* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub @ 2016-03-30 7:53 Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 12:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 14:25 ` Marc Rochkind 0 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 7:53 UTC (permalink / raw) The Unix History repository on GitHub [1] aims to provide the evolution of Unix from the 1970s until today under Git revision control. Through a few changes recently made [2] it's now possible for individual contributors to have their GitHub profile linked to their early Unix contributions. Ken Thompson graciously made this move last week following a personal email invitation. I think it would be really cool if more followed. This would send a powerful message of continuity and tradition in computing to youngsters joining GitHub today. What you need to do is the following. - Create a GitHub profile (if you haven't already got one) - Click on https://github.com/settings/emails - Add the email address(es) associated with your early Unix commits (e.g. foo at research.uucp or bar at ucbvax.berkeley.edu). You can easily find an author's commits and email addresses recorded in the repository through the web search form http://www.spinellis.gr/cgi-bin/namegrep.pl - GitHub will tell you that a verification email has been sent to your (probably defunct) email address. Don't worry. Your account will be linked to the address even without the verification step. - Adding your photograph to your profile will increase the vividness of GitHub's revision listings. If you're in contact with Unix contributors who are not on this list, please forward them this message. Also, if your name isn't properly associated with the repository's commits, drop me an email message (or a GitHub pull request for the corresponding file [3]), and I'll add it. [1] https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-repo [2] The modifications involved the change of UUCP addresses to use the .uucp pseudo-domain rather than a ! path and the listing of co-authors within the commit message. [3] https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-make/tree/master/src/author-path Diomidis - http://www.spinellis.gr ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 7:53 [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 12:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 13:10 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 19:17 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 14:25 ` Marc Rochkind 1 sibling, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1054 bytes --] Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > The Unix History repository on GitHub [1] aims to provide the evolution > of Unix from the 1970s until today under Git revision control. Through > a few changes recently made [2] it's now possible for individual > contributors to have their GitHub profile linked to their early Unix > contributions. Ken Thompson graciously made this move last week > following a personal email invitation. I think it would be really cool > if more followed. This would send a powerful message of continuity and > tradition in computing to youngsters joining GitHub today. Given that using git enforces a loss of meta data, is there a chance to get the SCCS history for older UNIX versions? Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 12:31 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 13:10 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 13:44 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 19:17 ` Larry McVoy 1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw) On 30/03/2016 15:31, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Given that using git enforces a loss of meta data, is there a chance to get > the SCCS history for older UNIX versions? I've tried to incorporate the SCCS meta data in the Git commits. Where that was not possible I added a header-like line in the Git commit message. The BSD CSRG SCCS data are available on the four CD set compiled by Marshall Kirk McKusick https://www.mckusick.com/csrg/. I don't know of any other SCCS data openly available. If anyone has such data, I'd appreciate a copy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 13:10 ` Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 13:44 ` Joerg Schilling 0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2626 bytes --] Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > On 30/03/2016 15:31, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Given that using git enforces a loss of meta data, is there a chance to get > > the SCCS history for older UNIX versions? > > I've tried to incorporate the SCCS meta data in the Git commits. Where > that was not possible I added a header-like line in the Git commit message. > > The BSD CSRG SCCS data are available on the four CD set compiled by > Marshall Kirk McKusick https://www.mckusick.com/csrg/. > > I don't know of any other SCCS data openly available. If anyone has > such data, I'd appreciate a copy. I know of no other SCCS data, but let me make a remark that results from a recent discussion with Kirk Mckusick: Kirk told me that the regents of UCB do not like the unmodified (original) SCCS history data to be published unless this is done with a written permission. Currently only Kirk owns such a permission. Kirk did however aks whether the GIT repo from CSRG would be OK as it contains hand made fixes for a disk crash and as it does not use the original meta data. The result was that there is no problem with a different archive format. Given that the recent (upcomming **) SCCS history format (SCCSv6) is not the original SCCSv4 format that was used in CSRG, it seems that using the hand crafted fixed and a conversion to SCCSv6 would be OK as well. The advantage with the SCCSv6 history format is that you are able to convert it back to the SCCSv4 history format via: sccs -R cvt -d -V4 . ;-) I am planning a SCCSv6 variant of the CSRG archives, but I need to manually fix the broken history files first. Note that this now may be a bit easier because sccs -R val -T gives better warnings since a few years than the historic sccs did. Note that a full SCCS history may be very helpful. Last year, I came up with some problems in the Bourne Shell and a SCCS history with delta comments from around 1983 would have been very helpful to understand some changes that introduced bugs. I also recently was interested in knowing when waitpid() was introduced. **) upcomming because support for project based commits and network support is not yet ready in sccs. See http://sccs.sourceforge.net/man/sccsfile.4.html for a description of the SCCSv6 history format. