[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Michael Sokolov]

Robertdkeys at aol.com wrote:

> [...] I just used the quasijarus
> 0a source tarball (that is supposed to be Tahoe) [...]

It is.

> Out of curiosity, anyone still running a 4.3BSD
> box?  I had a couple microVAXes up with it until
> my ESDI drives went bellyup a few days back.

Do you mean the plain original 4.3 or enhanced versions like 4.3-Quasijarus?
The plain original 4.3 doesn't run on MicroVAXen, so if you had 4.3 on yours,
it must have been *some* enhanced version.

MS

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Cyrille Lefevre]

On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 09:26:47AM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> In article by Robertdkeys at aol.com:
> > Warren... is there a non-broken 4.3BSD-Tahoe set somewhere?
> > Bob
> 
> As in a bootable 4.3BSD-Tahoe kit? As far as I know, no. The Unix Archive
> has a broken copy in 4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe, indicating that
> both usr.tar and src.tar are broken.
> 
> It might/should be possible to merge files from the CRSG CD set from Kirk
> to recreate these tar files.
> 
> Anybody out there have an unbroken Tahoe release?

Hi, take a look at http://mapage.noos.fr/clefevre/4bsd/

you will found the listings of some archives found around the net some years ago.
don't ask me where, I can't remember. If you are interrested by one or more
of them, let me know, I'll provide you in a way or another.

FYI, appart the 4.3BSD-Tahoe archive, the following one is also broken :

4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Rev2-Foreign/usr.tar.gz

4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe/src.tar.gz
4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe/usr.tar.gz

Cyrille.
-- 
Cyrille Lefevre                 mailto:cyrille.lefevre at laposte.net

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Michael Sokolov]

Robertdkeys at aol.com wrote:

> I am wondering if
> a dd image of a working few start blocks on a
> disk could be copied over to a raw formatted
> disk from the tape copy, before the miniroot
> went on, as part of the boot/install process?

This should work.

> Michael, what are your thoughts on setting up
> the disks, reasonably?

Well, every time I need to do this, I do some history reenactment, as this is
how Quasijarus Project was originally bootstrapped. I first install Ultrix on
the VAX, then write a Tahoe/Quasijarus disk label to the boot disk (by
compiling disklabel under Ultrix), and then do the normal 4.3-QJ0a install, at
which point the standalone system sees the label and is happy.

MS

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Michael Sokolov]

Robertdkeys at aol.com wrote:

> Great!  Keep me in mind for any testing if you
> need it.

I currently don't need any testing that I can't do myself, but thanks anyway.

> I still am curious as to how many on the lists
> are actually running such critters, currently,
> on Quasijarus or on Ultrix.

Well, Harhan is still up as you can see, despite the incessant bills... Pretty
much all my work on Quasijarus since 4.3-QJ0a has been on operational issues,
i.e., issues that don't matter much for hobbyists but become important when you
use it operationally for your mission-critical computing. All my VAXen are
running current unreleased code. The Internet feed is WorldCom/UUNET with a
Quasijarus-based router. I wrote all the code for the latter, which will
hopefully appear in 4.3-QJ1.

I also have an MV3100 running Ultrix whose sole purpose is to interface an
Exabyte 8 mm SCSI tape drive to my cluster. Doing backups on TK50s is
prohibitively expensive. Some day I hope to find time to port 4.3-Quasijarus to
it.

> Did you arrive at any reasonable way to do the
> initial disklabels and boot blocks so one can
> install Quasijarus directly?

That was and still is planned for 4.3-QJ1. 4.3-QJ0a and 4.3-QJ0b "officially"
support bootstrap only on DEC RA disks. Two of my running MicroVAXen are
equipped with the latter (RA72s). I also run one with ESDI disks, as I have
equipped many MicroVAXen in the past. I bootstrap the latter via Ultrix (see my
other reply).

