Re: Condition of 2BSD
In-Reply-To: <20030320000803.GD47194@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <200303191740.h2JHeUf02457@moe.2bsd.com> <20030320000803.GD47194@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030320022751.GA212@luva.home>

On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 10:38:03AM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 March 2003 at  9:40:30 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
...
> > 	But is 2BSD free?   That I don't know.  It is more free than it was
> > 	a long time ago but
> 
> After Caldera released the Ancient UNIX license last January, 2BSD
> must be free, unless I'm missing something.

IMHO Caldera/SCO could only release the AT&T part
of xBSD. To release xBSD completely the UCB would
have to do this formally...

Caveats: haven't Caldera/SCO pulled back this re-
lease (IIRC I saw something like that when I vi-
sited their web site; reason whatever "abuse").

Also these releases from them used to be for per-
sonal, education/research use and thus would re-
strict the scope of their release. At least this
was the case when you had still to apply in wri-
ting to SCO.

I guess UCB wouldn't like again to test the current
status quo at court...

...
> > 	Does the current state of the Caldera/SCO/whatever license override
> > 	any existing licenses?   THAT I do not know.
> 
> My understanding (and I'm pretty sure it's correct) is that it
> replaces the old AT&T license for the specified products, including
> all AT&T precursors of [1-4]BSD.


From franco.tassone at inwind.it  Thu Mar 20 18:26:11 2003
From: franco.tassone at inwind.it (Franco Tassone)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 09:26:11 +0100
Subject: [pups] Missing Base Kit Sistem Area Disk 1 in pro/venix 2.0 distribution (by DEC)
Message-ID: <009301c2eeba$5d53dca0$3b0810ac@emsargroup.com>

Hi all,

I have a Pro/venix 2.0 distribution (the one by DEC) and was going to
reinstall it on my PRO/350. Unfortunatelly I discoveded that the Base Kit
Sistem Area Disk 1 was bad.
Anyone in this list can help me in supplying this floppy image ?
Thanks in advance.

Franco.


From semenov at jet.msk.su  Thu Mar 20 18:49:37 2003
From: semenov at jet.msk.su (Gleb N. Semenov)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:49:37 +0300
Subject: [pups] Missing Base Kit Sistem Area Disk 1 in pro/venix 2.0 
 distribution (by DEC)
References: <009301c2eeba$5d53dca0$3b0810ac@emsargroup.com>
Message-ID: <3E7980A1.B90768C3@jet.msk.su>

Hello Franco!

Franco Tassone wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have a Pro/venix 2.0 distribution (the one by DEC) and was going to
> reinstall it on my PRO/350. Unfortunatelly I discoveded that the Base Kit
> Sistem Area Disk 1 was bad.
> Anyone in this list can help me in supplying this floppy image ?
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> Franco.
> _______________________________________________
> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups

Possibly this link will help You:

ftp://ftp.update.uu.se/pub/professional/venix/

Regards!
GNS

-- 
Gleb N. Semenov     | 103006, Krasnoproletarskaya St. 6, Moscow, Russia
Security Specialist | Phone: +7(095)972.1182   Fax: +7(095)972.0791
Jet Infosystems     | E-mail: semenov at jet.msk.su


From franco.tassone at inwind.it  Thu Mar 20 18:53:10 2003
From: franco.tassone at inwind.it (Franco Tassone)
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 09:53:10 +0100
Subject: [pups] Missing Base Kit Sistem Area Disk 1 in pro/venix 2.0  distribution (by DEC)
References: <009301c2eeba$5d53dca0$3b0810ac@emsargroup.com> <3E7980A1.B90768C3@jet.msk.su>
Message-ID: <00d501c2eebe$2293be60$3b0810ac@emsargroup.com>

Hi Gleb,

thanks for your pointer, unfortunatelly this is NOT the right one, as there
was two Venix distributions:

- PRO/Venix 2.0 (this one is by DEC, the one I also own)
- Venix/PRO 1.x, 2,x (this one by VenturCom).

Your pointer is for the second one, while I'm asking for the first one.
Thanks a lot for your kind answer.

Franco.

> Possibly this link will help You:
>
> ftp://ftp.update.uu.se/pub/professional/venix/



From iking at killthewabbit.org  Sat Mar 22 04:08:35 2003
From: iking at killthewabbit.org (Ian King)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:08:35 -0800
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
References: <200303191736.h2JHaw302449@moe.2bsd.com>
Message-ID: <000401c2efd4$e3ee0f90$450010ac@dawabbit>

Steve,

Now I know I'm missing something.  I tried following your advice, using the
disklabel utility running under the old kernel.  From what you say below, I
assume you are referring to the 'fstype' parameter on the partition, not the
'type' parameter for the drive, correct?  The drive type is MSCP, and the
partition fstype is 2.11BSD.

I tried changing the partition type with disklabel -e -r but, when I exited
vi, I got an error message saying that the type I'd provided was not valid.
Viewing the label (with disklabel -r) showed the fstype set to 'unknown'.

Just for grins, I tried modifying the drive type, too - no success there,
either.  The disklabel utility isn't having any of that; again it claims
'unknown'.

Oh well, while I'm waiting for your reply I can rebuild my kernel with a
higher MAXUSERS parameter.  :-)

Thanks -- Ian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms at 2BSD.COM>
To: <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel


[snip]
> > Now, when I respond to the boot prompt with 'ra(0,0)unix', I'm getting
the
> > following:
> >
> > <banner for the image, date, time, etc.>
> > panic: iinit
> > no fs on 5/0
>
> That says the kernel was not able to mount the root filesystem.  The
> earlier messages about the kernel build date, etc appear because
> the kernel prints those directly from internal strings  (and the
> kernel is loaded by /boot who doesn't "mount" the root filesystem).
>
[snip]

> The times I have seen the 'iinit' panic it's meant that the disklabel
> was either missing _or_ that the root ('a') partition was not of
> type FS_V71K.   I SUPPOSE it's far fetched, but possible, that the
> old kernel predates the check for the filesystem type, thus it ignores
> the type of partition 'a' and assumes it's a valid filesystem.
>
> If you have a copy of the standalone 'disklabel' program installed
> in / you can boot that with
>
> ra(0,0)disklabel
>
> and examine the label that way.   Or boot the tape and load the
> utility that way.   Using the old kernel and running disklabel
> would work too.   If the 'type' for the 'a' partition is not 'FS_V71K'
> that's the problem.
>




From sms at 2BSD.COM  Sat Mar 22 04:26:17 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:26:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303211826.h2LIQH906763@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> Now I know I'm missing something.  I tried following your advice, using the
> disklabel utility running under the old kernel.  From what you say below, I

	Which part of the advice?   ;)

	The part of the advice that might be most useful was to put a 
	copy of the standalone disklabel program in / and boot it - NOT
	run the usermode version while the system is running.

	cd /sys/pdpstand
	make
	cp disklabel /

	then reboot the system and at the ':' prompt enter ra(0,0)disklabel

	there are things that can be done with the standalone version that
	are either impractical under a kernel (because the 'a'/root partition
	is open/busy) or because the standalone version has no safety checks.

> assume you are referring to the 'fstype' parameter on the partition, not the
> 'type' parameter for the drive, correct?  The drive type is MSCP, and the
> partition fstype is 2.11BSD.

	'fstype' is what I had in mind.  

  a:    16720        0   2.11BSD     1024  1024         # (Cyl.    0 - 39)

> I tried changing the partition type with disklabel -e -r but, when I exited
> vi, I got an error message saying that the type I'd provided was not valid.
> Viewing the label (with disklabel -r) showed the fstype set to 'unknown'.

	Now I am confused.   2.11BSD is correct - but then it's "unknown" and
	that would cause the 'iinit' panic that started this thread of
	discussion.

	Down the path of logic that results in a 'iinit' panic and the 
	'no fs' there's a check for the filesystem type and "unknown" was the
	likely cause (or at least that was the hope).

	If the standalone disklabel program says it's "2.11BSD" then there's
	something else going on - the next likely thought is that 'rootdev'
	or related entity isn't set to the device that is the actual root
	filesystem.

> Just for grins, I tried modifying the drive type, too - no success there,
> either.  The disklabel utility isn't having any of that; again it claims
> 'unknown'.

	That's not used for anything important.

> Oh well, while I'm waiting for your reply I can rebuild my kernel with a
> higher MAXUSERS parameter.  :-)

	~12 is a good number - not much need for more than that as a rule.

	Steve


From sms at 2BSD.COM  Sat Mar 22 04:33:00 2003
From: sms at 2BSD.COM (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:33:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [pups] Progress on 2.11BSD kernel
Message-ID: <200303211833.h2LIX0N06827@moe.2bsd.com>

Hi -

> From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> I tried changing the partition type with disklabel -e -r but, when I exited
> vi, I got an error message saying that the type I'd provided was not valid.
> Viewing the label (with disklabel -r) showed the fstype set to 'unknown'.

	"unknown" or "unused"

	On my virtual 11 I see disklabel report:

8 partitions:
#        size   offset    fstype   [fsize bsize]
  a:    16720        0   2.11BSD     1024  1024         # (Cyl.    0 - 39)
  b:     8360    16720      swap                        # (Cyl.   40 - 59)
  c:   340670        0    unused     1024  1024         # (Cyl.    0 - 814)
  h:   315590    25080   2.11BSD     1024  1024         # (Cyl.   60 - 814)

> Just for grins, I tried modifying the drive type, too - no success there,
> either.  The disklabel utility isn't having any of that; again it claims
> 'unknown'.

	Ah, that says something is corrupt somewhere.

	If you look at /usr/include/sys/disklabel.h you'll see the
	table of filesystem types:

static char *fstypenames[] = {
        "unused",
	"swap",
	"Version 6",
	"Version 7",
	"System V",
	"2.11BSD",
	"Eighth Edition",
	"4.2BSD",
	"MSDOS",
	"4.4LFS",
	"unknown",
	"HPFS",
	"ISO9660",
	0
};

	So for 'unknown' to appear there would need to be a 10 in the type
	field instead of a 5 (for "2.11BSD").   'unused' is a 0 obviously.

	Try booting up a standalone disklabel and see what it says without
	a kernel getting involved.

	Steve


From robinb at ruffnready.co.uk  Sat Mar 22 09:04:55 2003
From: robinb at ruffnready.co.uk (Robin Birch)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 23:04:55 +0000
Subject: [pups] Totally off topic question
Message-ID: <Wceu1YAXq5e+Ewjk@falstaf.demon.co.uk>

Hi Everyone,
Sorry for asking this here but you are probably the best people to ask.

I'm in the process of packing up my house to redecorate it and move to 
another.  As a result my 11/83 has been packed up and I won't get to 
play for some time :-(.  However, the question -

I am probably going to get a broadband connection to wherever I end up. 
I will then network all of the various boxes together and connect 
everything (including the PDP) to the Internet.  I intend having one box 
set up as a server for FTP, email and so on and everything else using 
that.  I will probably use a Linux box for this.  Can I get a pop3 
system for it that will talk to sendmail (only because sendmail is the 
only mail system that I have used) or can I get a reasonable pop3 server 
for Linux.

Anybody else has ideas on how I should do this then hints tips etc. 
gratefully received.

In case the above seems stupid the idea is to take all email through a 
server, weed out all incoming rubbish, and route it to various 
individual's (partner, daughter etc.) PCs.

Cheers

Robin
-- 
Robin Birch



From pete at dunnington.u-net.com  Sat Mar 22 10:31:10 2003
From: pete at dunnington.u-net.com (Peter Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 00:31:10 GMT
Subject: [pups] Totally off topic question
In-Reply-To: Robin Birch <robinb@ruffnready.co.uk>
        "[pups] Totally off topic question" (Mar 21, 23:04)
References: <Wceu1YAXq5e+Ewjk@falstaf.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <10303220031.ZM25050@mindy.dunnington.u-net.com>

On Mar 21, 23:04, Robin Birch wrote:

> I am probably going to get a broadband connection to wherever I end
up.
> I will then network all of the various boxes together and connect
> everything (including the PDP) to the Internet.  I intend having one
box
> set up as a server
[...]
> In case the above seems stupid the idea is to take all email through
a
> server, weed out all incoming rubbish, and route it to various
> individual's (partner, daughter etc.) PCs.