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 12:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 13:10 ` Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 19:17 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 21:07 ` Random832 2016-03-30 23:42 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-30 19:17 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:31:21PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > > > The Unix History repository on GitHub [1] aims to provide the evolution > > of Unix from the 1970s until today under Git revision control. Through > > a few changes recently made [2] it's now possible for individual > > contributors to have their GitHub profile linked to their early Unix > > contributions. Ken Thompson graciously made this move last week > > following a personal email invitation. I think it would be really cool > > if more followed. This would send a powerful message of continuity and > > tradition in computing to youngsters joining GitHub today. > > Given that using git enforces a loss of meta data, is there a chance to get > the SCCS history for older UNIX versions? You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. --larry "not feeling love for git" mcvoy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 19:17 ` Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-30 21:07 ` Random832 2016-03-30 23:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-31 3:20 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 23:42 ` Joerg Schilling 1 sibling, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Random832 @ 2016-03-30 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 15:17, Larry McVoy wrote: > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. Didn't you sue someone for writing a BK to Git exporter? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 21:07 ` Random832 @ 2016-03-30 23:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-31 3:20 ` Larry McVoy 1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 23:03 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --] Random832 <random832 at fastmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 15:17, Larry McVoy wrote: > > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. > > Didn't you sue someone for writing a BK to Git exporter? Doesn't GIT use a similar import format as BK uses for it's output? AFAIK, GIT was written as a BK CLI clone. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 21:07 ` Random832 2016-03-30 23:03 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-31 3:20 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-31 3:34 ` Random832 1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-31 3:20 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:07:29PM -0400, Random832 wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 15:17, Larry McVoy wrote: > > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. > > Didn't you sue someone for writing a BK to Git exporter? Nope. In 18 years of business we've never sued anyone. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-31 3:20 ` Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-31 3:34 ` Random832 2016-03-31 3:40 ` Larry McVoy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Random832 @ 2016-03-31 3:34 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 23:20, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:07:29PM -0400, Random832 wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 15:17, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > > > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > > > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. > > > > Didn't you sue someone for writing a BK to Git exporter? > > Nope. In 18 years of business we've never sued anyone. Sorry, I guess I got the timeline and the specifics mixed up (the stuff about a non-compete agreement - I've never heard of any other company having such a thing for their _customers_ - made me assume that there was an attempt to actually enforce that), but it certainly seemed like you were not very big fans of the idea of a perfect BK-to-_anything_ exporter, since then you'd lose control of the users whose metadata you had locked up in your servers. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-31 3:34 ` Random832 @ 2016-03-31 3:40 ` Larry McVoy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-31 3:40 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:34:08PM -0400, Random832 wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 23:20, Larry McVoy wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:07:29PM -0400, Random832 wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016, at 15:17, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > > > > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > > > > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. > > > > > > Didn't you sue someone for writing a BK to Git exporter? > > > > Nope. In 18 years of business we've never sued anyone. > > Sorry, I guess I got the timeline and the specifics mixed up (the stuff > about a non-compete agreement - I've never heard of any other company > having such a thing for their _customers_ - made me assume that there > was an attempt to actually enforce that), but it certainly seemed like > you were not very big fans of the idea of a perfect BK-to-_anything_ > exporter, since then you'd lose control of the users whose metadata you > had locked up in your servers. Dear Mr or Ms Random832, The BK flame wars are long gone, Git won. Not really interested in rehashing all of that. Especially not here. Please take your ax and grind it elsewhere if that is what you want to do. To the rest of the list, sorry about this, not my intent to have these "discussions" here. --lm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 19:17 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 21:07 ` Random832 @ 2016-03-30 23:42 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-31 3:54 ` Larry McVoy 1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 23:42 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1138 bytes --] Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com> wrote: > > Given that using git enforces a loss of meta data, is there a chance to get > > the SCCS history for older UNIX versions? > > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. We talked about this before: You are the only person who does not attack me when I write that SCCS is much faster than RCS, just because you know ;-) RCS was not a advantage for the developer community as it's use was based on a missunderstanding of properties. The first system to implement something based on previous good ideas was BK and AFAIK, GIT was implemented originally as an empty shelf that aimed to imitate the CLI from BK. