[TUHS] Re: TUHS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7

[TUHS] Re: TUHS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7

[Larry McVoy]

> > I've personally thought that Sun should release the source trees of its old 
> > BSD-based SunOS with the idea of getting back onside with all the Linux and 
> > Unix people it pissed off by its "buying" a "Unix" license from SCO, the 
> > Societe Commercial du On-Dit, the Commercial Society of Rumourmongers.
> 
> Don't hold your breath. Even SunOS 4.1.x had large chunks of System V Release 3
> code in it: all the STREAMS stuff and RFS worked in that environment (not that
> anyone ever used it).  Also all of /usr/5bin, /usr/5lib etc.

I removed all that stuff and booted up and ran on a complete free version of
SunOS long ago.  Read about it here:

http://www.bitmover.com/lm/papers/srcos.html
-- 
---
Larry McVoy              lm at bitmover.com          http://www.bitmover.com/lm

[TUHS] Re: TUHS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7

[Larry McVoy]

> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:39:23 -0800 (PST)
> From: Kenneth Stailey <kstailey at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] 32V/I portability
> To: macbiesz at optonline.net, tuhs at minnie.tuhs.org
> Message-ID: <20031112013923.70852.qmail at web60509.mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> 
> --- macbiesz at optonline.net wrote:
> > You could set up a Sourceforge project for 32/I?
> > 
> > Maciek
> 
> Anything but Sourceforge.  You will rue the day you chose them.  Don't take my

If someone gives me a pointer to the tarballs I'll happily import
them into BitKeeper and set up a 32vi.bkbits.net that anyone can use.
Unlike sourceforge, we're about quality, not quantity, but even so,
we have 1/3 as many files under revision control and no performance
problems.  It's not really sourceforge's fault, they choose CVS and CVS
sucks.  As Ted T'so said recently "CVS is not the answer, CVS is the
question.  No is the answer."  :)
-- 
---
Larry McVoy              lm at bitmover.com          http://www.bitmover.com/lm

[TUHS] Re: TUHS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7

[Wesley Parish]

I'm aware of that, and thanks Larry, for a pointer to the article.

What would interest me would be a copy of the source tree - any chance of 
that, or is it no longer extant?

Wesley Parish

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:09, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > > I've personally thought that Sun should release the source trees of its
> > > old BSD-based SunOS with the idea of getting back onside with all the
> > > Linux and Unix people it pissed off by its "buying" a "Unix" license
> > > from SCO, the Societe Commercial du On-Dit, the Commercial Society of
> > > Rumourmongers.
> >
> > Don't hold your breath. Even SunOS 4.1.x had large chunks of System V
> > Release 3 code in it: all the STREAMS stuff and RFS worked in that
> > environment (not that anyone ever used it).  Also all of /usr/5bin,
> > /usr/5lib etc.
>
> I removed all that stuff and booted up and ran on a complete free version
> of SunOS long ago.  Read about it here:
>
> http://www.bitmover.com/lm/papers/srcos.html

-- 
Clinesterton Beademung - in all of love.
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."