[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[Larry McVoy]

> Michael Sokolov, it was, that writted:
>  [stuff]
> 
> ====
> 
> You silly, twisted boy, you.

Indeed.  Michael does not seem to have been taking his meds.  Nice guy but
a bit out there.

Tim wrote:
> A good example would probably be SunOS 4 - we already know that Sun are
> quite interested in open sourcing stuff given OpenSolaris, but SunOS 4
> hasn't been, presumably because it is full of stuff-they-don't-own and has
> no commercial value at all.

I'm the guy who took SunOS 4.1.3 and removed all the non-free stuff from it
(which was 90% STREAMS) and demo-ed it to McNealy in effort to set it free.
A lot went into this: http://www.bitmover.com/lm/papers/srcos.html

There isn't much chance they'll release it and at this point it is so far
behind I'm not sure I see the point.  Even though that is the one kernel
that I really loved.

> From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy at optushome.com.au>
> SMP support started earlier than 4.1.4.  The sun4m machines (SS470,
> SS670) were the first SMP machines and ISTR they were supported in

Um, search google groups for lm at slovax - that was a 470.  It was most
definitely not an SMP box though it was my favorite Sun machine.  Great
machine, my home machine is still named slovax in honor of that box (which
was named slovax in honor of a Wisconsin 11/750 that held the 4.x BSD source
which taught me more than anything else).

And for those who care, slovax/470 now belongs to Theo Deraadt, I'm
ashamed to say that I sold it to him so I could buy some parts for my
VW van at the time.  At the time I didn't have any money, if I could do
it over again I would have given it to him.

The 670 was an SMP, that's Chuck Narad's box.  Pretty nice except that
bcopy performance was really bad.

-----

But the bigger point I wanted to make was to react to all the stuff about
OSF/1 or Ultrix or Tru64 or AIX or whatever.  Most of you probably have
no idea who I am or what we do.  I run a company that makes a software
product which runs on all those old Unix platforms.  We have all the
boxen with all the various Unix versions.

Other than SunOS 4.x, if they all fell off the face of the earth tomorrow
I couldn't be happier.  They suck.  And even SunOS sucks in some ways, it's
way behind Linux.  I'm a file system guy, I'm the last guy who did anything
significant to UFS (ask Kirk), and I have to admit that the Linux guys are
in some ways running circles around the old school Unix guys.  The one 
exception (that I know of) is ZFS.  That's pretty cool, the Linux guys
are unlikely to do anything that good, it's too complex.

But my point is that the love for the old unix versions is mostly
misplaced.  V7, you bet.  That teaches you "small" (as does Comer's
Xinu work).  But all of the vendor Unices, even my beloved SunOS, pale in
comparison to Linux.  Sad but true, I've spent a lot of time in the code.

And in some ways it isn't sad at all, it's cool.  Linux is free.

The only sad part that I still see is maybe personal.  I loved SunOS
because working in it, as a young kid, I didn't know shit.  But there
I was, hacking away.  When I started, wandering through the code made
me feel like I was in a fog, I couldn't see the next step.  But as time
went on the fog cleared and I saw this very clear and clean architecture.
It became something that you could really see and see why it was that
way and see how you could extend it and see how you shouldn't extend it.

The generic kernel source (take away drivers and file system
implementations, but keep the VFS layer) is very small.  I've lived for
many years in SunOS, I've lived in IRIX, I've lived in SCO (which is
more true to V7 than anything else), I've lived in Linux, I've read the
HP-UX code, I haven't read Ultrix, OSF/1 or AIX, but the ones I know,
they are all pretty simple.  The only one that ever cleared the fog for
me was SunOS, all the other ones looked like a mess which is why I don't
share the sentiment that we should be crying over the loss of all the
vendor Unices.

I don't want to go back.  Linux is pretty nice.  Maybe they'll fuck it
up, that seems to be a Unix OS tradition, but so far so good.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[Lyrical Nanoha]

On Thu, 18 May 2006, Larry McVoy wrote:

> Tim wrote:
>> A good example would probably be SunOS 4 - we already know that Sun are
>> quite interested in open sourcing stuff given OpenSolaris, but SunOS 4
>> hasn't been, presumably because it is full of stuff-they-don't-own and has
>> no commercial value at all.
>
> I'm the guy who took SunOS 4.1.3 and removed all the non-free stuff from it
> (which was 90% STREAMS) and demo-ed it to McNealy in effort to set it free.
> A lot went into this: http://www.bitmover.com/lm/papers/srcos.html

The idea is not unlike what I am hoping to be able to do, that is, make a 
system as close to "real" Unix as possible, and fully open-source / 
copyleft, where Linux really isn't "it", BSD is closer to this goal, and 
indeed NetBSD + Heirloom Toolchest is where I would start.  I'd like to 
see a system, and hell, if I could I'd implement it myself.  One that felt 
so like commercial Unix that you couldn't tell the difference unless you 
ran uname.  And had needed functionality without being uber-bloated like 
GNU.

-uso.

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Thursday, 18 May 2006 at 19:35:29 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
>
> Most of you probably have no idea who I am or what we do.

But of course!  Your reputation precedes you.

> I'm a file system guy, I'm the last guy who did anything significant
> to UFS (ask Kirk),

Hmm.  You know about the UFS2 work that Kirk did in FreeBSD over the
last few years, right?  Here's part of the last commit he did.

mckusick    2005-05-18 22:18:21 UTC

  FreeBSD src repository

  Modified files:
    sys/ufs/ufs          ufs_vnops.c
  Log:
  Allow removal of empty directories with high link counts.  ...

