* [TUHS] pseudo tty history @ 2025-08-15 22:28 ron minnich 2025-08-15 22:33 ` [TUHS] " Bakul Shah via TUHS 2025-08-16 1:19 ` Jeremy C. Reed 0 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: ron minnich @ 2025-08-15 22:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 306 bytes --] so the question of pseudo tty came up today. My memory is that it started with TOPS-10, though I doubt I know enough. Vague memory says there was a PTY: device. Further, I believe pty came in from UCB ca 1977 or so? I'm wondering if people who were Present at the Creation can fill in the gaps. Thanks [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 433 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 22:28 [TUHS] pseudo tty history ron minnich @ 2025-08-15 22:33 ` Bakul Shah via TUHS 2025-08-15 22:56 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-16 1:19 ` Jeremy C. Reed 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Bakul Shah via TUHS @ 2025-08-15 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ron minnich; +Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1939 bytes --] From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoterminal Pseudoterminals were present in the DEC <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Equipment_Corporation> PDP-6 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-6> Timesharing Monitor at least as early as 1967, and were used to implement batch processing. They are described in the documentation for the succeeding TOPS-10 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOPS-10> on the PDP-10 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-10>.[6] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoterminal#cite_note-6> Other DEC operating systems also had PTYs, including RSTS/E <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSTS/E> for the PDP-11 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDP-11>, as did the third-party TENEX <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TENEX_(operating_system)> operating system for the PDP-10. Implementations of Unix pseudo terminals date back to the modifications that RAND and BBN made to a 6th Edition in the late 1970s to support remote access over a network.[7] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoterminal#cite_note-7> Modern Unix pseudoterminals originated in 1983 during the development of Eighth Edition Unix <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_8_Unix> and were based on a similar feature in TENEX.[8] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoterminal#cite_note-8> They were part of the 4.3BSD-Reno <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.3BSD-Reno>, with a rather cumbersome openpty() interface defined for use.[9] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoterminal#cite_note-9> [In absence of a more authoritative source] > On Aug 15, 2025, at 3:28 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: > > so the question of pseudo tty came up today. > > My memory is that it started with TOPS-10, though I doubt I know enough. Vague memory says there was a PTY: device. > > Further, I believe pty came in from UCB ca 1977 or so? > > I'm wondering if people who were Present at the Creation can fill in the gaps. > > Thanks [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8751 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 22:33 ` [TUHS] " Bakul Shah via TUHS @ 2025-08-15 22:56 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-15 23:00 ` ron minnich 2025-08-16 3:19 ` Clem Cole 0 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Ron Natalie @ 2025-08-15 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bakul Shah, ron minnich; +Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 99 bytes --] I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the UNIX implementations. [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1318 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 22:56 ` Ron Natalie @ 2025-08-15 23:00 ` ron minnich 2025-08-15 23:15 ` Warner Losh 2025-08-16 3:19 ` Clem Cole 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: ron minnich @ 2025-08-15 23:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ron Natalie; +Cc: Bakul Shah, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 291 bytes --] That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this list, and primary sources rule. On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: > I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the > UNIX implementations. > > > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 751 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 23:00 ` ron minnich @ 2025-08-15 23:15 ` Warner Losh 2025-08-15 23:19 ` Tom Lyon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Warner Losh @ 2025-08-15 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ron minnich; +Cc: Bakul Shah, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 510 bytes --] At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. Warner On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: > That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this list, > and primary sources rule. > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: > >> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the >> UNIX implementations. >> >> >> [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1261 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 23:15 ` Warner Losh @ 2025-08-15 23:19 ` Tom Lyon 2025-08-16 0:53 ` Jonathan Gray ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Tom Lyon @ 2025-08-15 23:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Warner Losh; +Cc: Bakul Shah, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 822 bytes --] Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and telnet. Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. Anyone got them?? On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were > static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. > > Warner > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this >> list, and primary sources rule. >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: >> >>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the >>> UNIX implementations. >>> >>> >>> [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1816 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 23:19 ` Tom Lyon @ 2025-08-16 0:53 ` Jonathan Gray 2025-08-16 1:49 ` ron minnich 2025-08-16 3:20 ` [TUHS] " Clem Cole 2 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Gray @ 2025-08-16 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Lyon; +Cc: Bakul Shah, tuhs On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 04:19:38PM -0700, Tom Lyon wrote: > Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and telnet. > > Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents for > 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. > Anyone got them?? Rich Morin scanned CSRG TR 3 & 4 https://www.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/2020-January/020006.html https://www.