[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Brian S Walden]

On 20 May 2009, at 05:56, Derek Peschel wrote:

> Interesting question!  And related questions -- When did the current
> start of the epoch get chosen?  Were there any false starts or early
> changes?  (I seem to recall reading about one change, moving forward
> by a year.)  And were there ever any dates in the system that couldn't
> be correctly recorded, because the epoch started too late?

The current epoch was choose for the 4th edition, the man page date
is 8/5/73. The first edition's epoch was 00:00:00, Jan. 1, 1971.
This can be obtained from the time(2) man page. Here they are parapharsed,
I like that epoch changed from the second to thrid editions, but the
man page date did not; and the "bugs" line from the 3rd edition is memorable.

v1:
 DATE: 11/3/71 
 DESCRIPTION: time returns the time since 00:00:00, Jan. 1, 1971, measured in sixtieths of a second. 
 BUGS: The chronological-minded user will note that 2**32 slxtieths of a seeond is only about 2.5 years.

v2:
 DATE: 3/15/72 
 DESCRIPTION: time returns the time since 00:00:00, Jan. 1, 1971, measured in sixtieths of a second. 
 BUGS: The chronological-minded user will note that 2**32 slxtieths of a seeond is only about 2.5 years.

v3:
 DATE: 3/15/72
 DESCRIPTION: time returns the time since 00:00:00, Jan. 1, 1972, measured in sixtieths of a second. 
 BUGS: The time is stored in 32 bits. This guarantees a crisis every 2.26 years.


v4:
 DATE: 8/5/73
 DESCRIPTION: time returns the time since 00:00:00 GMT, Jan. 1, 1970, measured in seconds.

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Brian S Walden]

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133570

> So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
> of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
> 
> Tim Newsham

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Larry McVoy]

If there was some bright person here who had an idea as to how we might
honor these guys, in a way they would like, let's go.  They are geeks 
and we are too, seems like maybe someone could come up with an idea.

If that idea requires money then let me know, millions isn't in the
cards, but drop a couple of zeros and maybe we can do it.

Regardless of all that. kudos to Brian, Dennis, and Ken.  And Joe,
because I still do my papers in troff, our invoices are in troff,
and our logo is in troff.  Our website is in troff -ms format,
I wrote a perl script that generates the html.

--lm

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 11:48:53PM -0400, Brian S Walden wrote:
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133570
> 
> > So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
> > of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
> > 
> > Tim Newsham
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Jim Capp]

Larry,

How about a virtual birthday "card" where we make a site that people  
from all over the world can sign on and leave personalized "best  
wishes"?

To promote it, we design a modest logo that people can place on their  
websites, linking to the site, allowing visitors to read the various  
"cards", and encouraging them to leave their own messages.

We could add an /etc/passwd style listing of "users" with their own / 
etc/motd or "wishes of the day".  We could bootstrap it with the  
original passwd entries, recognizing and saying "thank you" to the  
creators and contibutors of UNIX, in a wiki style with proper  
monitoring of course.

What do you think?

Jim


On Jun 5, 2009, at 12:18 AM, lm at bitmover.com (Larry McVoy) wrote:

> If there was some bright person here who had an idea as to how we  
> might
> honor these guys, in a way they would like, let's go.  They are geeks
> and we are too, seems like maybe someone could come up with an idea.
>
> If that idea requires money then let me know, millions isn't in the
> cards, but drop a couple of zeros and maybe we can do it.
>
> Regardless of all that. kudos to Brian, Dennis, and Ken.  And Joe,
> because I still do my papers in troff, our invoices are in troff,
> and our logo is in troff.  Our website is in troff -ms format,
> I wrote a perl script that generates the html.
>
> --lm
>
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 11:48:53PM -0400, Brian S Walden wrote:
>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133570
>>
>>> So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
>>> of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
>>>
>>> Tim Newsham
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
> -- 
> ---
> Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[John Cowan]

Brian S Walden scripsit:

> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133570

Not a bad article, really, but <rant>I do get very tired of this rigid
separation of Linux and Unix.  No, Linux doesn't have any AT&T code,
but there isn't all that much left in Solaris or *BSD either (other
than header files and such).  And no, Linux distros aren't Unix-branded
at present, but FWIU, that's because certification is neither fast nor
cheap, and applies only to a given release.  Commercial Linuxes have fast
release cycles, and Debian, whose release cycles are slow, can't afford
certification.  But in terms of actual, rather than formal, compliance,
Linux is as much a Unix as any branded Unix.</rant>