This is exactly what I do, though I have the sending and receiving
sides of the email equation separate.  I have one machine that acts as
a mail hub.  It runs sendmail with a custom sendmail.cf which is
capable of delivering internal mail either to /var/mail, which is then
exported to other machines, or via UUCP or SMTP to other machines.  It
also batches up outgoing mail and sends it to my ISP's mail server
("Smart Host") at specific times of the day (mine's not an always-on
connection).

All the other machines either use UUCP, or use sendmail with the
"nullclient" .cf file, to send mail to my hub machine.  No reason why
the hub couldn't run a POP3 server for the benefit of Windoze PCs as
well, but I've never felt the need :-)  If you go that route, I'd
suggest you think about IMAP rather than POP, though.  As far as
getting mail from my ISP, I use fetchmail -- but if you do this, be
sure that your ISP puts something in the headers that makes it easy for
fetchmail to tell which user it's really for (don't forget about
mailing lists), and that you have a catchall rule to handle mail you
didn't think of.

If you have an always-on connection, you could have your DNS MX
record(s) set to point to your hub machine, and needn't use fetchmail.
 However, if you do that, be sure to set up sendmail with anti-relaying
and all the proper security patches.



-- 
Pete						Peter Turnbull
						Network Manager
						University of York


From iking at killthewabbit.org  Sat Mar 22 13:31:19 2003
From: iking at killthewabbit.org (Ian King)
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:31:19 -0800
Subject: [pups] Totally off topic question
References: <Wceu1YAXq5e+Ewjk@falstaf.demon.co.uk> <10303220031.ZM25050@mindy.dunnington.u-net.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c2f023$80a2cdf0$7f0010ac@pepelepew>

Yup.  I used to do that, but had an older version of sendmail and got
'co-opted' as a relay host for a spammer.  :-(  But the Linux distribution
included a pop3 server out of the box, and my Windows machines were able to
connect to it just fine.

FWIW: rather than update sendmail and hack another .cf, I bought a
Windows-based mail server from a company called True North Software
(www.tnsoft.com), and I'm running it on Windows 2000.  It also provides a
POP3 server that the other machines access (so my family can have email,
too), and is a complete no-brainer to administer.  Once upon a time I
thought it was fun to administer a mail server; now I really appreciate this
'hands-off' solution.  :-)  OK, I paid $150 for a piece of software, but
when I consider the value (to me) of my free time, that's chump change....

Instead, I use my free time to hack 2.11BSD and UNIX v6!  :-)  Cheers -- Ian

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Turnbull" <pete at dunnington.u-net.com>
To: "Robin Birch" <robinb at ruffnready.co.uk>; <pups at minnie.tuhs.org>
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: [pups] Totally off topic question


> On Mar 21, 23:04, Robin Birch wrote:
>
> > I am probably going to get a broadband connection to wherever I end
> up.
> > I will then network all of the various boxes together and connect
> > everything (including the PDP) to the Internet.  I intend having one
> box
> > set up as a server
> [...]
> > In case the above seems stupid the idea is to take all email through
> a
> > server, weed out all incoming rubbish, and route it to various
> > individual's (partner, daughter etc.) PCs.
>
> This is exactly what I do, though I have the sending and receiving
> sides of the email equation separate.  I have one machine that acts as
> a mail hub.  It runs sendmail with a custom sendmail.cf which is
> capable of delivering internal mail either to /var/mail, which is then
> exported to other machines, or via UUCP or SMTP to other machines.  It
> also batches up outgoing mail and sends it to my ISP's mail server
> ("Smart Host") at specific times of the day (mine's not an always-on
> connection).
>
> All the other machines either use UUCP, or use sendmail with the
> "nullclient" .cf file, to send mail to my hub machine.  No reason why
> the hub couldn't run a POP3 server for the benefit of Windoze PCs as
> well, but I've never felt the need :-)  If you go that route, I'd
> suggest you think about IMAP rather than POP, though.  As far as
> getting mail from my ISP, I use fetchmail -- but if you do this, be
> sure that your ISP puts something in the headers that makes it easy for
> fetchmail to tell which user it's really for (don't forget about
> mailing lists), and that you have a catchall rule to handle mail you
> didn't think of.
>
> If you have an always-on connection, you could have your DNS MX
> record(s) set to point to your hub machine, and needn't use fetchmail.
>  However, if you do that, be sure to set up sendmail with anti-relaying
> and all the proper security patches.
>
>
>
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
> _______________________________________________
> PUPS mailing list
> PUPS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups



From pete at dunnington.u-net.com  Sat Mar 22 19:20:15 2003
From: pete at dunnington.u-net.com (Peter Turnbull)
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 09:20:15 GMT
Subject: [pups] Totally off topic question
In-Reply-To: "Ian King" <iking@killthewabbit.org>
        "Re: [pups] Totally off topic question" (Mar 21, 19:31)
References: <Wceu1YAXq5e+Ewjk@falstaf.demon.co.uk> 
	<10303220031.ZM25050@mindy.dunnington.u-net.com> 
	<000c01c2f023$80a2cdf0$7f0010ac@pepelepew>
Message-ID: <10303220920.ZM25308@mindy.dunnington.u-net.com>

On Mar 21, 19:31, Ian King wrote:
> Yup.  I used to do that, but had an older version of sendmail and got
> 'co-opted' as a relay host for a spammer.  :-(

I've seen a few attempts to do that.  I should point out that even if
you only run sendmail for the benefit of machines on your own network,
and even if you use a dialup (rather than always-on) connection, you
want the ant-relay stuff.  I see regular attempts to connect to port 25
on my hub, even though it's behind a dynamic IP address on an ISDN
dialup (I also see regular attempts to connect to the telnet, ssh, and
ftp ports, and others, maybe 2-3 times a week.  If you run a common
operating system, don't assume that a dynamic IP address, or NAT, or
using a dialup, gives any worthwhile protection).

> FWIW: rather than update sendmail and hack another .cf, I bought a
> Windows-based mail server

Nowadays, it's easy to use m4 to set up sendmail.cf for the common
sorts of home use -- just define the settings for masquerading and
smarthost, and press go (more or less).  The only time you need to hack
it a bit is if you want something unusual, like some mail going to the
local machine and some forwarded to other machines on your network, or
using UUCP.

> Instead, I use my free time to hack 2.11BSD and UNIX v6!  :-)

I have to admit that sounds like a better use of the time :-)

-- 
Pete						Peter Turnbull
						Network Manager
						University of York


From helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE  Sun Mar 23 22:32:03 2003
From: helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE (Wolfgang Helbig)
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 13:32:03 +0100 (MET)
Subject: [pups] V7 setjmp/longjmp
Message-ID: <200303231233.h2NCXIg03159@bsd.korb>

>X-Unix-From: michael_davidson at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 31 17:04:50 2002
>Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 08:02:37 -0800
>From: Michael Davidson <michael_davidson at pacbell.net>
>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:0.9.4) 
Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1
>X-Accept-Language: en-us
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Wolfgang Helbig <helbig at Informatik.BA-Stuttgart.DE>
>CC: pups at minnie.tuhs.org
>Subject: Re: [pups] V7 setjmp/longjmp
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Wolfgang Helbig wrote:

>>You can trust register variables when setjmp() returns the second time. Then
>>the registers are restored to the values they had when the "next" function was 
>>called, that is the "values as of the time longjmp() was called" (quoted from
>>longjmp(3)'s man page. Thus any variable behaves the same, regardless of its
>>storage class.
>>
>Yes, you are right - V7 restores the register variables to a state which
>is consistent with the other auto variables in the function - ie the value
>which they had when longjmp was called.
>
>The caveats about not relying on register variables applied to V6.

Nope, even in V6, register variables are restored to the values they had
when reset(III) was called! (reset() is the name of longjmp() in V6).
By the way, reset() is much smaller than longjmp() but provides the same
functionality.

I wonder why longjmp() was rewritten.

Wolfgang.



From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com  Tue Mar 25 15:14:53 2003
From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 00:14:53 -0500
Subject: [pups] V7 setjmp/longjmp
Message-ID: <8b42de71c97729c28a22c46456004471@plan9.bell-labs.com>

Helbig remarked (quoting Davidson):

 > >Yes, you are right - V7 restores the register variables to a state which
 > >is consistent with the other auto variables in the function - ie the value
 > >which they had when longjmp was called.
 > >
 > >The caveats about not relying on register variables applied to V6.

 > Nope, even in V6, register variables are restored to the values they had
 > when reset(III) was called! (reset() is the name of longjmp() in V6).
 > By the way, reset() is much smaller than longjmp() but provides the same
 > functionality.

 > I wonder why longjmp() was rewritten.

Setjmp/longjmp do more (setjmp returns different values
for the initial call and the longjmp-invoked one).
But the thing that would become more important
is that the PDP-11 compiler's calling sequence was
especially friendly toward restoring register values--
it just worked automatically.

Other machines and compilers were not so friendly.
This is why ANSI and ISO had to put in special rules
about promising to preserve only things marked
volatile.

We've been through this before.

	Dennis




From johnzulu at yahoo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:33:28 2003
From: johnzulu at yahoo.com (John Chung)
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 08:33:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #128 - 1 msg
In-Reply-To: <200303040212.h242C8n80999@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030305163328.941.qmail@web12805.mail.yahoo.com>

--- tuhs-request at minnie.tuhs.org wrote:
> Send TUHS mailing list submissions to
> 	tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
> 	http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> 	tuhs-request at minnie.tuhs.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TUHS digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: compiling festoon (Warren Toomey)
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 1
> From: Warren Toomey <wkt at minnie.tuhs.org>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] compiling festoon
> To: Aharon Robbins <arnold at skeeve.com>
> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 09:22:49 +1000 (EST)
> CC: tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Reply-To: wkt at tuhs.org
> 
> In article by Aharon Robbins:
> > Hi All.
> > 
> > The following diff is necessary to use GCC on a
> linux system.
> > (Anyone know what gcc's builtin `conj' function
> is? Beats me.)
> > 
> > Warren, you might want to fix that last line in
> the archive version
> > of the file.
> 
> Um, it compiles fine for me on FreeBSD using gcc
> version 2.95.3,
> so I'd say that it's a Linux library. I'll put your
> suggestion
> into the README.
> 
> 	Warren
> 
> 
  It also compiles fine with me. Using RH 7.2 with gcc
2.95.

Regards,
John Chung

> --__--__--
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> 
> 
> End of TUHS Digest


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/


From tfb at cley.com  Thu Mar  6 03:28:44 2003
From: tfb at cley.com (Tim Bradshaw)
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 17:28:44 +0000
Subject: [TUHS] compiling festoon
In-Reply-To: <200302272322.h1RNMop13970@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <200302271206.h1RC6HSQ001634@localhost.localdomain>
	<200302272322.h1RNMop13970@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <15974.13260.138185.519539@cley.com>

* Warren Toomey wrote:

> Um, it compiles fine for me on FreeBSD using gcc version 2.95.3,
> so I'd say that it's a Linux library. I'll put your suggestion
> into the README.

I think it may be a gcc 2 / 3 change.  gcc 3.2 on Solaris has a
similar complaint.

--tim



From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Thu Mar  6 09:14:34 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:14:34 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] compiling festoon
Message-ID: <200303061138.h26BcRn18785@minnie.tuhs.org>

Since the problem is a new library function that appeared in
the official header files in C99, it makes sense that newer
versions of gcc object.  That means that as time goes by, newer
C compilers everywhere will probably pick up the change.  Any
documentation stored next to festoon.c should definitely point
out the problem and its full generality.