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/2020-January/020033.html The versions I have are from there, but the cfcl.com links no longer work. Warren uploaded them to the Internet Archive: CSRG TR 3 William Joy, Robert Fabry An Architecture for Interprocess Communication in UNIX DRAFT of June 22, 1981 https://archive.org/details/csrgtr3 CSRG TR 4 William Joy, Robert Fabry Proposals for enhancement of UNIX on the VAX July 21, 1981, Revised August 31, 1981 https://archive.org/details/csrgtr4 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 23:19 ` Tom Lyon 2025-08-16 0:53 ` Jonathan Gray @ 2025-08-16 1:49 ` ron minnich 2025-08-16 2:48 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-16 3:23 ` Bakul Shah via TUHS 2025-08-16 3:20 ` [TUHS] " Clem Cole 2 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: ron minnich @ 2025-08-16 1:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Lyon; +Cc: Bakul Shah, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1554 bytes --] was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that predated ptys on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for ptys? Did the folks implementing Unix networking bring in ptys before, or as part of, or after networking, i.e. did folks building networking for Unix realize they needed ptys once they started working on telnet, or did they plan for ptys from the get go? I was an observer for some of this stuff, but as a 20-year-old at UDEL I was also quite out of the loop. I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, so this question is somewhat simplistic. I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and telnet. > > Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents > for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. > Anyone got them?? > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > >> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were >> static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >> >> Warner >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this >>> list, and primary sources rule. >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the >>>> UNIX implementations. >>>> >>>> >>>> [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3048 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-16 1:49 ` ron minnich @ 2025-08-16 2:48 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-16 3:23 ` Bakul Shah via TUHS 1 sibling, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Ron Natalie @ 2025-08-16 2:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2003 bytes --] We had virtual links that just used clever use of pipes around the shell. It was clunky. Even in the NTP (pre-internet Arpanet) days we had ptys. ------ Original Message ------ From "ron minnich" <rminnich@gmail.com> To "Tom Lyon" <pugs78@gmail.com> Cc "Bakul Shah" <bakul@iitbombay.org>; "The Eunuchs Hysterical Society" <tuhs@tuhs.org> Date 8/15/2025 9:49:16 PM Subject [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history >was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that predated >ptys on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for ptys? Did the folks >implementing Unix networking bring in ptys before, or as part of, or >after networking, i.e. did folks building networking for Unix realize >they needed ptys once they started working on telnet, or did they plan >for ptys from the get go? I was an observer for some of this stuff, but >as a 20-year-old at UDEL I was also quite out of the loop. > > I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, so this >question is somewhat simplistic. > >I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. > >On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> wrote: >>Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and >>telnet. >> >>Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning >>documents for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. >>Anyone got them?? >> >>On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>>At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were >>>static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >>> >>>Warner >>> >>>On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this >>>>list, and primary sources rule. >>>> >>>>On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> >>>>wrote: >>>>>I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to >>>>>the UNIX implementations. >>>>> >>>>> [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5084 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-16 1:49 ` ron minnich 2025-08-16 2:48 ` Ron Natalie @ 2025-08-16 3:23 ` Bakul Shah via TUHS 2025-08-16 3:35 ` Clem Cole 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Bakul Shah via TUHS @ 2025-08-16 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ron minnich; +Cc: Tom Lyon, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2219 bytes --] From RFC 89 (dated 19 January 1971) titled "Some historic moments in networking": Second, the Harvard system has temporarily implemented this remote network console interface feature using a DEC style pseudo-teletype (PTY). From RFC 46 (dated April 1970) titled "'ARPA Network Protocol Notes": 3. A standard way for a newly created process to initiate pseudo- typewriter communication with the foreign process which requested its creation. > On Aug 15, 2025, at 6:49 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: > > was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that predated ptys on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for ptys? Did the folks implementing Unix networking bring in ptys before, or as part of, or after networking, i.e. did folks building networking for Unix realize they needed ptys once they started working on telnet, or did they plan for ptys from the get go? I was an observer for some of this stuff, but as a 20-year-old at UDEL I was also quite out of the loop. > > I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, so this question is somewhat simplistic. > > I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com <mailto:pugs78@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and telnet. >> >> Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. >> Anyone got them?? >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com <mailto:imp@bsdimp.com>> wrote: >>> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >>> >>> Warner >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com <mailto:rminnich@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this list, and primary sources rule. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com <mailto:ron@ronnatalie.com>> wrote: >>>>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the UNIX implementations. >>>>> >>>>> [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4298 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-16 3:23 ` Bakul Shah via TUHS @ 2025-08-16 3:35 ` Clem Cole 2025-08-16 3:50 ` Aron Insinga 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Clem Cole @ 2025-08-16 3:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bakul Shah; +Cc: Tom Lyon, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2459 bytes --] Watch the dates - that's not UNIX. In 1973, Version 4 Unix is first released outside of BTL, so the Harvard system being talked about in RFC 89 is probably an 18 bit ??PDP6 maybe??. On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:24 PM Bakul Shah via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote: > From RFC 89 (dated 19 January 1971) titled "Some historic moments in > networking": > > Second, the Harvard system has temporarily implemented this remote > network console interface feature using a DEC style pseudo-teletype > (PTY). > > From RFC 46 (dated April 1970) titled "'ARPA Network Protocol Notes": > > 3. A standard way for a newly created process to initiate pseudo- > typewriter communication with the foreign process which requested > its creation. > > > On