-- 
The first thing you learn in a lawin' family    John Cowan
is that there ain't no definite answers         cowan at ccil.org
to anything.  --Calpurnia in To Kill A Mockingbird

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Ian King]

On Jun 5, 2009, at 7:40 AM, John Cowan wrote:

> Brian S Walden scripsit:
>
>> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do? 
>> command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133570
>
> Not a bad article, really, but <rant>I do get very tired of this rigid
> separation of Linux and Unix.  No, Linux doesn't have any AT&T code,
> but there isn't all that much left in Solaris or *BSD either (other
> than header files and such).  And no, Linux distros aren't Unix- 
> branded
> at present, but FWIU, that's because certification is neither fast nor
> cheap, and applies only to a given release.  Commercial Linuxes  
> have fast
> release cycles, and Debian, whose release cycles are slow, can't  
> afford
> certification.  But in terms of actual, rather than formal,  
> compliance,
> Linux is as much a Unix as any branded Unix.</rant>

Not a very *good* article, either, IMHO.  One gets the impression the  
author of the piece was given two or three pieces of data and  
instructed to write a historical drama around them.  I also suspect  
he's never seen a PDP-7, either.  Until about two years ago, one of  
these 'wimpy' machines was running a particle accelerator at the  
University of Oregon.  It was unnecessary to slam the PDP-7 to make  
the point that Unix was created on a computer of modest resources.

Unix bloat occurred for the same reason any other piece of software  
bloats up: users want to do less and get more.  While it's true that  
some programmers and companies are better than others at adding  
features without adding heft, most find such exercise in economy  
unnecessary given the "throw another giga[byte | hertz] at it"  
culture that currently prevails.

It's also amusing he introduces the NT kernel as some sort of  
'perfect foil' to Unix, without even mentioning its VMS roots - as  
though it sprang fully formed from the aether.  The reason NT was  
competitive is that Unix configuration and administration has never  
been a task for the meek.  The goal of Windows was to reduce - or  
hide - complexity and lower the intellectual 'cost' of entry.  It's  
not clear that newer versions have in fact accomplished that.  :-)

In other words, this read like any other popularized account - which  
would be expected, if it had been published in Ladies Home Journal.   
-- Ian 

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[John Cowan]

Ian King scripsit:

> Not a very *good* article, either, IMHO.  One gets the impression the  
> author of the piece was given two or three pieces of data and  
> instructed to write a historical drama around them.

A bit more than that: the author credits Salus as his main source,
so if you want more detail, you know where to get it.  Remember the
target audience.

> I also suspect he's never seen a PDP-7, either.

Few of us have, and even fewer have seen one running Unix, I dare say.
For that matter, I never saw a PDP-11 running Unix, though I certainly
heard plenty about it: my first Unix-in-anger was MS Xenix System III on
a PC/AT with a 10 Mb hard drive.

> It was unnecessary to slam the PDP-7 to make
> the point that Unix was created on a computer of modest resources.

"Wimpy" is a disrespectful word, undoubtedly.

> In other words, this read like any other popularized account - which  
> would be expected, if it had been published in Ladies Home Journal.   

Is it actually necessary to slam _Ladies' Home Journal_ to make the point
that _Computerworld_ is a popularizing magazine?  Have you ever read even
a single issue of LHJ?  I have read many of them, though admittedly not
since the 1970s.

-- 
John Cowan    cowan at ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
The present impossibility of giving a scientific explanation is no proof
that there is no scientific explanation. The unexplained is not to be
identified with the unexplainable, and the strange and extraordinary
nature of a fact is not a justification for attributing it to powers
above nature.  --The Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "telepathy" (1913)

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Ian King]

On Jun 5, 2009, at 11:29 AM, John Cowan wrote:

> Ian King scripsit:
>>
>
>> In other words, this read like any other popularized account - which
>> would be expected, if it had been published in Ladies Home Journal.
>
> Is it actually necessary to slam _Ladies' Home Journal_ to make the  
> point
> that _Computerworld_ is a popularizing magazine?  Have you ever  
> read even
> a single issue of LHJ?  I have read many of them, though admittedly  
> not
> since the 1970s.
>

I offer my sincere apology to Ladies Home Journal.  -- Ian 

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Jason Stevens]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1587 bytes --]

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Brian S Walden<tuhs at cuzuco.com> wrote:
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133570
>


I've just posted my $0.02 on the whole thing, but to recap I think
it's lame the author didn't try to track down any actual digital
artifacts of the era.  I've tried to make the Unix v1 resurrection
project more 'accessible' to the 'masses' (albeit windows masses)..
But I guess it's just not glitzy enough.. Or they just don't realize
that it even exists.

