From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 31151 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2021 06:34:23 -0000 Received: from bsd.lv (HELO mandoc.bsd.lv) (66.111.2.12) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 19 Aug 2021 06:34:23 -0000 Received: from fantadrom.bsd.lv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mandoc.bsd.lv (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 01503257 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:34:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) by mandoc.bsd.lv (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 7cf34f43 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 01:34:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (173-228-4-126.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [173.228.4.126]) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id 17J6YH0f012865 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 23:34:17 -0700 From: Guy Harris Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailinglist: mandoc-tech Reply-To: tech@mandoc.bsd.lv Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\)) Subject: Re: Should .At 32v rather be [AT&T] UNIX/32V rather than Version 32 AT&T UNIX? Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 23:34:16 -0700 References: <20210818184652.gp3apndkyoa2m3kc@tarta.nabijaczleweli.xyz> To: tech@mandoc.bsd.lv In-Reply-To: <20210818184652.gp3apndkyoa2m3kc@tarta.nabijaczleweli.xyz> Message-Id: <8F26DC01-86AD-420E-B6E2-658C53B0F5C7@alum.mit.edu> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13) X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVZElTDR9Gx5LjbOo1QAjpSXWUKwbS2OY1VNPsWVOi6wQns7ShieFFC44pU0AC8aDA1bFSCy91TJ2HlnXKkZP0cK X-Sonic-ID: C;1GtFercA7BGP4NvKcSgy2w== M;Ji6QercA7BGP4NvKcSgy2w== X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd On Aug 18, 2021, at 11:46 AM, =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=B1 = wrote: > My reasoning being that 32V is a direct port of V7 to the VAX > with single-digit and non-formative new utilities (tsort, ..?); > bundling it in with V[1234567] is, at its best, disingenuous, > and, at worst, just plainly wrong. In what way does calling it "Version 32V AT&T UNIX" bundle it in with = V[1-7]? (BTW, tsort was in V7, but I digress.) However: > The designations of early unices originate in their manuals; > how does 32V stack up here? Yes, Bell Labs appeared to call it UNIX/32V, not Version 32V AT&T UNIX. However however, if the goal was to be compatible with current versions = of -mdoc, then calling it Version 32V AT&T UNIX achieves that goal. = That appears to date back at least as far as 4.4-Lite-2, from a quick = "egrep -i 32v" in Lite-2's /usr/src/share/tmac directory. Presumably, from the Debian bug you filed, your goal is to get all = implementations of -mdoc changed, not just the mdoc implementation. (Note, BTW, that calling V7 "Version 7 AT&T UNIX" also dates back to = Lite-2's -mdoc (if not earlier); I'm not sure whether the *operating = system* had an official name, or whether it was just the UNIX = Programmer's Manual that came with it being the Seventh Edition of the = manual.)= -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mandoc.bsd.lv