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 23:42 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-31 3:54 ` Larry McVoy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-31 3:54 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 01:42:23AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com> wrote: > > > > Given that using git enforces a loss of meta data, is there a chance to get > > > the SCCS history for older UNIX versions? > > > > You are the first person outside of BitMover that I've ever seen > > recognize that. Go you! It's very annoying, we can write a perfect BK > > to Git exporter but going the other way is a research project. > > We talked about this before: You are the only person who does not attack me > when I write that SCCS is much faster than RCS, just because you know ;-) You can thank Walter Tichy, who got a PhD for RCS if I recall, can you believe that? He tried to paint SCCS as bad and everyone believed him. SCCS is brilliant in how it stores the changes, it's a weave rather than diff and patch. Which means it can get 1.1 as fast as it can get the tip. Or better put, in a big tree, it is way way faster than git for some things: What BK GIT How much faster is BK? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- annotate/blame 0.01 seconds 32.3 seconds 3230 times faster search history 0.01 seconds 138.9 seconds 13890 times faster That's a 1M changeset tree with 230,000 files (4GB of history). You all know what annotate/blame are, the search history is answering the question "did the string 'those bastards at $COMPANY' ever occur in our source code?" so it's searching all versions. The SCCS weave is instant for stuff like that; diff and patch have to tons more work. > The first system to implement something based on previous good ideas was BK and We took the weave and turbo charged it. Recent BK versions are crazy fast. > AFAIK, GIT was implemented originally as an empty shelf that aimed to imitate > the CLI from BK. No, Git, credit to Linus, was his own ideas. Yeah, he took the basic model of clone/pull/commit/push, but the storage format is all his (and retarded, it doesn't scale, it's all content addressable data by hash, works when it fits in memory, thrashes like hell when it doesn't). Anyhoo, we should take this private, this is a Unix list, not an SCM list. Though I am loving the work to get a repo, even if it is git, with all the history. That's awesome! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 7:53 [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 12:31 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 14:25 ` Marc Rochkind 2016-03-30 15:23 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis 1 sibling, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Marc Rochkind @ 2016-03-30 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw) What do you mean by "early"? All of my early work was done under my login "marc", and in those days to email we just typed: % mail marc Email was internal to the system. Email between machines came along later. Also, I don't think we ever used the word "commit." Actually, much of my early work predated the introduction of SCCS. ;-) marc On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > The Unix History repository on GitHub [1] aims to provide the evolution of > Unix from the 1970s until today under Git revision control. Through a few > changes recently made [2] it's now possible for individual contributors to > have their GitHub profile linked to their early Unix contributions. Ken > Thompson graciously made this move last week following a personal email > invitation. I think it would be really cool if more followed. This would > send a powerful message of continuity and tradition in computing to > youngsters joining GitHub today. > > What you need to do is the following. > > - Create a GitHub profile (if you haven't already got one) > - Click on https://github.com/settings/emails > - Add the email address(es) associated with your early Unix commits (e.g. > foo at research.uucp or bar at ucbvax.berkeley.edu). You can easily find an > author's commits and email addresses recorded in the repository through the > web search form http://www.spinellis.gr/cgi-bin/namegrep.pl > - GitHub will tell you that a verification email has been sent to your > (probably defunct) email address. Don't worry. Your account will be > linked to the address even without the verification step. > - Adding your photograph to your profile will increase the vividness of > GitHub's revision listings. > > If you're in contact with Unix contributors who are not on this list, > please forward them this message. Also, if your name isn't properly > associated with the repository's commits, drop me an email message (or a > GitHub pull request for the corresponding file [3]), and I'll add it. > > [1] https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-repo > [2] The modifications involved the change of UUCP addresses to use the > .uucp pseudo-domain rather than a ! path and the listing of co-authors > within the commit message. > [3] > https://github.com/dspinellis/unix-history-make/tree/master/src/author-path > > Diomidis - http://www.spinellis.gr > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20160330/40365f37/attachment.