I guess what it is coming down to, if you want it done 'right' you're
going to have to do it yourself.  And I guess that would be to make
something detailed to categorized the evolutionary steps of Unix from
all the versions that are in the TUHS/PUPS archive.  And if the
multiuser facilities exist, to make as may different versions
(free/unencumbered or even 'commercial?') available online for people
to kick the tires...

I don't know I may be just dreaming in the sense I figure I'd probably
end up with something just as empty, but would people be willing to
put forth some kind of wiki of antidotes of their usage of various
Unix on platforms?

Maybe I'm just babbling so if it sounding too grandiose feel free to
say I'm delusional.

But in some way it’d be cool to have a “Unix museum” online that could
walk you thru the various versions, show off the features of each, and
allow the person to actually logon to a system..

That being said, is there a way to “cap” the amount of CPU that SIMH
uses?  Like a good old fashioned throttle?

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Aharon Robbins]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2274 bytes --]

What a lovely thought!

ISTR that many of the papers in the 1978 issue were from the V7
distribution, so the text is around, but not in that format.
DMR could probably clarify more about those issues. (Please?)

I own paper copies of both, although I'm not sure I could find them
quickly if necessary. :-)

I doubt that SysIII is free, even the 16 bit stuff; the userland is
more interesting than the kernel land, and that stuff didn't really care
(much) about 16 vs. 32 bit.

Arnold

> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 23:20:03 -0300
> From: Rafael R Obelheiro <rro at das.ufsc.br>
> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
> > I'd love to get as much of literature, ads, pdf's & stuff for all the
> > research editions, and package them up to celebrate the 40th...
>
> On a related note, does anyone know if the 1978 and 1984 issues of the
> Bell System Technical Journal dedicated to UNIX have been made
> available online, or if this is even a possibility? AFAIK, a few
> papers have appeared here and there, but having the full collection
> would be another nice way of celebrating the 40 years...
>
> Best regards,
> Rafael
>
> > 
> > I've been doing some limited stuff with v1 & the BSD stuff but it'd be
> > fun to do something for 1/4/5/6/32v...
> > 
> > Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
> > I know it was 'ok' by the fact it had been omitted by the opening memo
> > that had stated that the 32bit versions of SYSIII & SYSV were not
> > free...
> > 
> > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Tim Newsham <newsham at lava.net> wrote:
> > > So when do the official celebrations begin? �What's a good estimate
> > > of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
> > >
> > > Tim Newsham
> > > http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > TUHS mailing list
> > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Jason Stevens]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3683 bytes --]

I kind of figured that's why the PDP-11 & z8000 sys3 stuff up &
disappeared...   Although I have to wonder, as someone who paid SCO
(Old sco I think) the $100 for an ancient unix license, what did it
cover again?

It was sooooo long ago..  But I'm guessing it was research 1-7 & 32v...?

Wait I see what it covered in here:

http://minnie.tuhs.org/Seminars/Saving_Unix/

While i'd love to have some kind of sysv for a vax (even the 780 which
simh can run...) I would suspect the license cost would simply be
astronomical... lol it'd be probably more feasable to port Solaris 10
to the 11/780... (yes I'm kidding!).

There is also a wealth of information on googles "groups" with
information from the 1980's taken from usenet backup tapes, it would
be 'neat' to have them online in some kind of NNTP server that tin or
pine could actually read... So you could browse this massive
'database' of unix knowledge from an ancient unix (well one that has
either local news with all the google groups, or a TCP enabled
unix...)

Anyways I can tell I'm rambling, and the cat is jumping on the
keyboard so I'm off to bed.