We'll leave aside for now the question of whether complex
conjugation really ought to be public.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Thu Mar  6 22:16:25 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 22:16:25 +1000 (EST)
Subject: [TUHS] compiling festoon
In-Reply-To: <200303061138.h26BcRn18785@minnie.tuhs.org> from Norman Wilson at
 "Mar 5, 2003 06:14:34 pm"
Message-ID: <200303061216.h26CGQDN019224@minnie.tuhs.org>

In article by Norman Wilson:
> We'll leave aside for now the question of whether complex
> conjugation really ought to be public.

I guess as long as the numbers are consenting, it's fine.
Maybe we need a ``don't ask, don't tell'' policy on complex conjugation.

Sorry, it's 11pm here.

	Warren


From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com  Sat Mar  8 16:30:08 2003
From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 01:30:08 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] compiling festoon
Message-ID: <3e68b80d9683d61d0d4291a6160eb1f5@plan9.bell-labs.com>

Norman observed (about conj):

 > Since the problem is a new library function that appeared in
 > the official header files in C99, it makes sense that newer
 > versions of gcc object.  That means that as time goes by, newer
 > C compilers everywhere will probably pick up the change.  Any
 > documentation stored next to festoon.c should definitely point
 > out the problem and its full generality.

 > We'll leave aside for now the question of whether complex
 > conjugation really ought to be public.

So far as I can tell from ISO/IEC 9899:1999,
the panoply of Complex macros and functions
are supposed to be enabled only after

 #include <complex.h>

gcc looks to be overenthusiastic.

	Dennis



From lm at bitmover.com  Sun Mar  9 12:22:12 2003
From: lm at bitmover.com (Larry McVoy)
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 18:22:12 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] Re: TUHS digest, Vol 1 #131 - 1 msg
In-Reply-To: <200303090209.h2929pn68480@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <200303090209.h2929pn68480@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030309022212.GQ31633@work.bitmover.com>

> gcc looks to be overenthusiastic.
> 
> 	Dennis

One for the quotes page, eh?
-- 
---
Larry McVoy            	 lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitmover.com/lm 


From grog at lemis.com  Sun Mar  9 13:20:00 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 13:50:00 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] Why is \n 012?
Message-ID: <20030309032000.GD34634@wantadilla.lemis.com>

A thing that has puzzled me almost for ever is why the newline
character in C is 012 and not 015.  Does anybody have any insight?

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030309/8ad517aa/attachment.sig>

From greg at censoft.com  Sun Mar  9 13:57:31 2003
From: greg at censoft.com (Greg Haerr)
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 19:57:31 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] Why is \n 012?
References: <20030309032000.GD34634@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <040b01c2e5f0$03000580$6401a8c0@gregnewport>

> A thing that has puzzled me almost for ever is why the newline
> character in C is 012 and not 015.  Does anybody have any insight?

Well, my take on this is that C was developed with UNIX,
of course, and UNIX early on decided to use a single
character rather than a two-char (CRLF) sequence for
end-of-lines.  So, since the CR was already in use for 
the leading char in the two-char sequence, it made it a lot
easier to use the LF character for the single newline, so
programs wouldn't always have to be checking a second
character...

Regards,

Greg



From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com  Sun Mar  9 16:07:07 2003
From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 01:07:07 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] Why is \n 012?
Message-ID: <7816891f511016bfdc584185f2a11bb3@plan9.bell-labs.com>

Lehey wondered,

 > A thing that has puzzled me almost for ever is why the newline
 > character in C is 012 and not 015.  Does anybody have any insight?

And Haerr speculated 
 > Well, my take on this is that C was developed with UNIX,
 > of course, and UNIX early on decided to use a single
 > character rather than a two-char (CRLF) sequence for
 > end-of-lines...

This came via Unix from Multics.  My Multics
Programmers' Manual (1969) says, in reference
to its use of the ASCII character set: "Reference:
USA Standard X3.4-1967," and describes the LF
character, with code octal 012, "New Line.
Move carriage to the left edge of the next
line.... ASCII LF is used for this function."

I believe that either this or some other version
of ASCII standard blessed (or condoned) one
of the interpretations of the 012 character
for the new-line function.  However, I haven't
turned up hard evidence of this, despite several
conversations with Eric Fischer, who has
kept track of various versions of the standards.

In the event, various of the terminals used early
on did implement the NL function.  E.g. the
IBM 1050 and 2741 terminals (decidedly
non-ASCII) had a new-line function, like
a typewriter, no CR, but sometimes an
"Index" character that moved the paper
but not the printing element.  The TTY 37
had an optional interpretation of 012 as
NL.  Of course, other terminals required
separate CR and LF characters.

The choice of a single character to separate
lines still seems wise if you're using a byte-stream
model.

	Dennis



From imp at bsdimp.com  Sun Mar  9 16:19:22 2003
From: imp at bsdimp.com (M. Warner Losh)
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 23:19:22 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [TUHS] Why is \n 012?
In-Reply-To: <040b01c2e5f0$03000580$6401a8c0@gregnewport>
References: <20030309032000.GD34634@wantadilla.lemis.com>
	<040b01c2e5f0$03000580$6401a8c0@gregnewport>
Message-ID: <20030308.231922.68546726.imp@bsdimp.com>

In message: <040b01c2e5f0$03000580$6401a8c0 at gregnewport>
            "Greg Haerr" <greg at censoft.com> writes:
: > A thing that has puzzled me almost for ever is why the newline
: > character in C is 012 and not 015.  Does anybody have any insight?
: 
: Well, my take on this is that C was developed with UNIX,
: of course, and UNIX early on decided to use a single
: character rather than a two-char (CRLF) sequence for
: end-of-lines.  So, since the CR was already in use for 
: the leading char in the two-char sequence, it made it a lot
: easier to use the LF character for the single newline, so
: programs wouldn't always have to be checking a second
: character...

Also, it is not possible to do overstriking w/o <BS> if you can't use
<CR> for the task.

Warner


From grog at lemis.com  Mon Mar 10 11:21:47 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:51:47 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
Message-ID: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>

I'm sure I'm not the only person who sees SCO's recent legal
activities with dismay.  For those of you still looking for facts,
take a look at the links off http://www.sco.com/scosource/, and
particularly the complaint at
http://www.sco.com/scosource/complaint3.06.03.html.  There are a
number of things there which concern me, but particularly:

   85.  For example, Linux is currently capable of coordinating the
        simultaneous performance of 4 computer processors.  UNIX, on
        the other hand, commonly links 16 processors and can
        successfully link up to 32 processors for simultaneous
        operation.  This difference in memory management performance
        is very significant to enterprise customers who need extremely
        high computing capabilities for complex tasks.  The ability to
        accomplish this task successfully has taken AT&T, Novell and
        SCO at least 20 years, with access to expensive equipment for
        design and testing, well-trained UNIX engineers and a wealth
        of experience in UNIX methods and concepts.

Apart from the fact that I can't see any factual evidence that System
V as licensed from SCO or its predecessors had any competitive SMP
scalability, the "20 years" concerns me.  That could go back to the
days of the Seventh Edition.

Which brings me to the real point: a little over a year ago, we
received a message from Dion Johnson releasing Ancient UNIX under a
BSD licence.  For those of you who have misplaced it, I'm attaching it
again.  While none of us doubt that it is genuine, SCO has no record
of it on their web site, nor (as far as I know) do any of us have this
in signed form.  In view of SCO's aggression, I think we should
contact them and ask them to at least put the statement somewhere on
their web site.

Comments?

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: unknown sender
Subject: no subject
Date: no date
Size: 100
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030310/8355c19a/attachment.mht>

From djenner at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 10 12:33:34 2003
From: djenner at earthlink.net (David C. Jenner)
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2003 18:33:34 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <3E6BF97E.773E2F62@earthlink.net>

Greg,

I can't properly read your pdf attachment.

Some of us have a signed, dated, and numbered license and paid $100 for it!

Dave

Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> 
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who sees SCO's recent legal
> activities with dismay.  For those of you still looking for facts,
> take a look at the links off http://www.sco.com/scosource/, and
> particularly the complaint at
> http://www.sco.com/scosource/complaint3.06.03.html.  There are a
> number of things there which concern me, but particularly:
> 
>    85.  For example, Linux is currently capable of coordinating the
>         simultaneous performance of 4 computer processors.  UNIX, on
>         the other hand, commonly links 16 processors and can
>         successfully link up to 32 processors for simultaneous
>         operation.  This difference in memory management performance
>         is very significant to enterprise customers who need extremely
>         high computing capabilities for complex tasks.  The ability to
>         accomplish this task successfully has taken AT&T, Novell and
>         SCO at least 20 years, with access to expensive equipment for
>         design and testing, well-trained UNIX engineers and a wealth
>         of experience in UNIX methods and concepts.
> 
> Apart from the fact that I can't see any factual evidence that System
> V as licensed from SCO or its predecessors had any competitive SMP
> scalability, the "20 years" concerns me.  That could go back to the
> days of the Seventh Edition.
> 
> Which brings me to the real point: a little over a year ago, we
> received a message from Dion Johnson releasing Ancient UNIX under a
> BSD licence.  For those of you who have misplaced it, I'm attaching it
> again.  While none of us doubt that it is genuine, SCO has no record
> of it on their web site, nor (as far as I know) do any of us have this
> in signed form.  In view of SCO's aggression, I think we should
> contact them and ask them to at least put the statement somewhere on
> their web site.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Greg
> --
> Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
> See complete headers for address and phone numbers
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Liberal license for ancient UNIX sources
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 15:03:37 -0800
> From: Dion Johnson <dionj at caldera.com>
> To: wht at minnie.tuhs.org
> CC: dmr at bell-labs.com, ken at plan9.bell-labs.com, grog at lemis.com,
>      John Terpstra <jht at caldera.com>, drew at caldera.com, maddog at li.org,
>      evan at starnix.com, phatch at caldera.com, ransom at caldera.com
> 
> Dear Warren, and friends,
> 
> I'm happy to let you know that Caldera International has placed
> the ancient UNIX releases (V1-7 and 32V) under a "BSD-style" license.
> I've attached a PDF of the license letter hereto.  Feel free to
> propogate it as you see fit.
> 
> I apologize that this has taken so long.  We do not have a well
> regulated archive of these ancient releases, so we must depend
> upon you UNIX enthusiasts, historians, and original authors to
> help the community of interested parties figure out exactly what
> is available, where, and how.
> 
> Many thanks to Warren Toomey, of PUPS, and to Caldera's Bill
> Broderick, director of licensing services here.  Both of these
> gentlemen were instrumental in making this happen.  And thanks
> to our CEO, Ransom Love, whose vision for Caldera International
> prescribes cooperation and mutual respect for the open source
> communities.
> 
> Of course, there are thousands of other people who should be
> acknowledged.  I regret I do not have time or wisdom to make
> a list of them all, but maybe someone does, or has.
> 
> Anyway, here it is.  Feel free to write to us if you want to
> understand more about how/why Caldera International has released
> this code, or you have any other comments that we should hear.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Dion L. Johnson II - dionj at caldera.com
> Product Manager and one of many open source enthusiasts in Caldera Intl.
> 
> Paul Hatch - phatch at caldera.com
> Public Relations Manager at Caldera International
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                              Name: ancient-source-all.pdf
>    ancient-source-all.pdf    Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
>                          Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature

-- 
David C. Jenner
djenner at earthlink.net


From michael_davidson at pacbell.net  Mon Mar 10 13:13:01 2003
From: michael_davidson at pacbell.net (Michael Davidson)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 19:13:01 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com>
To: UNIX Heritage Society <tuhs at tuhs.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 5:21 PM
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?


> 
> Which brings me to the real point: a little over a year ago, we
> received a message from Dion Johnson releasing Ancient UNIX under a
> BSD licence.  For those of you who have misplaced it, I'm attaching it
> again.  While none of us doubt that it is genuine, SCO has no record
> of it on their web site, nor (as far as I know) do any of us have this
> in signed form.  In view of SCO's aggression, I think we should
> contact them and ask them to at least put the statement somewhere on
> their web site.
> 

While I can't comment on the current legal issues, I was involved
in the decision to release the "Ancient UNIX" source code under a
BSD style license and I am not aware of anything having changed
in that area.