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 14:25 ` Marc Rochkind @ 2016-03-30 15:23 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 19:14 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis 1 sibling, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1533 bytes --] Marc Rochkind <rochkind at basepath.com> wrote: > What do you mean by "early"? All of my early work was done under my login > "marc", and in those days to email we just typed: > > % mail marc > > Email was internal to the system. Email between machines came along later. > > Also, I don't think we ever used the word "commit." Actually, much of my > early work predated the introduction of SCCS. ;-) Good point! Checking the sccs -R log output from the CSRG archives of course at the bottom gives something like: Wed Apr 9 16:02:50 1980 bill * ./sys/kern/kern_resource.c 3.1 date and time created 80/04/09 16:02:50 by bill Wed Apr 9 16:02:48 1980 bill * ./sys/vax/vax/Locore.c 3.1 date and time created 80/04/09 16:02:48 by bill Tue Dec 4 15:58:14 1979 bostic * ./usr.bin/ctags/ctags.c 4.1 3bsd version and we need to know that "bostic" is the login from Keith Bostic and "bill" is the login from Bill Joy. I am not sure whether there ever was something like user at domain in version control before BitKeeper SCCS has been introduced. BTW: the introduction of SCCS was early, at that time I had no access to more than a desktop calculator. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 15:23 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 19:14 ` Larry McVoy 0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2016-03-30 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 05:23:00PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > I am not sure whether there ever was something like user at domain in version > control before BitKeeper SCCS has been introduced. Pretty sure we were first with it. We didn't have it in Sun's SCCS. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 14:25 ` Marc Rochkind 2016-03-30 15:23 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 16:07 ` Joerg Schilling ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw) On 30/03/2016 17:25, Marc Rochkind wrote: > What do you mean by "early"? All of my early work was done under my > login "marc", and in those days to email we just typed: > > % mail marc > > Email was internal to the system. Email between machines came along later. > > Also, I don't think we ever used the word "commit." Actually, much of my > early work predated the introduction of SCCS. ;-) I should have been more clear. The Unix history Git repository contains synthetic commits imported from snapshots, patches, SCCS, CVS, and Git files. I took the liberty of attaching the email ID at research.uucp on all Bell Labs commits, even though many predate UUCP email. Your SCCS work belongs to the mysterious subset of Bell Labs commands that made their first public appearance on BSD Unix. I didn't find SCCS included in the 6th or 7th Research Edition, nor in Unix 32/V, which, I understand, were the ancestors of BSD. Specifically, I first find SCCS included in the BSD-4 snapshot (e.g. usr.bin/sccs/sccs.c) and also in the BSD SCCS repositories predating BSD-4, through commits such as the following. commit 20f9634be56fa471a34bc386dcc4c04f9587791d Author: Eric Allman <eric at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Tue May 13 07:23:29 1980 -0800 changed path to SCCS/s. added chghist & help generalized argument chomping SCCS-vsn: 1.2 Other commands that fall into this category include fsck (frodo), gres (lem), efl (sif), diction (llc), and ideal (cvw). Somebody has commented on this list that a secret tunnel linked Murray Hill and Berkeley. I'd welcome any better explanations you may have. I'll find a way to graft you as the developer of SCCS somewhere between BSD3 and BSD4, so please do claim marc at research.uucp on GitHub. Are there other files I should also attribute to you? Diomidis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 16:07 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 16:29 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 16:14 ` Pat Barron 2016-03-30 16:30 ` Marc Rochkind 2 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1610 bytes --] Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > Specifically, I first find SCCS included in the BSD-4 snapshot (e.g. > usr.bin/sccs/sccs.c) and also in the BSD SCCS repositories predating > BSD-4, through commits such as the following. > > commit 20f9634be56fa471a34bc386dcc4c04f9587791d > Author: Eric Allman <eric at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> > Date: Tue May 13 07:23:29 1980 -0800 > > changed path to SCCS/s. > added chghist & help > generalized argument chomping It seems that you confuse the program "sccs" from Eric Allman with SCCS in general. sccs see: http://sccs.sourceforge.net/man/sccs.1.html is a wrapper program that helps to use the SCCS worker programs. "sccs" was written at UC Berkeley since Max 10 1980. Check the bottom SEE ALSO paragraph. admin cdc comb delta get help prs prt rmdel sact unget val are the worker programs that predate the existence of the "sccs" program by many years. These programs have been written at AT&T by Marc. BTW: The SCCSv4 history format was introduced February 18, 1977 and is still understood by recent software. CSRG includes the UCB history for the AT&T SCCS commands as well, but they have not been legally available before December 20 2006. The AT&T sources "slipped" into the CSRG archives and nobody really complained ;-) Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 16:07 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 16:29 ` Diomidis Spinellis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-03-30 16:29 UTC (permalink / raw) On 30/03/2016 19:07, Joerg Schilling wrote: > It seems that you confuse the program "sccs" from Eric Allman with SCCS in > general. [...] > CSRG includes the UCB history for the AT&T SCCS commands as well, but they have > not been legally available before December 20 2006. The AT&T sources "slipped" > into the CSRG archives and nobody really complained ;-) Thank you for the clarification! The AT&T SCCS commands appear to have been put under SCCS control at CSRG in 1981, again mostly by Eric Allman. commit 92fe3a3649e9adbf1e06346b5fe09f57e7b8017f Author: Eric Allman <eric at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Wed Jan 14 22:42:08 1981 -0800 date and time created 81/01/14 14:42:08 by eric SCCS-vsn: 1.1 usr/src/local/sccscmds/sccscmds.2/cmd/prs.c | 795 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 795 insertions(+) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 16:07 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 16:14 ` Pat Barron 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole 2016-03-30 16:30 ` Marc Rochkind 2 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Pat Barron @ 2016-03-30 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw) On 3/30/2016 11:49 AM, Diomidis Spinellis wrote: > > Other commands that fall into this category include fsck (frodo), gres > (lem), efl (sif), diction (llc), and ideal (cvw). Somebody has > commented on this list that a secret tunnel linked Murray Hill and > Berkeley. I'd welcome any better explanations you may have. FWIW, "fsck" existed in V7m (from DEC) as well, though I'm not sure it was necessarily the same program.... --Pat. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 16:14 ` Pat Barron @ 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole 2016-03-31 21:54 ` Ron Natalie ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Clem Cole @ 2016-03-31 21:06 UTC (permalink / raw) I've rehashed this here before... I'd really like to put this to bed ( Dioxides Spinellis -- it would be great if you could put this some where in you files so it does not get lost). I'll restate the history of fsck for my friend and one time lab partner, Ted Kowalski - aka research!frodo or frodo at ece.cmu.edu as Ted passed a few years ago and can not do this for himself. Ted did his undergrad at Michigan and was Bill Joy's housemate (where wnj was also an undergrad) in the early 1970s. Both were MTS/360 hackers and were introduced to UNIX there. Ted would go to CMU for his grad work in the mid/late 1970s (where I knew him when I was there) and Joy would do his grad work at UCB in the same time frame (as did I were I knew him). I was originally a CMU TSS/360 [MTS's older brother] hacker and was introduced to UNIX by Ted.*** The original FS tools for UNIX icheck/dcheck/ncheck were very crude. TSS and MTS (used a similar/same FS format) and and had a similar program in the key of fsck that Ted was familiar (as did a number of DEC systems for that matter). Ted wrote the original version of premordial fsck for v6 at UMich (maybe v5 - Joy probably would know what the version of UNIX was there then). Ted took "pre-fsck" to Bell Lab the summer between Mich and CMU. Ted would rewrite and "continue hacking" fsck at CMU in the next year targeting V6. It was at this time that CMU was switching from V5 to V6, I do not believe (remember) that Ted ever had fsck running on a V5 format FS, but early versions could definitely be compiled for either v6 or v7 with #ifdefs (I'm likely to have those sources somewhere if I can read a tape -- but I can tell you the bits were not in SCCS control). I remember taking his ire when we both edited a file at the same time ;-) BTW: the reason why the errors from the original version of fsck were all in UPPER CASE was because that's TSS and MTS did that. So that's how I was taught for sure and I believe Ted also. A number of early CMU UNIX programs look this way. Note: Ted was *originally* in the "UNIX Support Group" @ BTL - aka USG (summit, not research and IIRC was Armando's officemate at USG). By the early 1980s, Ted would become part of Research, so the research!frodo moniker became his (although I can not state when that was but other might know). When Ted (and Armando) were part of USB ???1977 or 78 maybe?? working on a kernel referred to as UNIX/TS - which would later become the kernel release by USG in PWB 2.0. UNIX/TS was loosely based on bits that Ken and Dennis were working with in Murray Hill - but the kernel and FS difference between v6 and v7 were in UNIX/TS (PWB 2.0 et els). At some point (June I think) Dennis (and the research folks) took a snap shot of what was the research in 1979. This would be released the folks outside of BTL as V7. Ted had not yet completed fsck and so it was not (yet) in the research system (*i.e.* they still used icheck/ncheck/dcheck). But Ted would later put it into what would become PWB 2.0. Similarly, Ted would also give copies of the CMU program to Ken/Dennis, Bill, and Armando for sure and I suspect some of his other friends at UMich had it also. I had done some >>small<< things to help him with the program during my CMU time so I had it (it was how I learned C after being an assembler, Bliss, Algol and SAIL hacker from the TSS, 10s and VMS). Those of us UNIX hackers from CMU are also likely to have had fsck such as dvk (CS), gss (BIO), tron(Mellon), and others (for instance, I believe Wayne Gramlich who was gss's housemate in Pittsburgh brought fsck from CMU to MIT when he moved from undergrad @ CMU to grad student at MIT - again someone like Noah might know when it showed up there). The point is that fsck was officially a "CMU/EE Dept developed program" - although frodo certainly used UMich, as well as AT&T resources at USG hacking on it also. But because of the CMU origins it was able to swim the UNIX oceans independently of the AT&T distribution methods of either research or summit. For instance, I brought it to Tektronix before I was at UCB and it was at UCB by the time I was there. I suspect it was Joy who put it into BSD at some point, although there was definitely a number of students and faculty starting with Ken that moved between BTL and UCB (i.e. any BTL "OYOC" student could have brought anything with them); much less common students between CMU/UCB such as myself, Mike Carey, Shafi Goldwasser just in my class but as I said I think it predates us there. I would have expected fsck to become part of BSD around 3.0 but it might not have been until 4.0 or 4.1. Also any SCCS files you have from Joy/Kirk, are a number of years later than the original development. They are based on the version wnj would have gotten from Ted at some point. How it made it to DEC, I do not know, although there were enough folks from lots of places like BTL much less academic institutions such as CMU (including Gordon Bell who was one of our Profs, Dave Roger's who ran the Vax project, Sam Fuller, and Bell's student Bell Strecker), that went to DEC that it's not surprising fsck made it there too. Clem ***A side note, while Multics/CTSS impacted the BTL & MIT folks, and untold story of UNIX history is how TSS, MTS and VM/CMS for the IBM 360 had impact on many for the UNIX hackers of that same time from other academic centers (CMU, MIT, Stanford, Cornell, Princeton ...). On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Pat Barron <patbarron at acm.org> wrote: > On 3/30/2016 11:49 AM, Diomidis Spinellis wrote: > >> >> Other commands that fall into this category include fsck (frodo), gres >> (lem), efl (sif), diction (llc), and ideal (cvw). Somebody has commented on >> this list that a secret tunnel linked Murray Hill and Berkeley. I'd welcome >> any better explanations you may have. >> > > FWIW, "fsck" existed in V7m (from DEC) as well, though I'm not sure it was > necessarily the same program.... > > --Pat. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20160331/75dda3c9/attachment-0001.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole @ 2016-03-31 21:54 ` Ron Natalie 2016-04-01 9:01 ` Diomidis Spinellis ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Ron Natalie @ 2016-03-31 21:54 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1267 bytes --] Thanks for that piece of history. I remember well the days of using icheck and dcheck (coupled with some of the other tools like ncheck and clri…which we rewrote to clrm…much safer because it was easier to reverse if you got the wrong one. One thing afflicting the V6 file system was that it wasn't too safe in the way it committed changes. Hence, you could get "dups in free" and inode link counts that differed from the number of entries in directories. I remember being grilled on this my freshman year on the file system format, what the various failures were, how to detect them with icheck/dcheck and how to fix them before they'd let me play computer operator on the UNIX system. FSCK was a big improvement but so was fixing up the ordering in the file system so as not to get degenerate cases (better to lose blocks from the free list than to have them duplicated). My favorite FSCK story was I was called by an operator one time to tell me that "FSCK had gone into a loop." When I got there, I found the machine running FSCK on the root, deciding it needed to reboot the machine and doing so and then rerunning FSCK getting the same error. Somehow the operator neglected to mention that part of the loop was the machine rebooting. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole 2016-03-31 21:54 ` Ron Natalie @ 2016-04-01 9:01 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-04-01 14:41 ` Clem Cole 2016-04-01 21:00 ` Jeremy C. Reed 2016-04-01 13:06 ` Dave Horsfall 2016-04-01 21:52 ` Pat Barron 3 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-04-01 9:01 UTC (permalink / raw) Thank you Clem! I added your description of the fsck birth to the repository creation source code. I'll also work on injecting the fsck (and SCCS) source code with the correct authorship between BSD-3 and BSD-4. Both made their appearance during that time via CSRG SCCS. This is the first CSRG fsck SCCS commit. Author: Kirk McKusick <mckusick at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Thu Aug 27 06:47:37 1981 -0800 date and time created 81/08/26 23:47:37 by mckusick SCCS-vsn: 1.1 usr/src/sbin/fsck/main.c | 1679 1 file changed, 1679 insertions(+) Also, these are the first two commits of the SCCS commands. Author: Bill Joy <root at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Wed May 14 00:56:00 1980 -0800 date and time created 80/05/13 17:56:00 by root SCCS-vsn: 1.1 usr/src/local/sccscmds/sccscmds.ok/cmd/delta.c | 670 1 file changed, 670 insertions(+) commit 5ff237f5a32255288bd826872a309ee844435a1a Author: Eric Allman <eric at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Wed Jan 14 22:42:08 1981 -0800 date and time created 81/01/14 14:42:08 by eric SCCS-vsn: 1.1 usr/src/local/sccscmds/sccscmds.ok/cmd/prs.c | 795 1 file changed, 795 insertions(+) Diomidis On 01/04/2016 00:06, Clem Cole wrote: > I've rehashed this here before... I'd really like to put this to bed > (Dioxides Spinellis -- it would be great if you could put this some > where in you files so it does not get lost). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-04-01 9:01 ` Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-04-01 14:41 ` Clem Cole 2016-04-01 21:00 ` Jeremy C. Reed 1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Clem Cole @ 2016-04-01 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1802 bytes --] On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:01 AM, Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > Thank you Clem! > Most welcome. > I added your description of the fsck birth to the repository creation > source code. > Thank you. > I'll also work on injecting the fsck (and SCCS) source code with the > correct authorship between BSD-3 and BSD-4. Both made their appearance > during that time via CSRG SCCS. > If I can find and read some old mag tapes with sources, I'll try to get you earlier dates to put into your records. I'll take that off line. > > This is the first CSRG fsck SCCS commit. > > Author: Kirk McKusick <mckusick at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> > Date: Thu Aug 27 06:47:37 1981 -0800 > 1981 -- That makes sense... I would come to UCB in September of '81, but IIRC wnj had spent the summer before @ research; where Ted spent his summers also. Ted had came to CMU in '76 I believe and developed what would become fsck that year on the EE Digital Lab's 11/34 @ CMU, later in '76, EE & Bio Med got an Unix machine of some flavor, as did Mellon Institute (which would be the system with the first commercial UNIX license for a University). fsck did not make it over to CS to the 11/40e's until later probably '78, likely by dvk who was not EE but common with me @ Mellon. I took it with me to Tektronix in '79. I think Wayne (an CMU EE UNIX hacker) took his Hawaiian shirts to Cambridge, MA in '78, so that's about the time it would have made it to MIT. The important point is that fsck was 4-5 years old by the time it made it to UCB and was already migrating to other places via sneaker-net. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20160401/b5a7a695/attachment.