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Aharon Robbins <arnold at skeeve.com> wrote:
> What a lovely thought!
>
> ISTR that many of the papers in the 1978 issue were from the V7
> distribution, so the text is around, but not in that format.
> DMR could probably clarify more about those issues. (Please?)
>
> I own paper copies of both, although I'm not sure I could find them
> quickly if necessary. :-)
>
> I doubt that SysIII is free, even the 16 bit stuff; the userland is
> more interesting than the kernel land, and that stuff didn't really care
> (much) about 16 vs. 32 bit.
>
> Arnold
>
>> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 23:20:03 -0300
>> From: Rafael R Obelheiro <rro at das.ufsc.br>
>> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
>> > I'd love to get as much of literature, ads, pdf's & stuff for all the
>> > research editions, and package them up to celebrate the 40th...
>>
>> On a related note, does anyone know if the 1978 and 1984 issues of the
>> Bell System Technical Journal dedicated to UNIX have been made
>> available online, or if this is even a possibility? AFAIK, a few
>> papers have appeared here and there, but having the full collection
>> would be another nice way of celebrating the 40 years...
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Rafael
>>
>> >
>> > I've been doing some limited stuff with v1 & the BSD stuff but it'd be
>> > fun to do something for 1/4/5/6/32v...
>> >
>> > Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
>> > I know it was 'ok' by the fact it had been omitted by the opening memo
>> > that had stated that the 32bit versions of SYSIII & SYSV were not
>> > free...
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Tim Newsham <newsham at lava.net> wrote:
>> > > So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
>> > > of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
>> > >
>> > > Tim Newsham
>> > > http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > TUHS mailing list
>> > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> > > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > TUHS mailing list
>> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
>

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[M. Warner Losh]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4266 bytes --]

In message: <46b366130905182313l1dc757cdr47449749da930efe at mail.gmail.com>
            Jason Stevens <neozeed at gmail.com> writes:
: I kind of figured that's why the PDP-11 & z8000 sys3 stuff up &
: disappeared...   Although I have to wonder, as someone who paid SCO
: (Old sco I think) the $100 for an ancient unix license, what did it
: cover again?
: 
: It was sooooo long ago..  But I'm guessing it was research 1-7 & 32v...?
: 
: Wait I see what it covered in here:
: 
: http://minnie.tuhs.org/Seminars/Saving_Unix/
: 
: While i'd love to have some kind of sysv for a vax (even the 780 which
: simh can run...) I would suspect the license cost would simply be
: astronomical... lol it'd be probably more feasable to port Solaris 10
: to the 11/780... (yes I'm kidding!).

NetBSD should work on vax :)

: There is also a wealth of information on googles "groups" with
: information from the 1980's taken from usenet backup tapes, it would
: be 'neat' to have them online in some kind of NNTP server that tin or
: pine could actually read... So you could browse this massive
: 'database' of unix knowledge from an ancient unix (well one that has
: either local news with all the google groups, or a TCP enabled
: unix...)

Google kinda did this with dejanews.  Some love it, most tolerate
it...

Warner

: Anyways I can tell I'm rambling, and the cat is jumping on the
: keyboard so I'm off to bed.
: 
: On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Aharon Robbins <arnold at skeeve.com> wrote:
: > What a lovely thought!
: >
: > ISTR that many of the papers in the 1978 issue were from the V7
: > distribution, so the text is around, but not in that format.
: > DMR could probably clarify more about those issues. (Please?)
: >
: > I own paper copies of both, although I'm not sure I could find them
: > quickly if necessary. :-)
: >
: > I doubt that SysIII is free, even the 16 bit stuff; the userland is
: > more interesting than the kernel land, and that stuff didn't really care
: > (much) about 16 vs. 32 bit.
: >
: > Arnold
: >
: >> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 23:20:03 -0300
: >> From: Rafael R Obelheiro <rro at das.ufsc.br>
: >> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
: >>
: >> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
: >> > I'd love to get as much of literature, ads, pdf's & stuff for all the
: >> > research editions, and package them up to celebrate the 40th...
: >>
: >> On a related note, does anyone know if the 1978 and 1984 issues of the
: >> Bell System Technical Journal dedicated to UNIX have been made
: >> available online, or if this is even a possibility? AFAIK, a few
: >> papers have appeared here and there, but having the full collection
: >> would be another nice way of celebrating the 40 years...
: >>
: >> Best regards,
: >> Rafael
: >>
: >> >
: >> > I've been doing some limited stuff with v1 & the BSD stuff but it'd be
: >> > fun to do something for 1/4/5/6/32v...
: >> >
: >> > Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
: >> > I know it was 'ok' by the fact it had been omitted by the opening memo
: >> > that had stated that the 32bit versions of SYSIII & SYSV were not
: >> > free...
: >> >
: >> > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Tim Newsham <newsham at lava.net> wrote:
: >> > > So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
: >> > > of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
: >> > >
: >> > > Tim Newsham
: >> > > http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
: >> > > _______________________________________________
: >> > > TUHS mailing list
: >> > > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
: >> > > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
: >> > >
: >> > _______________________________________________
: >> > TUHS mailing list
: >> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
: >> > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
: >> _______________________________________________
: >> TUHS mailing list
: >> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
: >> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
: >>
: >
: > _______________________________________________
: > TUHS mailing list
: > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
: > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
: >
: >
: _______________________________________________
: TUHS mailing list
: TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
: https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
: 
: 