I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current
position on "Ancient UNIX" - I expect that this will take a few
days but I should have an answer by the end of the week.

Michael Davidson



From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au  Mon Mar 10 13:28:28 2003
From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:28:28 +1100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <3E6BF97E.773E2F62@earthlink.net>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <3E6BF97E.773E2F62@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20030310032828.GG90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>

On 2003-Mar-09 18:33:34 -0800, "David C. Jenner" <djenner at earthlink.net> wrote:
>I can't properly read your pdf attachment.

It was attached as "text/plain" instead of PDF.  If I save it, xpdf
displays it correctly.

>Some of us have a signed, dated, and numbered license and paid $100 for it!

The critical bit of Greg's mail relates to the release of Ancient UNIX
under a BSD license.  Your "signed, dated, and numbered license" states
that Ancient UNIX contains trade secret information.

Peter


From arnold at skeeve.com  Tue Mar 11 02:44:43 2003
From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 18:44:43 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] compiling festoon
Message-ID: <200303101644.h2AGihXN001569@localhost.localdomain>

DMR remarked:
> So far as I can tell from ISO/IEC 9899:1999,
> the panoply of Complex macros and functions
> are supposed to be enabled only after
>
>  #include <complex.h>
>
> gcc looks to be overenthusiastic.
>
> 	Dennis

I would agree. I plan to file a bug report about it. I built and
checked the latest gcc, and even this file generates the
complaint:

	#include <stdio.h>

	int conj(a)
	int a;
	{
		return a;
	}

	main()
	{
		printf("%d\n", conj(1));
	}

Sigh.

Arnold


From jss at subatomix.com  Tue Mar 11 06:21:00 2003
From: jss at subatomix.com (Jeffrey Sharp)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:21:00 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
 <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com>
Message-ID: <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com>

On Sunday, March 9, 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
> I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current position
> on "Ancient UNIX"

But once they've released it under a BSD-style license, it is released. They
simply can't unrelease it. They don't have to continue distributing it, but
they can't stop me from doing what the license explicitly allows. So their
current position WRT ancient UNIX may not mave much legal weight. IANAL,
TINLA.

-- 
Jeffrey Sharp



From jss at subatomix.com  Tue Mar 11 06:23:36 2003
From: jss at subatomix.com (Jeffrey Sharp)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:23:36 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030310032828.GG90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
 <3E6BF97E.773E2F62@earthlink.net> <20030310032828.GG90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
Message-ID: <501177473.20030310142336@subatomix.com>

> Your "signed, dated, and numbered license" states that Ancient UNIX
> contains trade secret information.

This probably all comes down to whether or not IBM breached any NDAs it had
with SCO. Trade secrets in and of themselves IIRC do not have any statutory
protection in the United States. Once they're leaked, they aren't secrets
any more. IANAL, TINLA.

-- 
Jeffrey Sharp



From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au  Tue Mar 11 07:15:18 2003
From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 08:15:18 +1100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com>
Message-ID: <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>

On 2003-Mar-10 14:21:00 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp <jss at subatomix.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, March 9, 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
>> I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current position
>> on "Ancient UNIX"
>
>But once they've released it under a BSD-style license, it is released. They
>simply can't unrelease it. They don't have to continue distributing it, but
>they can't stop me from doing what the license explicitly allows. So their
>current position WRT ancient UNIX may not mave much legal weight. IANAL,
>TINLA.

AFAIK, the only evidence we have that it is released under a BSD-style
license is an e-mail allegedly from an authorised person within SCO.
Warren has not been able to find an equivalent statement on their
website.  I suspect Warren is concerned that they could claim it was
never released - ie the e-mail is a faked/forged or the sender didn't
have the authority to make the claims therein.

What would you do if SCO's lawyers came knocking on your door and
demanded you cease distributing ancient UNIX or derived products?
Whilst you could probably prove the authenticity of the e-mail, this
would cost real money - and SCO probably can afford to spend a lot
more money than you can.

The date of the e-mail may also be a crucial issue - since IBM would
presumably have the right to use the code after SCO changed the code
to a BSD license.

IANAL, TINLA etc.

Peter


From djenner at earthlink.net  Tue Mar 11 07:54:37 2003
From: djenner at earthlink.net (David C. Jenner)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 13:54:37 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
Message-ID: <3E6D099D.A9F4654D@earthlink.net>

Warren has a signed, dated, and numbered license for Ancient Unix (AU-0).
I have a signed, dated, and numbered license for Ancient Unix (AU-1).
I don't see how Warren can't distribute to me any software covered under the license.

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> 
> On 2003-Mar-10 14:21:00 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp <jss at subatomix.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, March 9, 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
> >> I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current position
> >> on "Ancient UNIX"
> >
> >But once they've released it under a BSD-style license, it is released. They
> >simply can't unrelease it. They don't have to continue distributing it, but
> >they can't stop me from doing what the license explicitly allows. So their
> >current position WRT ancient UNIX may not mave much legal weight. IANAL,
> >TINLA.
> 
> AFAIK, the only evidence we have that it is released under a BSD-style
> license is an e-mail allegedly from an authorised person within SCO.
> Warren has not been able to find an equivalent statement on their
> website.  I suspect Warren is concerned that they could claim it was
> never released - ie the e-mail is a faked/forged or the sender didn't
> have the authority to make the claims therein.
> 
> What would you do if SCO's lawyers came knocking on your door and
> demanded you cease distributing ancient UNIX or derived products?
> Whilst you could probably prove the authenticity of the e-mail, this
> would cost real money - and SCO probably can afford to spend a lot
> more money than you can.
> 
> The date of the e-mail may also be a crucial issue - since IBM would
> presumably have the right to use the code after SCO changed the code
> to a BSD license.
> 
> IANAL, TINLA etc.
> 
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-- 
David C. Jenner
djenner at earthlink.net


From grog at lemis.com  Tue Mar 11 09:45:48 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:15:48 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
Message-ID: <20030310234548.GO94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at  8:15:18 +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2003-Mar-10 14:21:00 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp <jss at subatomix.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 9, 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
>>> I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current position
>>> on "Ancient UNIX"
>>
>> But once they've released it under a BSD-style license, it is released. They
>> simply can't unrelease it. They don't have to continue distributing it, but
>> they can't stop me from doing what the license explicitly allows. So their
>> current position WRT ancient UNIX may not mave much legal weight. IANAL,
>> TINLA.
>
> AFAIK, the only evidence we have that it is released under a BSD-style
> license is an e-mail allegedly from an authorised person within SCO.
> Warren has not been able to find an equivalent statement on their
> website.  I suspect Warren is concerned that they could claim it was
> never released - ie the e-mail is a faked/forged or the sender didn't
> have the authority to make the claims therein.

I think you mean me, not Warren.  Warren hasn't said anything yet.

My concern is not whether it's genuine--I'm convinced it is.  My
concern is more whether SCO's apparently bone-headed lawyers will
believe it's genuine.

> What would you do if SCO's lawyers came knocking on your door and
> demanded you cease distributing ancient UNIX or derived products?

Yes, this is the point.

> Whilst you could probably prove the authenticity of the e-mail, this
> would cost real money - and SCO probably can afford to spend a lot
> more money than you can.

It's not clear how much money SCO has.

> The date of the e-mail may also be a crucial issue - since IBM would
> presumably have the right to use the code after SCO changed the code
> to a BSD license.

I am very sure that IBM has not put any UNIX code into Linux.  For one
thing, it's not their style, and in fact they keep the AIX and Linux
people very separate.  Last year I wrote a clone of AIX's JFS file
system on Linux for IBM.  This is the old JFS, not the JFS they
released under GPL.  I was not allowed to see the AIX source code, for
exactly the reasons of the complaint.  The only information I had were
the header files they distribute with the development system.

The AIX code wouldn't have helped, anyway.  Linux is not UNIX, as
anybody who's done kernel programming in both knows.  I had thought
that this childish superstition about the holiness of source code
would have been stamped out at the end of the last UNIX wars.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030311/935da425/attachment.sig>

From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au  Tue Mar 11 10:22:03 2003
From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:22:03 +1100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030310234548.GO94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <20030310234548.GO94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030311002203.GS90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>

On 2003-Mar-11 10:15:48 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at  8:15:18 +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>I think you mean me, not Warren.  Warren hasn't said anything yet.

Oops.  Sorry about that.  "My mind is going...  I can feel it, Dave"

>My concern is not whether it's genuine--I'm convinced it is.  My
>concern is more whether SCO's apparently bone-headed lawyers will
>believe it's genuine.

Taking the devil's advocate position, if my lawyers were convinced
that I'm made a particular statement, based solely on a piece of
e-mail given to them by my competition, I'd be in the market for
some new lawyers.

>> Whilst you could probably prove the authenticity of the e-mail, this
>> would cost real money - and SCO probably can afford to spend a lot
>> more money than you can.
>
>It's not clear how much money SCO has.

Probably more than you or I do...

>I am very sure that IBM has not put any UNIX code into Linux.

I'd be very surprised at this as well.  It would open a legal minefield.

Peter


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Tue Mar 11 11:14:44 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:14:44 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030311002203.GS90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
Message-ID: <000001c2e76b$9a93f560$e3c8580c@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
You guys will never guess where I first saw this issue raised.
Personally I don't think IBM would be as stupid as SCO wants them to
be. If anything SCO is looking at a wash of red ink, because Caldera
was actually doing badly in the Linux field, and SCO saw its own
profits waste away, after Linux took off, like a heard of elephants.

And for that matter, having read the PDF that contains the license
statement, twice now, I am convinced of one thing, okay two. SCO is
desperate for cash. And some idiot in their legal department thinks
suing IBM will help.

And those are only opinions mind you, nothing more.
Besides, I'm convinced SCO should just forget about the versions of
UNIX that we run on such programs as SIMH, and even E-11, and
sometimes on a real hardware.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of Peter Jeremy
> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 7:22 PM
> To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey
> Cc: UNIX Heritage Society
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
> 
> On 2003-Mar-11 10:15:48 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com>
wrote:
> >On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at  8:15:18 +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> >I think you mean me, not Warren.  Warren hasn't said anything yet.
> 
> Oops.  Sorry about that.  "My mind is going...  I can feel it, Dave"
> 
> >My concern is not whether it's genuine--I'm convinced it is.  My
> >concern is more whether SCO's apparently bone-headed lawyers will
> >believe it's genuine.
> 
> Taking the devil's advocate position, if my lawyers were convinced
> that I'm made a particular statement, based solely on a piece of
> e-mail given to them by my competition, I'd be in the market for
> some new lawyers.
> 
> >> Whilst you could probably prove the authenticity of the e-mail,
this
> >> would cost real money - and SCO probably can afford to spend a
lot
> >> more money than you can.
> >
> >It's not clear how much money SCO has.
> 
> Probably more than you or I do...
> 
> >I am very sure that IBM has not put any UNIX code into Linux.
> 
> I'd be very surprised at this as well.  It would open a legal
minefield.
> 
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Tue Mar 11 11:51:28 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:51:28 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <000001c2e76b$9a93f560$e3c8580c@who5>
References: <20030311002203.GS90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <000001c2e76b$9a93f560$e3c8580c@who5>
Message-ID: <20030311015128.GA95821@minnie.tuhs.org>

I've just read through the TUHS mail: SCO vs. IBM.

I think we're missing the point a bit. The Caldera license places the
UNIX research editions 1 to 7, and 32V, under a BSD-style license.
Later systems such as System III and System V are not covered.

Although the Caldera license helps protect the newer BSDs from license
infringement, SCO/Caldera can still sue anybody if they believe that
their IP from System III/System V and on has been violated.

IBM has a source license to System V and has contributed to Linux.
I think that this is the approach that SCO/Caldera are taking in the
lawsuit.