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-04-01 9:01 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-04-01 14:41 ` Clem Cole @ 2016-04-01 21:00 ` Jeremy C. Reed 1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Jeremy C. Reed @ 2016-04-01 21:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Fri, 1 Apr 2016, Diomidis Spinellis wrote: > This is the first CSRG fsck SCCS commit. > > Author: Kirk McKusick <mckusick at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> > Date: Thu Aug 27 06:47:37 1981 -0800 > > date and time created 81/08/26 23:47:37 by mckusick > > SCCS-vsn: 1.1 > > usr/src/sbin/fsck/main.c | 1679 For the earlier code as shipped with BSD see: 4.0 and 4.1 usr/src/cmd/fsck.c static char *sccsid = "@(#)fsck.c 4.10 (Berkeley) 11/15/80"; The changes document from (January 1980's 3BSD to November 1980's 4BSD) calls it the "new ... interactive repair program" and "new, intelligent, interactive file system check program" and that it obsoletes dcheck and ncheck and largely replaces icheck. 4.1.snap static char *sccsid = "@(#)fsck.c 4.13 (Berkeley) 81/03/09"; 2.8 (Jun 16 1981 filestamp) char *sccsid = "@(#)fsck.c 2.5"; From those versions it is easy to see that the later main.c derived from the fsck.c. (By the time it gets to the version shipped with 4.3BSD ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole 2016-03-31 21:54 ` Ron Natalie 2016-04-01 9:01 ` Diomidis Spinellis @ 2016-04-01 13:06 ` Dave Horsfall 2016-04-01 21:52 ` Pat Barron 3 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Dave Horsfall @ 2016-04-01 13:06 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, 31 Mar 2016, Clem Cole wrote: > The original FS tools for UNIX icheck/dcheck/ncheck were very crude. I guess I should mention that somewhere in the AUUGN archives is a paper I wrote on the proper use of these tools (after having seen, and made, too many mistakes), along with the tool-of-last-resort "clri". FSCK is a wonderful program, and has saved my bacon many times. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2016-04-01 13:06 ` Dave Horsfall @ 2016-04-01 21:52 ` Pat Barron 3 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Pat Barron @ 2016-04-01 21:52 UTC (permalink / raw) On 3/31/2016 5:06 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > I've rehashed this here before... I'd really like to put this to bed > (Dioxides Spinellis -- it would be great if you could put this some > where in you files so it does not get lost). > > > I'll restate the history of fsck for my friend and one time lab > partner, Ted Kowalski - aka research!frodo or frodo at ece.cmu.edu > <mailto:frodo at ece.cmu.edu> as Ted passed a few years ago and can not > do this for himself. > > [...] This is really great - thanks from me on this, also! I missed all of this at CMU by several years. By the time I got there, dvk was at the Software Engineering Institute (which is where I was, so that's how I met him), and as far as I am aware, the PDP-11's were mostly long gone, except for a few that were used as routers (I had an 11/34a that we used as our router from the SEI building back to Wean Hall). Sort of a bummer I missed out on a lot of the fun. ;-) I think the only thing interesting I did while I was there, Unix-wise, was getting the 4.3BSD DEQNA driver working with the DELQA - I gave those changes for a few people elsewhere that asked for them, but I can't even find them myself anymore.... --Pat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20160401/f37e9188/attachment-0001.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 16:07 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 16:14 ` Pat Barron @ 2016-03-30 16:30 ` Marc Rochkind 2016-03-30 16:40 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 16:55 ` John Cowan 2 siblings, 2 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Marc Rochkind @ 2016-03-30 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) BSD is the new kind on the block. I don't think it came along until 1977 or so. Research UNIX I don't think picked up SCCS ever. SCCS first appeared in the PWB releases, if you don't count the earlier version in SNOBOL4 for the IBM mainframes. --Marc On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Diomidis Spinellis <dds at aueb.gr> wrote: > On 30/03/2016 17:25, Marc Rochkind wrote: > >> What do you mean by "early"? All of my early work was done under my >> login "marc", and in those days to email we just typed: >> >> % mail marc >> >> Email was internal to the system. Email between machines came along later. >> >> Also, I don't think we ever used the word "commit." Actually, much of my >> early work predated the introduction of SCCS. ;-) >> > > I should have been more clear. The Unix history Git repository contains > synthetic commits imported from snapshots, patches, SCCS, CVS, and Git > files. I took the liberty of attaching the email ID at research.uucp on all > Bell Labs commits, even though many predate UUCP email. > > Your SCCS work belongs to the mysterious subset of Bell Labs commands that > made their first public appearance on BSD Unix. I didn't find SCCS included > in the 6th or 7th Research Edition, nor in Unix 32/V, which, I understand, > were the ancestors of BSD. > > Specifically, I first find SCCS included in the BSD-4 snapshot (e.g. > usr.bin/sccs/sccs.c) and also in the BSD SCCS repositories predating BSD-4, > through commits such as the following. > > commit 20f9634be56fa471a34bc386dcc4c04f9587791d > Author: Eric Allman <eric at ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> > Date: Tue May 13 07:23:29 1980 -0800 > > changed path to SCCS/s. > added chghist & help > generalized argument chomping > > SCCS-vsn: 1.2 > > > Other commands that fall into this category include fsck (frodo), gres > (lem), efl (sif), diction (llc), and ideal (cvw). Somebody has commented on > this list that a secret tunnel linked Murray Hill and Berkeley. I'd welcome > any better explanations you may have. > > > I'll find a way to graft you as the developer of SCCS somewhere between > BSD3 and BSD4, so please do claim marc at research.uucp on GitHub. Are > there other files I should also attribute to you? > > > Diomidis > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20160330/8a6c5175/attachment.html> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 16:30 ` Marc Rochkind @ 2016-03-30 16:40 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 16:55 ` John Cowan 1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 902 bytes --] Marc Rochkind <rochkind at basepath.com> wrote: > BSD is the new kind on the block. I don't think it came along until 1977 or > so. Research UNIX I don't think picked up SCCS ever. SCCS first appeared in > the PWB releases, if you don't count the earlier