If you've been doing something in this time frame, I'd be very
interested in hearing about it.

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/20060523/0aa283fd/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[Larry McVoy]

On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 11:56:54AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> Hmm.  You know about the UFS2 work that Kirk did in FreeBSD over the
> last few years, right?  Here's part of the last commit he did.

You're right but I already sent out mail correcting that statement.

But the point I was really trying to make had little to do with UFS,
I was simply trying to establish my credentials as a kernel hack (once
upon a time).  Because without being one, making comments on all the
various Unices out there is pretty lame.

I'm perfectly happy to say Kirk is still kicking butt on UFS, in fact,
I'm ecstatic about that, I'm the guy who beat him up when he didn't
defend UFS at the LFS presentation (UFS is a much much nicer file system
and it's all about the allocation policy.  LFS doesn't really have one.
Works great for writing, sucks for reading.  Which do you do more?).
So go Kirk!

But the point being made was that I've been around the block, I've worked on
and/or looked hard at many different Unix variants and I'm not at all sad
to see them go.  Once upon a time it would have been great if SunOS 4.x 
had been open source, it was a much (and I mean MUCH) nicer place to start
than *BSD or Linux.  Much nicer.  But time has marched on and these days
I think that SunOS wouldn't be as viable.  And it's the only one that I
think would have had a chance and I work daily on all of them, we support
our product on 

	AIX
	IRIX
	Tru/64
	HP-UX
	Solaris
	SCO
	MacOS X

as well as all the free Unix variants.  Our build cluster is 35 platforms and
we get to deal with all the issues associated with all of them.  If I could
reduce that down to Linux, Windows, MacOS and Solaris I'd be happier.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[patv]

> 
> I don't want to go back.  Linux is pretty nice.  Maybe they'll fuck it
> up, that seems to be a Unix OS tradition, but so far so good.
> -- 
> ---
> Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           

I hate when these discussions become religious.  What I initially said was
I'd love to see what would happen if a TOG branded UNIX were open source.
 As for which one, I don't really care.  It doesn't matter which.  The
hypothetical scenario is if suddenly there was a "Open Source UNIX" out
there, what would happen to all the FUD and other marketing spin? 

This hypothetical OS could easily be a Linux based GNU distribution,
almost any BSD, or some other OS out there. I just mentioned OSF/1 because
it already has been branded UNIX.

Pat


---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Monmouth Internet MI-Webmail.
http://www.monmouth.com/

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[Larry McVoy]

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:33:55AM -0500, patv at monmouth.com wrote:
> > I don't want to go back.  Linux is pretty nice.  Maybe they'll fuck it
> > up, that seems to be a Unix OS tradition, but so far so good.
> > -- 
> > ---
> > Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           
> 
> I hate when these discussions become religious.  What I initially said was
> I'd love to see what would happen if a TOG branded UNIX were open source.

Isn't Solaris what you want then?
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[John Cowan]

patv at monmouth.com scripsit:

> I hate when these discussions become religious.  What I initially said was
> I'd love to see what would happen if a TOG branded UNIX were open source.

Ah, I missed that point (and I think some others did too).  The text
below strikes me as relevant; it was written by me, edited by Eric
Raymond with my consent, and published in his name in TAOUP:

                Master Foo Discourses on the Unix-Nature

A student said to Master Foo: ``We are told that the firm called SCO
holds true dominion over Unix.''

Master Foo nodded.

The student continued, Yet we are also told that the firm called
OpenGroup also holds true dominion over Unix.''

Master Foo nodded.

``How can this be?'' asked the student.

Master Foo replied:

``SCO indeed has dominion over the code of Unix, but the code of
Unix is not Unix. OpenGroup indeed has dominion over the name of Unix,
but the name of Unix is not Unix.''

``What, then, is the Unix-nature?'' asked the student.

Master Foo replied:

``Not code. Not name. Not mind. Not things. Always changing, yet
never changing.

``The Unix-nature is simple and empty. Because it is simple and empty,
it is more powerful than a typhoon.

``Moving in accordance with the law of nature, it unfolds inexorably
in the minds of programmers, assimilating designs to its own nature. All
software that would compete with it must become like to it; empty, empty,
profoundly empty, perfectly void, hail!''

Upon hearing this, the student was enlightened.


-- 
John Cowan  cowan at ccil.org   ccil.org/~cowan
Dievas dave dantis; Dievas duos duonos          --Lithuanian proverb
Deus dedit dentes; deus dabit panem             --Latin version thereof
Deity donated dentition;
  deity'll donate doughnuts                     --English version by Muke Tever
God gave gums; God'll give granary              --Version by Mat McVeagh

[TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 9

[Berny 'Scouser' Goodheart]

On Mon, 22 May 2006, 19:38:21 -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:

>But the point being made was that I've been around the block, I've worked
on and/or looked hard at many different Unix variants and I'm not at all sad
to see them go.

 

Why are you here then?

 

It's a fact that many of the big-gun Unix vendors have moved on but Unix

development continues to persist, so don't put it down yet. Unix is still

very much alive and kicking. Unix has been around forever and the Unicies

that remain still offer enough diversions to mix up the market and make

things interesting for us all. If Linux was the only Unix like system out

there then what would happen if Linux went belly-up. It could easily

happen if the big Linux vendors Redhat, Suse etc went to the dogs. Having

other Unix systems out their competing with each other as well as Linux is

healthy.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20060524/34b0a330/attachment.html>