The BSDs are more immune here, unless BSDI or Apple also have a System V
source license. [ Er, um, given the existence of Apples A/UX, they probably
do. Ah, I should have kept my mouth shut :-) ]

So: I don't think the BSDs or the Unix Archive are under any immediate
threat. I agree with whoever that suggested that SCO/Caldera are doing
this as a means of raising revenue.

Just my $0.02 here.

	Warren


From grog at lemis.com  Tue Mar 11 11:59:39 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:29:39 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030311015128.GA95821@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <20030311002203.GS90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <000001c2e76b$9a93f560$e3c8580c@who5> <20030311015128.GA95821@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030311015939.GN45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at 11:51:28 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> I've just read through the TUHS mail: SCO vs. IBM.
>
> I think we're missing the point a bit. The Caldera license places
> the UNIX research editions 1 to 7, and 32V, under a BSD-style
> license.  Later systems such as System III and System V are not
> covered.

Yes, maybe you're missing the point.  My concern was that the Caldera
license has never been signed, and that they don't have anything about
it on their web site.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030311/e7e67af9/attachment.sig>

From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Tue Mar 11 13:51:04 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:51:04 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030311015939.GN45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <20030311002203.GS90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <000001c2e76b$9a93f560$e3c8580c@who5> <20030311015128.GA95821@minnie.tuhs.org> <20030311015939.GN45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030311035104.GA97079@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 12:29:39PM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> > I think we're missing the point a bit.
> 
> Yes, maybe you're missing the point.  My concern was that the Caldera
> license has never been signed, and that they don't have anything about
> it on their web site.
> Greg

Yes, that's true. I hadn't missed it, but I hadn't started to worry
about it yet. Wait till Uncle Caldera gives me a phone call .....

	Warren



From michael_davidson at pacbell.net  Tue Mar 11 14:11:20 2003
From: michael_davidson at pacbell.net (Michael Davidson)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:11:20 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
Message-ID: <008701c2e784$46186b60$e847030a@ca.caldera.com>

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au>
To: Jeffrey Sharp <jss at subatomix.com>
Cc: UNIX Heritage Society <tuhs at tuhs.org>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?


> On 2003-Mar-10 14:21:00 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp <jss at subatomix.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, March 9, 2003, Michael Davidson wrote:
> >> I will, however, ask for an "official" statement of SCO's current
position
> >> on "Ancient UNIX"
> >
> >But once they've released it under a BSD-style license, it is released.
They
> >simply can't unrelease it. They don't have to continue distributing it,
but
> >they can't stop me from doing what the license explicitly allows. So
their
> >current position WRT ancient UNIX may not mave much legal weight. IANAL,
> >TINLA.
>
> AFAIK, the only evidence we have that it is released under a BSD-style
> license is an e-mail allegedly from an authorised person within SCO.
> Warren has not been able to find an equivalent statement on their
> website.  I suspect Warren is concerned that they could claim it was
> never released - ie the e-mail is a faked/forged or the sender didn't
> have the authority to make the claims therein.
>

I can assure you that the email from Dion Johnson was and is genuine.
The release of "Ancient UNIX" under a BSD license was agreed to by
Ransom Love (then president and CEO of Caldera), Drew Spencer
(then CTO of Caldera), Dion, myself and others.

I realise that some people are concerned that they can no longer find
the "Ancient UNIX" license on the SCO web site - I wouldn't read too
much into that - the "Ancient UNIX" stuff was always tucked away in
an obscure corner - I suspect that the link to it just got lost when we
stopped doing free evaluation licenses for the current product.

Anyway, as I said, I will try to get an "official statement" about the
"Ancient UNIX" license by the end of the week - I expect that statement
will simply re-affirm what you already know - ie that it has been released
under a BSD license, and possibly re-emphasize the fact that System III,
and System V are *NOT* covered by that license.
(However, I am *not* in a position where I can make such a statement
on behalf on SCO which is why I'm afraid you will have to wait a few
days so that I can get you the "official" position).




From wgm at telus.net  Tue Mar 11 13:51:17 2003
From: wgm at telus.net (Wm. G. McGrath)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 19:51:17 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030310195117.06b5fae4.wgm@telus.net>

On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 11:51:47 +1030
"Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com> wrote:

>I'm sure I'm not the only person who sees SCO's recent legal
>activities with dismay. 

More and more I come to the conclusion that intellectual property is
a bad idea. Physical property fine, but intellectual
property/patents etc seems to be a get rich scheme for lawyers,
executives and investors. This latest exploit is just another proof
that information needs at least a limited amount of freedom - like
the human minds that create it.

	bill


From dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com  Tue Mar 11 15:25:40 2003
From: dmr at plan9.bell-labs.com (Dennis Ritchie)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:25:40 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
Message-ID: <3394dec0a229ed7a184b5282445bb41e@plan9.bell-labs.com>

A working link to the ancient-Unix license exists at

  http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html

This is a saved link; I didn't investigate how
to find it currently from a Caldera or SCO site.

In case anyone is interested, I retrieved
some fraction of the court papers from
the early 90s USL suit against BSDI and UCB.
The case seems in some ways similar to this
one.  They are at

 http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/bsdi/bsdisuit.html

In this one, USL pulled back after an injunction
was denied.  By the time the 1993 ruling was issued,
USL was being taken over by Novell.

	Dennis


From grog at lemis.com  Tue Mar 11 16:01:43 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:31:43 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <3394dec0a229ed7a184b5282445bb41e@plan9.bell-labs.com>
References: <3394dec0a229ed7a184b5282445bb41e@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Message-ID: <20030311060143.GQ45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at  0:25:40 -0500, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
> A working link to the ancient-Unix license exists at
>
>   http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html
>
> This is a saved link; I didn't investigate how
> to find it currently from a Caldera or SCO site.

This is the prior license.  It contains wording like:

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

That's not the BSD-like license under which they re-released the code
last year.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030311/0efb01f6/attachment.sig>

From wes.parish at paradise.net.nz  Tue Mar 11 07:52:21 2003
From: wes.parish at paradise.net.nz (Wesley Parish)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:52:21 +1300
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
Message-ID: <200303111052.21237.wes.parish@paradise.net.nz>

Well, the impression I got from IBM re: AIX and Linux's relationship, was that 
they were going to give AIX a Linux makeover so that they could maintain an 
apparently unified Un*xish shop - as far as AIX and Linux _are_ Un*ces, that 
is!

How that gets interpreted as importing Un*x trade secrets into Linux, I have 
no idea.

I also thought IBM was going to allow some of their mainframe high 
availability ideas to influence Linux - not through direct porting of the 
code - VM/ESA is apparently written in PL/I, and I doubt that most Linux 
programmers would touch that with a barge-pole.  And a waldo at a workplace 
on a planet on the other side of the galaxy.  Or universe.

I myself wanted to get some information on the internal structure - ie, the 
part that gets passed between the SFS client and the Reusable Kernel Server - 
of the VM/ESA Shared File System way back when, and was told in no uncertain 
terms, not to bother trying.

I don't see SCO has much chance of doing anything except causing a bit of 
unwelcome disruption and - I hope - getting bought out at bargain basement 
prices by IBM and getting the entire Un*x source tree BSDed or LGPLed to stop 
all this useless nonsense at the "source".  Or at the "sauce", to give it a 
rather appropriate spin.

Wesley Parish

On Tuesday 11 March 2003 12:45 pm, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
<snip>
>
> I am very sure that IBM has not put any UNIX code into Linux.  For one
> thing, it's not their style, and in fact they keep the AIX and Linux
> people very separate.  Last year I wrote a clone of AIX's JFS file
> system on Linux for IBM.  This is the old JFS, not the JFS they
> released under GPL.  I was not allowed to see the AIX source code, for
> exactly the reasons of the complaint.  The only information I had were
> the header files they distribute with the development system.
>
> The AIX code wouldn't have helped, anyway.  Linux is not UNIX, as
> anybody who's done kernel programming in both knows.  I had thought
> that this childish superstition about the holiness of source code
> would have been stamped out at the end of the last UNIX wars.
>
> Greg

-- 
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 arnold at skeeve.com  Tue Mar 11 18:43:20 2003
From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:43:20 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
Message-ID: <200303110843.h2B8hKtx002312@localhost.localdomain>

Can someone clarify for me how Caldera fits in the picture?  I thought
SCO sold Unix to Caldera?  It was Caldera that did the BSD-ing of ancient
Unix.

FWIW I too paid $100 for an ancient Unix license, and I've got the System III
stuff that licensees had access to.

Thanks,

Arnold


From sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de  Tue Mar 11 19:44:06 2003
From: sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de (Sven Mascheck)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:44:06 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <008701c2e784$46186b60$e847030a@ca.caldera.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <008701c2e784$46186b60$e847030a@ca.caldera.com>
Message-ID: <20030311094406.GP16218@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>

On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 08:11:20PM -0800, Michael Davidson wrote:

> I realise that some people are concerned that they can no longer find
> the "Ancient UNIX" license on the SCO web site - I wouldn't read too
> much into that - the "Ancient UNIX" stuff was always tucked away in
> an obscure corner - I suspect that the link to it just got lost when we
> stopped doing free evaluation licenses for the current product.

Concerning the former, "strictly educational" license:
It doesn't seem to be linked, but is still available at
<http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html>
It's functional and pointing to downloadable source.

Sven


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Mar 12 01:40:36 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:40:36 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030311094406.GP16218@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>
Message-ID: <001601c2e7e4$9cb89f20$27c7580c@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
Well if anyone else is interested in my opinions, the pages that
originate at that link, make a reference to the code that resides at
Warren's repository, it even calls it by name. A proper one even.

So, I'm in the process of downloading the contents that I am
interested in, in case the site gets pulled down. I know everything
will still exist on Warren's site.

I suspect this will get settled out of court. And I still think SCO
should just give it up, and place everything except their current
products in the public domain. That is put what we run, and what they
are concerned about in that legal black hole, and find a public
administrator who knows computers to manage it.. 
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of Sven Mascheck
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 4:44 AM
> To: UNIX Heritage Society
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
> 
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 08:11:20PM -0800, Michael Davidson wrote:
> 
> > I realise that some people are concerned that they can no longer
find
> > the "Ancient UNIX" license on the SCO web site - I wouldn't read
too
> > much into that - the "Ancient UNIX" stuff was always tucked away
in
> > an obscure corner - I suspect that the link to it just got lost
when we
> > stopped doing free evaluation licenses for the current product.
> 
> Concerning the former, "strictly educational" license:
> It doesn't seem to be linked, but is still available at
> <http://shop.caldera.com/caldera/ancient.html>
> It's functional and pointing to downloadable source.
> 
> Sven
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



From grog at lemis.com  Wed Mar 12 08:45:00 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:15:00 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <200303110843.h2B8hKtx002312@localhost.localdomain>
References: <200303110843.h2B8hKtx002312@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20030311224500.GV45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at 10:43:20 +0200, Aharon Robbins wrote:
> Can someone clarify for me how Caldera fits in the picture?  I thought
> SCO sold Unix to Caldera?  It was Caldera that did the BSD-ing of ancient
> Unix.

Caldera changed its name (back) to SCO about last August.  It's the
same company.  Take a look at http://www.caldera.com.

> FWIW I too paid $100 for an ancient Unix license, and I've got the
> System III stuff that licensees had access to.

Hmmm.  That's a point.  Does the Ancient UNIX license cover more than
last year's release?

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030312/e1c6b44d/attachment.sig>

From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 12 09:27:13 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:27:13 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <20030311224500.GV45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <200303110843.h2B8hKtx002312@localhost.localdomain> <20030311224500.GV45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030311232713.GA7295@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 09:15:00AM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> > FWIW I too paid $100 for an ancient Unix license, and I've got the
> > System III stuff that licensees had access to.
> 
> Hmmm.  That's a point.  Does the Ancient UNIX license cover more than
> last year's release?
> Greg

The US$100 SCO Ancient UNIX license had this clause:

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

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

    [ http://minnie.tuhs.org/PUPS/sco_license.txt ]

This implies that System III on the PDP11 is covered by this license,
as SCO has the legal rights to System III and it is a SUCCESSOR
OPERATING SYSTEM.