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Michael Kerpan]

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:12 AM, M. Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:

> NetBSD should work on vax :)

But it's not System V, now is it... For some, that may be an
advantage, but if you want to run SysV for some reason, then BSD, be
it of the 4.3 or the NET variety isn't really the answer. Maybe we can
lean on Novell to update the Ancient Unix license and add Sys III and
Sys V (or at least at the versions prior the SVR4), though. It
couldn't hurt.

Personally, though, I'd rather see V8-V10 of research Unix made
available. It would be interesting to see firsthand how we got from
Unix to Plan 9...

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[John Cowan]

Jason Stevens scripsit:

> There is also a wealth of information on googles "groups" with
> information from the 1980's taken from usenet backup tapes, it would
> be 'neat' to have them online in some kind of NNTP server that tin or
> pine could actually read... So you could browse this massive
> 'database' of unix knowledge from an ancient unix (well one that has
> either local news with all the google groups, or a TCP enabled
> unix...)

Client-server, as opposed to peer-to-peer, NNTP support is very expensive
and painful at large scale, which is probably why Google doesn't provide
it (disclaimer: I work for them, but not on Groups, and I don't know
anything about Groups that isn't public knowledge).  AFAIK no one has
ever written an event-driven NNTP server that suppots NNTP reader mode;
even innd spawns a separate process when contacted by a non-peer.

-- 
You're a brave man! Go and break through the            John Cowan
lines, and remember while you're out there              cowan at ccil.org
risking life and limb through shot and shell,           http://ccil.org/~cowan
we'll be in here thinking what a sucker you are!
        --Rufus T. Firefly

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Tim Newsham]

So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?

Tim Newsham
http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Jason Stevens]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 859 bytes --]

I'd love to get as much of literature, ads, pdf's & stuff for all the
research editions, and package them up to celebrate the 40th...

I've been doing some limited stuff with v1 & the BSD stuff but it'd be
fun to do something for 1/4/5/6/32v...

Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
I know it was 'ok' by the fact it had been omitted by the opening memo
that had stated that the 32bit versions of SYSIII & SYSV were not
free...

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Tim Newsham <newsham at lava.net> wrote:
> So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
> of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
>
> Tim Newsham
> http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Al Kossow]

Jason Stevens wrote:

> Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?

I was thinking about the software's status recently, and was wondering
where people would go now if they wanted an ancient Unix license, or
would like to have source access for non-commercial use.

There is some software that the Computer History Museum has that we're trying
to get licensed for non-commercial use, but some of the sources are encumbered
by having some parts that were derived from Unix distributions.

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Rafael R Obelheiro]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1458 bytes --]

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
> I'd love to get as much of literature, ads, pdf's & stuff for all the
> research editions, and package them up to celebrate the 40th...

On a related note, does anyone know if the 1978 and 1984 issues of the
Bell System Technical Journal dedicated to UNIX have been made
available online, or if this is even a possibility? AFAIK, a few
papers have appeared here and there, but having the full collection
would be another nice way of celebrating the 40 years...

Best regards,
Rafael

> 
> I've been doing some limited stuff with v1 & the BSD stuff but it'd be
> fun to do something for 1/4/5/6/32v...
> 
> Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
> I know it was 'ok' by the fact it had been omitted by the opening memo
> that had stated that the 32bit versions of SYSIII & SYSV were not
> free...
> 
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Tim Newsham <newsham at lava.net> wrote:
> > So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
> > of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
> >
> > Tim Newsham
> > http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> >
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Warren Toomey]

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
> Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?

Unfortunately, no. The Ancient UNIX Hobbyist license does not cover it
in any form: http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf. But those
who purchased the $100 OldSCO license have access to SysIII.