version in SNOBOL4 for the > IBM mainframes. I guess that SCCSv3 with binary history files (used before 1977) was written in C already, correct? I have never been able to find any SCCS sources that predate the conversion to text history files in 1977. So I guess that before 1977, SCCS was only used internally at AT&T. Jörg -- EMail:joerg at schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.org/private/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 16:30 ` Marc Rochkind 2016-03-30 16:40 ` Joerg Schilling @ 2016-03-30 16:55 ` John Cowan 1 sibling, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: John Cowan @ 2016-03-30 16:55 UTC (permalink / raw) Marc Rochkind scripsit: > BSD is the new kind on the block. I don't think it came along until 1977 or > so. Research UNIX I don't think picked up SCCS ever. SCCS first appeared in > the PWB releases, if you don't count the earlier version in SNOBOL4 for the > IBM mainframes. Are any PWB releases publicly available? Though they aren't explicitly enumerated by the 2002 Caldera license, there's surely no one left with standing to object to its publication today. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org Reversing the apostolic precept to be all things to all men, I usually [before Darwin] defended the tenability of the received doctrines, when I had to do with the [evolution]ists; and stood up for the possibility of [evolution] among the orthodox --thereby, no doubt, increasing an already current, but quite undeserved, reputation for needless combativeness. --T. H. Huxley ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub @ 2016-03-30 18:28 Norman Wilson 2016-03-30 20:06 ` Ronald Natalie 0 siblings, 1 reply; 31+ messages in thread From: Norman Wilson @ 2016-03-30 18:28 UTC (permalink / raw) Marc Rochkind: BSD is the new kind on the block. I don't think it came along until 1977 or so. Research UNIX I don't think picked up SCCS ever. SCCS first appeared in the PWB releases, if you don't count the earlier version in SNOBOL4 for the IBM mainframes. ===== Correct. We never needed no stinkin' revision control in Research. More fairly, early systems like SCCS were so cumbersome that a community that was fairly small, in which everyone talked to everyone, and in which there was no glaring need wasn't willing to adopt them. I remember trying SCCS for a few small personal projects back in 1979 or so (well before I moved to New Jersey), finding it just too clunky for the benefits it gave me, and giving up. Much later, I found RCS just as messy. One thing that really bugged me was those systems' inherent belief that you rarely want to keep a checked-out copy of something except while you're working on it. Another, harder to work around, is that in any nontrivial project there are often stages when I want to make changes of scope broader than a single file: factor common stuff out into a new file, merge things into a single file, rename files, etc. CVS was a big step forward, but not enough. Subversion was the first revision-control that didn't feel like a huge burden to me. None of which is to say that SCCS and RCS were useless; they were important pioneers, and for the big projects that originally spawned them I'm sure they were indispensible. But I can't imagine Ken or Dennis putting up with them for very long, and I'm glad I never had to. Norman Wilson Toronto ON ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub 2016-03-30 18:28 Norman Wilson @ 2016-03-30 20:06 ` Ronald Natalie 0 siblings, 0 replies; 31+ messages in thread From: Ronald Natalie @ 2016-03-30 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw) > On Mar 30, 2016, at 2:28 PM, Norman Wilson <norman at oclsc.org> wrote: > > Marc Rochkind: > One thing that really bugged me was > those systems' inherent belief that you rarely want to keep a > checked-out copy of something except while you're working on it. > Another, harder to work around, is that in any nontrivial project > there are often stages when I want to make changes of scope broader > than a single file: factor common stuff out into a new file, merge > things into a single file, rename files, etc. Yeah, I hear you. We wrote wrappers for most of the RCS commands to do checkin and then checkout unlocked. The EMACS macros were helpful in this because it assumed you worked the way you do (look at a read-only version when not checked out for editing). We just jumped the version numbers when we needed a common point. We lived with RCS until we switched to Clearcase. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2284 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20160330/1cb6930b/attachment.bin> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 31+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-04-01 21:52 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 31+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-03-30 7:53 [TUHS] Claim your early Unix contributions on GitHub Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 12:31 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 13:10 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 13:44 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 19:17 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 21:07 ` Random832 2016-03-30 23:03 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-31 3:20 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-31 3:34 ` Random832 2016-03-31 3:40 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 23:42 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-31 3:54 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 14:25 ` Marc Rochkind 2016-03-30 15:23 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 19:14 ` Larry McVoy 2016-03-30 15:49 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 16:07 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 16:29 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-03-30 16:14 ` Pat Barron 2016-03-31 21:06 ` Clem Cole 2016-03-31 21:54 ` Ron Natalie 2016-04-01 9:01 ` Diomidis Spinellis 2016-04-01 14:41 ` Clem Cole 2016-04-01 21:00 ` Jeremy C. Reed 2016-04-01 13:06 ` Dave Horsfall 2016-04-01 21:52 ` Pat Barron 2016-03-30 16:30 ` Marc Rochkind 2016-03-30 16:40 ` Joerg Schilling 2016-03-30 16:55 ` John Cowan 2016-03-30 18:28 Norman Wilson 2016-03-30 20:06 ` Ronald Natalie
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).