The BSD-style Caldera license has this clause:

   The source code for which Caldera International, Inc. grants rights are
   limited to the following UNIX Operating Systems that operate on the
   16-Bit PDP-11 CPU and early versions of the 32-Bit UNIX Operating System,
   with specific exclusion of UNIX System III and UNIX System V and
   successor operating systems:

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

   [ http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf ]

So the new license specifically prohibits System III, whereas the Ancient UNIX
license implicitly permitted System III.

	Warren


From grog at lemis.com  Wed Mar 12 09:48:33 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:18:33 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <20030311232713.GA7295@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <200303110843.h2B8hKtx002312@localhost.localdomain> <20030311224500.GV45912@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030311232713.GA7295@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030311234833.GA78280@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Wednesday, 12 March 2003 at  9:27:13 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 09:15:00AM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>>> FWIW I too paid $100 for an ancient Unix license, and I've got the
>>> System III stuff that licensees had access to.
>>
>> Hmmm.  That's a point.  Does the Ancient UNIX license cover more than
>> last year's release?
>> Greg
>
> The US$100 SCO Ancient UNIX license had this clause:
>
>  ...
>
> So the new license specifically prohibits System III, whereas the
> Ancient UNIX license implicitly permitted System III.

Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030312/9ac73d3b/attachment.sig>

From jss at subatomix.com  Wed Mar 12 14:05:56 2003
From: jss at subatomix.com (Jeffrey Sharp)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:05:56 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <001601c2e7e4$9cb89f20$27c7580c@who5>
References: <001601c2e7e4$9cb89f20$27c7580c@who5>
Message-ID: <96925989.20030311220556@subatomix.com>

On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, Gregg C Levine wrote:
> I suspect this will get settled out of court. And I still think SCO should
> just give it up, and place everything except their current products in the
> public domain.

A large number of people on Slashdot are saying that SCO's market
capitalization is around $26 million. If that is correct, settling out of
court may involve more traders than lawyers. This may simply be SCO's exit
strategy, designed to get the most money for its investors. And of course,
if I read it on Slashdot it must be true.

-- 
Jeffrey Sharp



From jss at subatomix.com  Wed Mar 12 14:34:47 2003
From: jss at subatomix.com (Jeffrey Sharp)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:34:47 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <3394dec0a229ed7a184b5282445bb41e@plan9.bell-labs.com>
References: <3394dec0a229ed7a184b5282445bb41e@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Message-ID: <218657128.20030311223447@subatomix.com>

On Monday, March 10, 2003, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
> In case anyone is interested, I retrieved some fraction of the court
> papers from the early 90s USL suit against BSDI and UCB. ... USL pulled
> back after an injunction was denied. By the time the 1993 ruling was
> issued, USL was being taken over by Novell.

It seems that all descendants of 4.4BSD-Lite are immune to SCO, due to the
terms of the settlement. If you're in a hurry, skip to the last paragraph.

Source: Marshall Kirk McKusick, "Twenty Years of Berkeley Unix: From
AT&T-Owned to Freely Redistributable".
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/kirkmck.html

----- BEGIN -----

In addition to the groups organized to freely redistribute systems built
around the Networking Release 2 tape, a company, Berkeley Software Design,
Incorporated (BSDI), was formed to develop and distribute a commercially
supported version of the code. (More information about BSDI can be found at
http://www.bsdi.com.) Like the other groups, they started by adding the six
missing files that Bill Jolitz had written for his 386/BSD release. BSDI
began selling their system including both source and binaries in January
1992 for $995. They began running advertisements touting their 99% discount
over the price charged for System V source plus binary systems. Interested
readers were told to call 1-800-ITS-Unix.

Shortly after BSDI began their sales campaign, they received a letter from
Unix System Laboratories (USL) (a mostly-owned subsidiary of AT&T spun off
to develop and sell Unix). The letter demanded that they stop promoting
their product as Unix and in particular that they stop using the deceptive
phone number. Although the phone number was promptly dropped and the
advertisements changed to explain that the product was not Unix, USL was
still unhappy and filed suit to enjoin BSDI from selling their product. The
suit alleged that the BSDI product contained proprietary USL code and trade
secrets. USL sought to get an injunction to halt BSDI's sales until the
lawsuit was resolved, claiming that they would suffer irreparable harm from
the loss of their trade secrets if the BSDI distributions continued.

At the preliminary hearing for the injunction, BSDI contended that they were
simply using the sources being freely distributed by the University of
California plus six additional files. They were willing to discuss the
content of any of the six added files, but did not believe that they should
be held responsible for the files being distributed by the University of
California. The judge agreed with BSDI's argument and told USL that they
would have to restate their complaint based solely on the six files or he
would dismiss it. Recognizing that they would have a hard time making a case
from just the six files, USL decided to refile the suit against both BSDI
and the University of California. As before, USL requested an injunction on
the shipping of Networking Release 2 from the University and on the BSDI
products.

With the impending injunction hearing just a few short weeks away,
preparation began in earnest. All the members of the CSRG were deposed as
were nearly everyone employed at BSDI. Briefs, counter-briefs, and
counter-counter-briefs flew back and forth between the lawyers. Keith Bostic
and I personally had to write several hundred pages of material that found
its way into various briefs.

In December 1992, Dickinson R. Debevoise, a United States District Judge in
New Jersey, heard the arguments for the injunction. Although judges usually
rule on injunction requests immediately, he decided to take it under
advisement. On a Friday about six weeks later, he issued a forty-page
opinion in which he denied the injunction and threw out all but two of the
complaints. The remaining two complaints were narrowed to recent copyrights
and the possibility of the loss of trade secrets. He also suggested that the
matter should be heard in a state court system before being heard in the
federal court system.

The University of California took the hint and rushed into California state
court the following Monday morning with a counter-suit against USL. By
filing first in California, the University had established the locale of any
further state court action. Constitutional law requires all state filing to
be done in a single state to prevent a litigant with deep pockets from
bleeding an opponent dry by filing fifty cases against them in every state.
The result was that if USL wanted to take any action against the University
in state courts, they would be forced to do so in California rather than in
their home state of New Jersey.

The University's suit claimed that USL had failed in their obligation to
provide due credit to the University for the use of BSD code in System V as
required by the license that they had signed with the University. If the
claim were found to be valid, the University asked that USL be forced to
reprint all their documentation with the appropriate due credit added, to
notify all their licensees of their oversight, and to run full-page
advertisements in major publications such as The Wall Street Journal and
Fortune magazine notifying the business world of their inadvertent
oversight.

Soon after the filing in state court, USL was bought from AT&T by Novell.
The CEO of Novell, Ray Noorda, stated publicly that he would rather compete
in the marketplace than in court. By the summer of 1993, settlement talks
had started. Unfortunately, the two sides had dug in so deep that the talks
proceed slowly. With some further prodding by Ray Noorda on the USL side,
many of the sticking points were removed and a settlement was finally
reached in January 1994. The result was that three files were removed from
the 18,000 that made up Networking Release 2, and a number of minor changes
were made to other files. In addition, the University agreed to add USL
copyrights to about 70 files, although those files continued to be freely
redistributed.

The newly blessed release was called 4.4BSD-Lite and was released in June
1994 under terms identical to those used for the Networking releases.
Specifically, the terms allow free redistribution in source and binary form
subject only to the constraint that the University copyrights remain intact
and that the University receive credit when others use the code.
Simultaneously, the complete system was released as 4.4BSD-Encumbered, which
still required recipients to have a USL source license.

The lawsuit settlement also stipulated that USL would not sue any
organization using 4.4BSD-Lite as the base for their system. So, all the BSD
groups that were doing releases at that time, BSDI, NetBSD, and FreeBSD, had
to restart their code base with the 4.4BSD-Lite sources into which they then
merged their enhancements and improvements. While this reintegration caused
a short-term delay in the development of the various BSD systems, it was a
blessing in disguise since it forced all the divergent groups to
resynchronize with the three years of development that had occurred at the
CSRG since the release of Networking Release 2.

----- END -----

-- 
Jeffrey Sharp



From jss at subatomix.com  Wed Mar 12 14:46:04 2003
From: jss at subatomix.com (Jeffrey Sharp)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:46:04 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
 <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com>
 <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com>
 <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
Message-ID: <1099333580.20030311224604@subatomix.com>

On Monday, March 10, 2003, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> The date of the e-mail may also be a crucial issue - since IBM would
> presumably have the right to use the code after SCO changed the code to a
> BSD license.

Does the suit involve code xor concepts? If the patents are on concepts,
then any sufficiently similar implementation might infringe upon the patent,
no matter how untainted its code is. This case has the potential to go
horribly, horribly awry if a stupid judge sits on the bench.

-- 
Jeffrey Sharp



From grog at lemis.com  Wed Mar 12 15:03:12 2003
From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:33:12 +1030
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <1099333580.20030311224604@subatomix.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <1099333580.20030311224604@subatomix.com>
Message-ID: <20030312050312.GU78280@wantadilla.lemis.com>

On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at 22:46:04 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
> On Monday, March 10, 2003, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> The date of the e-mail may also be a crucial issue - since IBM would
>> presumably have the right to use the code after SCO changed the code to a
>> BSD license.
>
> Does the suit involve code xor concepts? If the patents are on concepts,
> then any sufficiently similar implementation might infringe upon the patent,
> no matter how untainted its code is. This case has the potential to go
> horribly, horribly awry if a stupid judge sits on the bench.

I this subthread is off the mark.  I'm personally convinced that IBM
never used any licensed UNIX technology in Linux.

Greg
--
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20030312/7f3fa100/attachment.sig>

From lars at nocrew.org  Wed Mar 12 16:43:34 2003
From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff)
Date: 12 Mar 2003 07:43:34 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <20030311224500.GV45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <200303110843.h2B8hKtx002312@localhost.localdomain>
	<20030311224500.GV45912@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <85smttgk4p.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

"Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com> writes:
> On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at 10:43:20 +0200, Aharon Robbins wrote:
> > Can someone clarify for me how Caldera fits in the picture?  I
> > thought SCO sold Unix to Caldera?  It was Caldera that did the
> > BSD-ing of ancient Unix.
> Caldera changed its name (back) to SCO about last August.  It's the
> same company.  Take a look at http://www.caldera.com.

This message explains the history of SCO in more detail:
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=56649&cid=5483348

-- 
Lars Brinkhoff,         Services for Unix, Linux, GCC, PDP-10, HTTP
Brinkhoff Consulting    http://www.brinkhoff.se/


From arnold at skeeve.com  Wed Mar 12 22:14:01 2003
From: arnold at skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:14:01 +0200
Subject: [TUHS] documment it and call it a feature
Message-ID: <200303121214.h2CCE1du006190@localhost.localdomain>

Sigh. This is the response on gcc and `conj.' Terms of
disgust elided, since the sentiments are undoubtedly shared.

Arnold

> Date: 11 Mar 2003 15:07:13 -0000
> To: arnold at skeeve.com, gcc-bugs at gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs at gcc.gnu.org,
>    nobody at gcc.gnu.org
> From: bangerth at dealii.org
>
> Synopsis: gcc 3.2.2 recognizes complex functions even without complex.h
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> State-Changed-By: bangerth
> State-Changed-When: Tue Mar 11 15:07:12 2003
> State-Changed-Why:
>     This is a gnu extension. The builtin conj function is switched
>     off if you use -ansi or -std=c89.
>     
>     W.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10025


From norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca  Thu Mar 13 01:07:45 2003
From: norman at nose.cs.utoronto.ca (Norman Wilson)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:07:45 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] documment it and call it a feature
Message-ID: <200303121508.h2CF8In16666@minnie.tuhs.org>

Aharon Robbins:

  Sigh. This is the response on gcc and `conj.' Terms of
  disgust elided, since the sentiments are undoubtedly shared.

