From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 49fab8ae for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:32:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id B93D49BD6E; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:32:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E2629BCD5; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:32:30 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7F9CD9BCD5; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:32:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15A279BCD0 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 03:32:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546) id E2F1635E0A8; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:32:28 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Henry Bent Message-ID: <20190828173228.GZ13570@mcvoy.com> References: <20190828063045.GE75146@server.rulingia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [TUHS] If not Linux, then what? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:34:46PM -0400, Henry Bent wrote: > On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 at 10:05, Clem Cole wrote: > > > If that's the MIPs code base, it is likely to not be there. I could be > > forgetting something, but I remember that DECnet was released for the MIPS > > products. It was on Tru64 and Ultrix, but is a 'layered product' so you > > needed a license to install it and it needed to be a late enough version > > that had switched to exposing a full OSI stack. > > > > That said, I do not remember/know how well it functioned talking to any > > OSI stack other than DECs. > > > > OSF/1 for MIPS wasn't actually a beta but it might as well have been. It > was slow, it was buggy, and DEC dropped support for it fairly quickly after > it was released. It was never ported to any of the R4k machines. Perhaps Clem can shed some light on why DEC did a MIPS machine? I had sort of stopped paying attention to them, so don't know the reasoning.