MS

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Robertdkeys]

That is what I do.  After several failures, I
find that using first NetBSD-1.4.1 boot to both
label and install boot blocks, followed by second,
NetBSD-1.2 boot and edlabel to trim the labels
back to something akin to a Tahoe style label,
seems to be the only way that works reliably.
The label 1.4.1 writes is different from the
Tahoe label, in that it computes incorrect c
partition sizes.  It does write something that
I think is bootblock related that seems to must
be there for Quasijarus to boot on my hardware.
I am not sure exactly what it is, but using just
the 1.2 edlabel does not seem to work reliably.
The 1.2 edlabel seems to write a correct c size
partition, though, after the 1.4.1 bits are put
on.  I ought to dd off the binary bits and see
what is actually being written.  But, the above
seems to work, for me, and got my crashed disks
back up a few minutes ago, after hours of prom
formatting....(:+{{.....  Anyway, that is how I
get the machine up.  If there is a better or
easier way, someone holler.  I am wondering if
a dd image of a working few start blocks on a
disk could be copied over to a raw formatted
disk from the tape copy, before the miniroot
went on, as part of the boot/install process?
An undersized disk label with reasonably sized
a and b partitions and a small but installable
h partition (big enough for the usr tarball to
fit on) should allow a bootable system to be
installed.  From that it could be set up on a
second disk with correctly sized labels.  Or,
when the tape was written, a selection of disk
boot/label images could be set up and a correct
one written to the boot tape for the target disk
install.  What other ways could this be done?

Michael, what are your thoughts on setting up
the disks, reasonably?

Thanks

Bob

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Andru Luvisi]

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 Robertdkeys at aol.com wrote:
[snip]
> Did you arrive at any reasonable way to do the
> initial disklabels and boot blocks so one can
> install Quasijarus directly?  The only clean way
> I can do it is to use two other OS installs that
> put enough bits there that Quasijarus is happy.
> There ought to be an easier way.
[snip]

I haven't tried it, but it occurs to me that it might be possible to start
installing NetBSD, until the point just after partitioning, and then
install 4.3...

Andru
-- 
Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst

Quote Of The Moment:
  Signs You're Not Cut Out to Be a Jedi:
    6. Down pat you have the backwards talk, yet impressed the chicks still
    are not.

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Robertdkeys]

Great!  Keep me in mind for any testing if you
need it.  I have 4 Qbus VAXentoyz that mostly
just sit and play, when the HD's stay up. Of
late ESDI drives have been giving me fits, but
maybe I can scrounge up a few more in the local
MooU surplus feeding frenzy diving pits.  Maybe,
someday, some scsi mscp cards might float up
from the depths!   (dream on.....(:+}}...)

I still am curious as to how many on the lists
are actually running such critters, currently,
on Quasijarus or on Ultrix.  I mostly play with
mine, doing some roffing and TeXing, and porting
a few minor tidbits.

Did you arrive at any reasonable way to do the
initial disklabels and boot blocks so one can
install Quasijarus directly?  The only clean way
I can do it is to use two other OS installs that
put enough bits there that Quasijarus is happy.
There ought to be an easier way.

Anyway, keep me posted as to when Quasijarus 0b
might become reality.

Thanks

Bob Keys

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Michael Sokolov]

Robertdkeys at aol.com wrote:

> It was Q0A.  Has there been any later development
> of it, of interest?

Yes, there has been. The only problem is that I still haven't managed (in 3
years) to find time to spin it into a release. :-( There is some hope, though,
that I'll find a bit of time (enough to spin out the 4.3-QJ0b release) this
winter.

MS

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Robertdkeys]

It was Q0A.  Has there been any later development
of it, of interest?

Thanks

Bob

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Robertdkeys]

The src tarball in the archives is only 35k or
something like that, so it is mostly gone.  At
one time, I thought it was more there.

Since I was only needing the dwb section out
of the sources, to power up a dwb suite on an
ancient ultrix box, I just used the quasijarus
0a source tarball (that is supposed to be Tahoe)
for the bits I needed.  It worked.

But, for the record, it might be nice to have a
complete, unbroken set, if it still exists, and
the bits can be rounded up.

Out of curiosity, anyone still running a 4.3BSD
box?  I had a couple microVAXes up with it until
my ESDI drives went bellyup a few days back.
(Ice storms and power glitches ate the drives.)
I have maybe 30mb of ports of this and that
(gzip, gmake, psroff, TeX, and other things)
that I would donate to the archives if there
was any interest.  MicroVAXen are a cheap way
of playing old BSD....(:+}}...

Thanks

Bob

[TUHS] Re: non-broken 4.3BSD set?

[Warren Toomey]

In article by Robertdkeys at aol.com:
> Warren... is there a non-broken 4.3BSD-Tahoe set somewhere?
> Bob

As in a bootable 4.3BSD-Tahoe kit? As far as I know, no. The Unix Archive
has a broken copy in 4BSD/Distributions/4.3BSD-Tahoe, indicating that
both usr.tar and src.tar are broken.

It might/should be possible to merge files from the CRSG CD set from Kirk
to recreate these tar files.

Anybody out there have an unbroken Tahoe release?

	Warren