This list isn't the right place for a general discussion of
the matter, but I cannot resist remarking that this is one
of the best arguments I have ever seen in support of gnu
control.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON


From peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au  Thu Mar 13 06:31:39 2003
From: peter.jeremy at alcatel.com.au (Peter Jeremy)
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:31:39 +1100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030312050312.GU78280@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com> <002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com> <671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com> <20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> <1099333580.20030311224604@subatomix.com> <20030312050312.GU78280@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030312203139.GE90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>

On 2003-Mar-12 15:33:12 +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, 11 March 2003 at 22:46:04 -0600, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
>> Does the suit involve code xor concepts? If the patents are on concepts,
>> then any sufficiently similar implementation might infringe upon the patent,
>> no matter how untainted its code is. This case has the potential to go
>> horribly, horribly awry if a stupid judge sits on the bench.

There's no reference anywhere in SCO's suit to patents.  The suit is
based on misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of contract and
unfair competition.

The "misappropriation of trade secrets" and "breach of contract" seems
to be based on the premise that since AIX is based on UNIX, _all_ of
AIX is therefore covered by the terms of IBM's source code license for
UNIX.  There are regular whinges about the viral nature of GPL, but
this is the first time I've seen someone claim the the UNIX license
was viral - and the USL case pretty well demonstrated the opposite.
4.4BSD-Lite is clear evidence that it's possible to take a UNIX
derivative, developed with full access to UNIX source code, and
produce a product that is not covered by UNIX licenses.

The basis of the "unfair competition" seems to be that IBM can afford
more staff than SCO can.  IBM's had plenty of practise at defending
itself against unfair competition claims in the past...

>I this subthread is off the mark.  I'm personally convinced that IBM
>never used any licensed UNIX technology in Linux.

Agreed.  I don't see that SCO has a leg to stand on.  The only way I
can see for them to win would be a combination of an incompetent
judge and managing to bamboozle a not-technically-savvy jury.

IANAL, TINLA etc

Peter


From wgm at telus.net  Thu Mar 13 06:33:26 2003
From: wgm at telus.net (Wm. G. McGrath)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:33:26 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] SCO sues IBM?
In-Reply-To: <20030312050312.GU78280@wantadilla.lemis.com>
References: <20030310012147.GB94647@wantadilla.lemis.com>
	<002501c2e6b2$f8b6ec60$ed8ca140@ca.caldera.com>
	<671020867.20030310142100@subatomix.com>
	<20030310211518.GL90290@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
	<1099333580.20030311224604@subatomix.com>
	<20030312050312.GU78280@wantadilla.lemis.com>
Message-ID: <20030312123326.788f4fff.wgm@telus.net>

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 15:33:12 +1030
"Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog at lemis.com> wrote:

>> Does the suit involve code xor concepts? If the patents are on
>> concepts, then any sufficiently similar implementation might
>> infringe upon the patent, no matter how untainted its code is.
>> This case has the potential to go horribly, horribly awry if a
>> stupid judge sits on the bench.
>
>I this subthread is off the mark.  I'm personally convinced that
>IBM never used any licensed UNIX technology in Linux.

Unfortunately, truth and morals often don't count in court. It's
what your lawyers can prove. That's why SCO engaged David Boies.
They want to win - just like in the Microsoft case - a true
miscarriage of justice.

Much will indeed depend on the judge. There isn't a lot of precedent
to support open source and public interest software, but there is a
lot to support patent and copyright. It will be difficult for a
senior citizen (the judge) to understand computers and free
software, let alone the interaction between IBM and the community.

	bill


From wgm at telus.net  Thu Mar 13 06:45:59 2003
From: wgm at telus.net (Wm. G. McGrath)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:45:59 -0800
Subject: [TUHS] Linux Journal article (Doc Searles) on SCO suit
Message-ID: <20030312124559.7be92c76.wgm@telus.net>

Hi all,

Some will be interested to read Doc Searles take on the SCO suit
here:

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6706

	bill


From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG  Tue Mar 18 05:18:15 2003
From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 03 11:18:15 PST
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
Message-ID: <0303171918.AA01260@ivan.Harhan.ORG>

Hi there,

I remember seeing in the Unix Archive a few years ago (back when the $100
licenses just came out and it was called PUPS Archive) some Russian Ancient
UNIX stuff, some things contributed to the UNIX community by the early Russian
UNIX users (on Soviet PDP-11s). However, I am now looking for it and cannot
find it. Would anyone have a pointer?

I am trying to russify my flagship UNIX (4.3BSD-Quasijarus) and I'm adding/
fixing 8-bit support in various parts of the system, and I got stuck on ex/vi.
The sucker just won't handle 8-bit chars. Since my job is to maintain Ancient
UNIX (my flavor thereof) rather than replace it, replacing the original ex/vi
with one of the modern reimplementations is not an option. I need to massage
8-bit support into the existing original Berkeley ex/vi with as few changes as
possible.

A friend of mine told me that Back in The Days the first UNIX users in the then
USSR were running patched (russified) 2.xBSD on Soviet PDP-11s and had KOI-8
for Russian. Since the flagship editor on <any>BSD is ex/vi, this makes me
think that those early Russian users used it and thus their patches
accomplished just what I need. And so I'm looking for those patches. TIA for
any help,

MS


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Tue Mar 18 10:26:15 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:26:15 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
In-Reply-To: <0303171918.AA01260@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
References: <0303171918.AA01260@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
Message-ID: <20030318002615.GA4329@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 11:18:15AM -0800, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> I am trying to russify my flagship UNIX (4.3BSD-Quasijarus) and I'm adding/
> fixing 8-bit support in various parts of the system, and I got stuck on ex/vi.
> The sucker just won't handle 8-bit chars. Since my job is to maintain Ancient
> UNIX (my flavor thereof) rather than replace it, replacing the original ex/vi
> with one of the modern reimplementations is not an option. I need to massage
> 8-bit support into the existing original Berkeley ex/vi with as few changes as
> possible.
> 
> A friend of mine told me that Back in The Days the first UNIX users in the then
> USSR were running patched (russified) 2.xBSD on Soviet PDP-11s and had KOI-8
> for Russian. Since the flagship editor on <any>BSD is ex/vi, this makes me
> think that those early Russian users used it and thus their patches
> accomplished just what I need. And so I'm looking for those patches. TIA for
> any help,
> MS

I have a thing called Demos in a hidden section of the archive, which is
a modified 7th Edition (plus other things?) from Russia. I've hidden it as
the legal status is unclear :-) I'm happy to hand it out to individual
requestors, though. However, I can't find a vi(1) in there:

/usr/Hidden_PUPS/Miscfiles/Russian: du -a | grep vi
1       ./cmd/TUVWXYZ/vipw.sh,v.gz
1       ./cmd/comint/Environment/README.gz
2       ./cmd/comint/Environment/termcap.gz
2       ./cmd/comint/Environment/tuner.gz
3       ./cmd/comint/Environment/minihelp.DEMOS.gz
9       ./cmd/comint/Environment
1       ./cmd/uucp/L-devices.gz
11      ./sys/dev/RCS/video.c,v.gz
6       ./sys/dev/RCS/vikey.c,v.gz
7       ./sys/dev/video.c.gz
1       ./sys/include/video.h.gz
3       ./sys/stand/libsa/RCS/video.c,v.gz
2       ./sys/stand/libsa/video.c.gz

and a grep on `ex' gives nothing either.

	Warren



From sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de  Tue Mar 18 10:52:30 2003
From: sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de (Sven Mascheck)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:52:30 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
In-Reply-To: <20030318002615.GA4329@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <0303171918.AA01260@ivan.Harhan.ORG> <20030318002615.GA4329@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030318005229.GA13935@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>

Warren Toomey wrote:
> Michael Sokolov wrote:

>> I'm adding/fixing 8-bit support in various parts of the system, and
>> I got stuck on ex/vi.
>
> I have a thing called Demos in a hidden section of the archive, which
> is a modified 7th Edition (plus other things?) from Russia. [...]
> However, I can't find a vi(1) in there

Then the following might be an option, /UnixArchive/Applications/Ritter_Vi/

"This is basically ex/vi 3.7, 6/7/85, from the 2.11BSD distribution"
"A larger addition is the ability to handle ISO character sets."

(recent development continued on <http://ex-vi.berlios.de/>)

Sven


From szigi at ik.bme.hu  Tue Mar 18 18:12:32 2003
From: szigi at ik.bme.hu (SZIGETI Szabolcs)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:12:32 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
References: <0303171918.AA01260@ivan.Harhan.ORG> <20030318002615.GA4329@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <003501c2ed26$20012000$26f34298@ik.bme.hu>

> A friend of mine told me that Back in The Days the first UNIX users in the
then
> USSR were running patched (russified) 2.xBSD on Soviet PDP-11s and had
KOI-8
> for Russian. Since the flagship editor on <any>BSD is ex/vi, this makes me
> think that those early Russian users used it and thus their patches

Hi,

I've got a story about this, which happened in the early '80s, int the then
communist Hungary. A friend of mine worked at the university as a sysadmin,
they were using Russian and Hungarian made PDP 11 clones, and mostly 6th ed.
Unix. (Incidentally, I wish once someone wrote the history of how the
Eastern Block countries managed to clone western machines and get software
for it. I've heard a lot of fascionating stories, involving some really
genious work, which of course the Western countries didn't appreciate at all
then.)

One day, some really important and secret people come from the interior
ministry, or military, with a tape, which they wanted to transfer to an
other tape, and only the university had such a tape drive which could read
the original. Well, the sysadmins realized, that this is some important
stuff (BOFHs existed here also :-), so while one kept the officials
occupied, the other went into the machine room, and hacked the device
driver, so that the tape would secretly be copied to disk.

They started the transfer, under close supervision, so that no other tape
copies were done, and so on. When the people left, they examined what they
had. It was a Russian port of the 7th edition, only maybe a couple of years
after 7th ed. were created. So they concluded that all the COCOM and other
export control regulations weren't really effective :-)

Szabolcs



From ak at synflood.at  Wed Mar 19 03:52:05 2003
From: ak at synflood.at (Andreas Krennmair)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:52:05 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
In-Reply-To: <003501c2ed26$20012000$26f34298@ik.bme.hu>
Message-ID: <54DDD708-596A-11D7-8EAB-000A956657C6@synflood.at>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, at 09:12  Uhr, SZIGETI Szabolcs wrote:
> Unix. (Incidentally, I wish once someone wrote the history of how the
> Eastern Block countries managed to clone western machines and get 
> software
> for it. I've heard a lot of fascionating stories, involving some really
> genious work, which of course the Western countries didn't appreciate 
> at all
> then.)

I think the "Communications of the ACM" had some articles about 
computing in the Eastern Block in June 1991.