Cheers,
	Warren

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[John Cowan]

Warren Toomey scripsit:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
> > Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
> 
> Unfortunately, no. The Ancient UNIX Hobbyist license does not cover it
> in any form: http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf. But those
> who purchased the $100 OldSCO license have access to SysIII.

Who is the successor in interest to OldSCO at this point?

-- 
John Cowan    cowan at ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
Nobody expects the RESTifarian Inquisition!  Our chief weapon is
surprise ... surprise and tedium  ... tedium and surprise ....
Our two weapons are tedium and surprise ... and ruthless disregard
for unpleasant facts....  Our three weapons are tedium, surprise, and
ruthless disregard ... and an almost fanatical devotion to Roy Fielding....

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Jason Stevens]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 623 bytes --]

Oh cool, so as a buyer of the old sco $100 license I suppose I should
contact you about getting SYSIII access ;)

And on that note has anyone installed it on SIMH?

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 01:27:50PM -0400, Jason Stevens wrote:
>> Oh and now that Im thinking about it, is the 16bit SYSIII stuff free?
>
> Unfortunately, no. The Ancient UNIX Hobbyist license does not cover it
> in any form: http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf. But those
> who purchased the $100 OldSCO license have access to SysIII.
>
> Cheers,
>        Warren
>

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Derek Peschel]

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 06:48:46AM -1000, Tim Newsham wrote:
> So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
> of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?

Interesting question!  And related questions -- When did the current
start of the epoch get chosen?  Were there any false starts or early
changes?  (I seem to recall reading about one change, moving forward
by a year.)  And were there ever any dates in the system that couldn't
be correctly recorded, because the epoch started too late?

The other question is what the official celebrations should celebrate.
Personally, I'd chip in on a big cake with one candle for each year
that a reasonable amount of UNIX source code was available.  No way was
UNIX ever open source in the modern sense, but it did set a precedent
and things could have been much worse.  When you consider the Bell
System's normal attitude toward proprietary information, the UNIX sources
look even more valuable.

-- Derek

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Jason Stevens]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1500 bytes --]

What more (well to me) is that interactive Unix was the first
commercial unix.... I suspect all versions of it's PDP-11 & VAX stuff
is lost forever?

Does anyone know why Kodak would have bought them?  I suspect they had
some imaging stuff going....?



On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Derek Peschel <dpeschel at eskimo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 06:48:46AM -1000, Tim Newsham wrote:
>> So when do the official celebrations begin?  What's a good estimate
>> of the month and date in 1969 when it all began?
>
> Interesting question!  And related questions -- When did the current
> start of the epoch get chosen?  Were there any false starts or early
> changes?  (I seem to recall reading about one change, moving forward
> by a year.)  And were there ever any dates in the system that couldn't
> be correctly recorded, because the epoch started too late?
>
> The other question is what the official celebrations should celebrate.
> Personally, I'd chip in on a big cake with one candle for each year
> that a reasonable amount of UNIX source code was available.  No way was
> UNIX ever open source in the modern sense, but it did set a precedent
> and things could have been much worse.  When you consider the Bell
> System's normal attitude toward proprietary information, the UNIX sources
> look even more valuable.
>
> -- Derek
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>

[TUHS] UNIX turns forty

[Tim Bradshaw]

On 20 May 2009, at 05:56, Derek Peschel wrote:

> Interesting question!  And related questions -- When did the current
> start of the epoch get chosen?  Were there any false starts or early
> changes?  (I seem to recall reading about one change, moving forward
> by a year.)  And were there ever any dates in the system that couldn't
> be correctly recorded, because the epoch started too late?

I'm not sure of the case in very early Unix, but I think in recent  
(4BSD and later is all I know well) history, time has always been a  
signed quantity, so you have as long before the epoch as you do  
after.  My wife has an amusing (in retrospect) story about someone who  
decided it would be interesting to see what happened if you set the  
clock on a system (these would have been Suns (definitely) running  
SunOS 4.x (I think, might have been 3)) close to the end of time and  
see what happens when it wraps: the result was a lot of files with  
dates in the long distant past, and a lot of work to fix this (which  
she forced the perpetrator to undertake I think).

However I have some memory that really early Unix (a) had a different  
epoch and (b) counted in different units related to some clock  
interrupt - 60ths of a second? - which gave a rather short wraparound.

--tim