> had. It was a Russian port of the 7th edition, only maybe a couple of 
> years
> after 7th ed. were created. So they concluded that all the COCOM and 
> other
> export control regulations weren't really effective :-)

Are you aware of the "KGB hackers" case in Germany? German hackers 
broke into systems, downloaded all data they could get, went to East 
Berlin, and sold it to the Russians. There's a nice German movie about 
the whole case, called "23". I don't know if it's been synchronized to 
other languages, but that movie is really worth watching. Full of 
historic hardware. :-)

Regards,
Andreas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Darwin)

iQEXAwUBPndc2Cw98mPKmtL6FAKE4AP8CwG/IGdgZPzZRCKA4IDvYjJZXiwm8nun
OeTt7vW0tmWV21VMMk4+PRucZ6Zn29I0RVQ4mJaVPhbcHXVKjs8+OqbxF/aJ2Tws
pbxlMIv6nK0dIkpYC8cJdePHXyXq/XTz+JIiKOGEo93NmW/+kU881hQuJIwqdCgn
aQNtC+2HOzQD/1uqejTW9dh/fi5/ZrffoxYIDU6Ub7H7Bhne8Yxo5WthFUkzI/Y1
zzH9UUPSPrRUixjKDl8O27QarOOexKWmSAGW0b+ZdWNT6pfhqQQyW3o46jTcKRcs
52/LIMxQZZbx6IJmWLsWQXLMeyzcrVFghvPAdsD19YcJeVm6am04Fj83
=OpXR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



From msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG  Wed Mar 19 06:25:30 2003
From: msokolov at ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 03 12:25:30 PST
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
Message-ID: <0303182025.AA01836@ivan.Harhan.ORG>

Sven Mascheck <sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de> wrote:

> Then the following might be an option, /UnixArchive/Applications/Ritter_Vi/
>
> "This is basically ex/vi 3.7, 6/7/85, from the 2.11BSD distribution"
> "A larger addition is the ability to handle ISO character sets."
>
> (recent development continued on <http://ex-vi.berlios.de/>)

Where can I get the early versions of this effort?
http://ex-vi.berlios.de/Changes lists at the very bottom:

: Release 31/05/00
: * String extraction using mkstr and xstr is not longer be done.
: * An ANSI C preprocessor may be used.
: * Changes of symbol names due to collisions on newer systems.
: * Fixed a null pointer reference in ex_tty.c.
: * Included the 2.11BSD termcap in a subdirectory. Ex could use any
:   termcap library, however, that does not use malloc().
: * Support of eight bit characters excluding the range 0200 to 0237 is
:   enabled with -DISO8859_1. It does not include the regular expression code,
:   but otherwise works well in practice with the ISO-8859-1 character set.

And all the newer stuff up to late 2002 is porting to "modern UNIX". But I
don't want "modern UNIX", I'm running the original UNIX in its virgin form, I
just want the 8-bit fix. The only files downloadable from ex-vi.berlios.de are
2002 releases and in the UNIX Archive Applications/Ritter_Vi contains only a
tiny README file pointing to http://ex-vi.berlios.de/. Where are the old 2000
versions?

MS


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 19 07:52:37 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 07:52:37 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
In-Reply-To: <0303182025.AA01836@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
References: <0303182025.AA01836@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
Message-ID: <20030318215237.GA13704@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 12:25:30PM -0800, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> And all the newer stuff up to late 2002 is porting to "modern UNIX". But I
> don't want "modern UNIX", I'm running the original UNIX in its virgin form, I
> just want the 8-bit fix. The only files downloadable from ex-vi.berlios.de are
> 2002 releases and in the UNIX Archive Applications/Ritter_Vi contains only a
> tiny README file pointing to http://ex-vi.berlios.de/. Where are the old 2000
> versions?
> MS

I have ritter_vi.tar.gz, size 211579, date 2000/06/09 on a backup CD of the
Unix archive at work. I'll put it back into the Unix Archive in the
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/Ritter_Vi  directory when I get
in to work in a few hours.

	Warren


From cpg at aladdin.de  Wed Mar 19 08:36:11 2003
From: cpg at aladdin.de (Christian Groessler)
Date: 18 Mar 2003 23:36:11 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
Message-ID: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>

Hi,

On 03/12/2003 10:18:33 AM ZE10B "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" wrote:
>
>On Wednesday, 12 March 2003 at  9:27:13 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
>>
>> So the new license specifically prohibits System III, whereas the
>> Ancient UNIX license implicitly permitted System III.
>
>Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)

Is System III somewhere in the archive for us $100 license owners?

regards,
chris



From sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de  Wed Mar 19 08:48:16 2003
From: sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de (Sven Mascheck)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 23:48:16 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
In-Reply-To: <0303182025.AA01836@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
References: <0303182025.AA01836@ivan.Harhan.ORG>
Message-ID: <20030318224816.GF13935@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>

Michael Sokolov wrote:
> Sven Mascheck wrote:

> > /UnixArchive/Applications/Ritter_Vi/
>
> [..] in the UNIX Archive Applications/Ritter_Vi contains only
> a tiny README file pointing to http://ex-vi.berlios.de/.
> Where are the old 2000 versions?

Interesting, a desynchronization: ftp.tuhs.org only lists that README,

ftp.cs.tu-berlin.de/pub/bsd/UnixArchive still also lists
README.NEW . . . . . . . .  May 31  2000      2k
READ_ME. . . . . . . . . .  Dec 10  1994      1k
ex-010521.tar.gz . . . . .  Jul 26  2001    186k
ritter_vi.tar.gz . . . . .  Jun  9  2000    207k

(And in ritter_vi the 8bit changes are surrounded by "#ifdef ISO".)

Sven


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Mar 19 08:52:00 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:52:00 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
Message-ID: <000601c2eda0$fd838380$27a3580c@who5>

Hello from Gregg C Levine
Have you been following all of the messages in that thread? A link was
posted, that provided an annoying click through license, which would
then provide the person who did click, with access to such items as
SYSIII, and V5, and V6, and V7. Also some odd bits, as well. And if
not, it should be in the archive. Also I can provide it.
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of Christian Groessler
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 5:36 PM
> To: The Unix Heritage Society
> Cc: cpg at aladdin.de
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/12/2003 10:18:33 AM ZE10B "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" wrote:
> >
> >On Wednesday, 12 March 2003 at  9:27:13 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> >>
> >> So the new license specifically prohibits System III, whereas the
> >> Ancient UNIX license implicitly permitted System III.
> >
> >Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)
> 
> Is System III somewhere in the archive for us $100 license owners?
> 
> regards,
> chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



From sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de  Wed Mar 19 08:54:51 2003
From: sven.mascheck at student.uni-ulm.de (Sven Mascheck)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 23:54:51 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Russian Ancient UNIX stuff in the Archive
In-Reply-To: <54DDD708-596A-11D7-8EAB-000A956657C6@synflood.at>
References: <003501c2ed26$20012000$26f34298@ik.bme.hu> <54DDD708-596A-11D7-8EAB-000A956657C6@synflood.at>
Message-ID: <20030318225451.GG13935@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>

Andreas Krennmair wrote:

> Are you aware of the "KGB hackers" case in Germany? German hackers 
> broke into systems, downloaded all data they could get, went to East 
> Berlin, and sold it to the Russians. There's a nice German movie about 
> the whole case, called "23".

...just based on The Cockoo's egg from Clifford Stoll.
One might argue about the amount of truth in the movie version.
And: AFAIK nobody knows what they had found/sold exactly...

> Full of historic hardware. :-)

That's another point certainly.


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 19 09:08:58 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:08:58 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] Ritter vi from year 2000
In-Reply-To: <20030318215237.GA13704@minnie.tuhs.org>
References: <0303182025.AA01836@ivan.Harhan.ORG> <20030318215237.GA13704@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <20030318230858.GA15253@minnie.tuhs.org>

> I have ritter_vi.tar.gz, size 211579, date 2000/06/09 on a backup CD of the
> Unix archive at work. I'll put it back into the Unix Archive in the
> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Applications/Ritter_Vi  directory when I get
> in to work in a few hours.

It's there now.

	Warren


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 19 09:10:12 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:10:12 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
References: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
Message-ID: <20030318231012.GC15253@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 11:36:11PM +0100, Christian Groessler wrote:
> >Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)
> Is System III somewhere in the archive for us $100 license owners?
> chris

Yes, send me a private e-mail and we can work out a transfer process.

	Warren


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 19 09:15:03 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:15:03 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SysIII from SCO/Caldera
Message-ID: <20030318231503.GD15253@minnie.tuhs.org>

8-)

Looks like Caldera are quite happy for you to obtain SysIII without signing
any license agreement.

http://www2.caldera.com/offers/ancient001/sysIII/

This is just a FYI. You would have to consider your legal position if
you did decide to download it.

	Warren


From jsnader at ix.netcom.com  Wed Mar 19 09:22:15 2003
From: jsnader at ix.netcom.com (Jon Snader)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:22:15 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
References: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
Message-ID: <20030318232215.GA34435@ix.netcom.com>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 11:36:11PM +0100, Christian Groessler wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/12/2003 10:18:33 AM ZE10B "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" wrote:
> >
> >On Wednesday, 12 March 2003 at  9:27:13 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> >>
> >> So the new license specifically prohibits System III, whereas the
> >> Ancient UNIX license implicitly permitted System III.
> >
> >Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)
> 
> Is System III somewhere in the archive for us $100 license owners?
> 

System III was available even with the free Ancient UNIX license.
It was still available on the Caldera/SCO site last week, but now
I am getting 404s.  In any event, anyone with one of the old PUPS
password should legally be able to get it from PUPS if nowhere
else.

Jon Snader


From hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net  Wed Mar 19 09:29:44 2003
From: hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:29:44 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <20030318231012.GC15253@minnie.tuhs.org>
Message-ID: <000701c2eda6$422a07c0$27a3580c@who5>

Hello again from Gregg C Levine
Warren, ah, I think I missed something someplace. It happens that I
was able to download it, after clicking through the license that was
presented several days ago, when the argument regarding the SCO
lawsuit was part of a thread. Does this mean that I didn't have to go
through this?
-------------------
Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon at worldnet.att.net
------------------------------------------------------------
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luke."  Obi-Wan Kenobi
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi )
(This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org [mailto:tuhs-admin at minnie.tuhs.org]
On
> Behalf Of Warren Toomey
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 6:10 PM
> To: The Unix Heritage Society
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 11:36:11PM +0100, Christian Groessler wrote:
> > >Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)
> > Is System III somewhere in the archive for us $100 license owners?
> > chris
> 
> Yes, send me a private e-mail and we can work out a transfer
process.
> 
> 	Warren
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs




From jsnader at ix.netcom.com  Wed Mar 19 09:22:15 2003
From: jsnader at ix.netcom.com (Jon Snader)
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:22:15 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
References: <87smtkb8v8.fsf@power.cnet.aladdin.de>
Message-ID: <20030318232215.GA34435@ix.netcom.com>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 11:36:11PM +0100, Christian Groessler wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/12/2003 10:18:33 AM ZE10B "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" wrote:
> >
> >On Wednesday, 12 March 2003 at  9:27:13 +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> >>
> >> So the new license specifically prohibits System III, whereas the
> >> Ancient UNIX license implicitly permitted System III.
> >
> >Heh.  So we have something to show for our $100 after all :-)
> 
> Is System III somewhere in the archive for us $100 license owners?
> 

System III was available even with the free Ancient UNIX license.
It was still available on the Caldera/SCO site last week, but now
I am getting 404s.  In any event, anyone with one of the old PUPS
password should legally be able to get it from PUPS if nowhere
else.

Jon Snader


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 19 11:22:44 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:22:44 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303181530250.17703-100000@gladen>
References: <20030318231012.GC15253@minnie.tuhs.org> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303181530250.17703-100000@gladen>
Message-ID: <20030319012244.GA19661@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 03:31:55PM -0800, Andru Luvisi wrote:
> I don't have the $100 license, but I did get one of the click-through
> licenses.

Then I assume you would be safe to download SysIII from the SCO/Caldera page,
as long as the license covers that.

	Warren


From wkt at minnie.tuhs.org  Wed Mar 19 11:24:30 2003
From: wkt at minnie.tuhs.org (Warren Toomey)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:24:30 +1000
Subject: [TUHS] SCO & Caldera?
In-Reply-To: <000701c2eda6$422a07c0$27a3580c@who5>
References: <20030318231012.GC15253@minnie.tuhs.org> <000701c2eda6$422a07c0$27a3580c@who5>
Message-ID: <20030319012430.GB19661@minnie.tuhs.org>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 06:29:44PM -0500, Gregg C Levine wrote:
> Warren, ah, I think I missed something someplace. It happens that I
> was able to download it, after clicking through the license that was
> presented several days ago, when the argument regarding the SCO
> lawsuit was part of a thread. Does this mean that I didn't have to go
> through this?

I'm saying that you can go directly to the SysIII source on Caldera's
website without agreeing to the click-through license. I e-mailed them
about this many many months ago, but they obviously haven't fixed it yet.

	Warren