Aug 15, 2025, at 6:49 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: > > was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that predated ptys > on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for ptys? Did the folks implementing > Unix networking bring in ptys before, or as part of, or after networking, > i.e. did folks building networking for Unix realize they needed ptys once > they started working on telnet, or did they plan for ptys from the get go? > I was an observer for some of this stuff, but as a 20-year-old at UDEL I > was also quite out of the loop. > > I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, so this > question is somewhat simplistic. > > I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and telnet. >> >> Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents >> for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. >> Anyone got them?? >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >> >>> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were >>> static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >>> >>> Warner >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this >>>> list, and primary sources rule. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to >>>>> the UNIX implementations. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4574 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-16 3:35 ` Clem Cole @ 2025-08-16 3:50 ` Aron Insinga 2025-08-16 14:57 ` Clem Cole 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Aron Insinga @ 2025-08-16 3:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tuhs [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3327 bytes --] The https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc89 mentions a PDP-6 and PDP-10s which are 36-bit twos complement machines, and a DEC PDP-1 which was an 18-bit one's complement machine. The "graphics-oriented" PDP-1 probably had the well-known Type 30 display which used a large round radar-type CRT thanks to the Project SAGE tradition, but there were a couple of other graphics display options for the PDP-1. https://www.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/graphics/ - Aron On 8/15/25 23:35, Clem Cole wrote: > Watch the dates - that's not UNIX. In 1973, Version 4 Unix is first > released outside of BTL, so the Harvard system being talked about in > RFC 89 is probably an 18 bit ??PDP6 maybe??. > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:24 PM Bakul Shah via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote: > > From RFC 89 (dated 19 January 1971) titled "Some historic moments > in networking": > > Second, the Harvard system has temporarily implemented this remote > network console interface feature using a DEC style pseudo-teletype > (PTY). > > From RFC 46 (dated April 1970) titled "'ARPA Network Protocol Notes": > > 3. A standard way for a newly created process to initiate pseudo- > typewriter communication with the foreign process which > requested > its creation. > > >> On Aug 15, 2025, at 6:49 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that >> predated ptys on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for ptys? Did >> the folks implementing Unix networking bring in ptys before, or >> as part of, or after networking, i.e. did folks building >> networking for Unix realize they needed ptys once they started >> working on telnet, or did they plan for ptys from the get go? I >> was an observer for some of this stuff, but as a 20-year-old at >> UDEL I was also quite out of the loop. >> >> I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, so >> this question is somewhat simplistic. >> >> I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for >> rlogin and telnet. >> >> Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning >> documents for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. >> Anyone got them?? >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> >> wrote: >> >> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. >> They were static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >> >> Warner >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich >> <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the >> work are on this list, and primary sources rule. >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie >> <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: >> >> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat >> garbled when it comes to the UNIX implementations. >> >> > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10482 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-16 3:50 ` Aron Insinga @ 2025-08-16 14:57 ` Clem Cole 2025-08-17 0:21 ` Aron Insinga 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Clem Cole @ 2025-08-16 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Aron Insinga; +Cc: tuhs [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3573 bytes --] Right. What I do not know is what early machines Harvard had from DEC. MIT had the 18 and 36 bit series which was what I was implying. The key point though is that if Harvard was the root of the PTY tree it would have been on one of those systems not a Unix system because Unix did not come to Harvard until 1974 and RFC 89 was 1971 and RFC 46 in 1970 Sent from a handheld expect more typos than usual On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:50 PM Aron Insinga <aki@insinga.com> wrote: > The https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc89 mentions a PDP-6 and > PDP-10s which are 36-bit twos complement machines, and a DEC PDP-1 which > was an 18-bit one's complement machine. The "graphics-oriented" PDP-1 > probably had the well-known Type 30 display which used a large round > radar-type CRT thanks to the Project SAGE tradition, but there were a > couple of other graphics display options for the PDP-1. > https://www.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/graphics/ > > > - Aron > > > On 8/15/25 23:35, Clem Cole wrote: > > Watch the dates - that's not UNIX. In 1973, Version 4 Unix is first > released outside of BTL, so the Harvard system being talked about in RFC 89 > is probably an 18 bit ??PDP6 maybe??. > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:24 PM Bakul Shah via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote: > >> From RFC 89 (dated 19 January 1971) titled "Some historic moments in >> networking": >> >> Second, the Harvard system has temporarily implemented this remote >> network console interface feature using a DEC style pseudo-teletype >> (PTY). >> >> From RFC 46 (dated April 1970) titled "'ARPA Network Protocol Notes": >> >> 3. A standard way for a newly created process to initiate pseudo- >> typewriter communication with the foreign process which requested >> its creation. >> >> >> On Aug 15, 2025, at 6:49 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that predated ptys >> on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for ptys? Did the folks implementing >> Unix networking bring in ptys before, or as part of, or after networking, >> i.e. did folks building networking for Unix realize they needed ptys once >> they started working on telnet, or did they plan for ptys from the get go? >> I was an observer for some of this stuff, but as a 20-year-old at UDEL I >> was also quite out of the loop. >> >> I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, so this >> question is somewhat simplistic. >> >> I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and >>> telnet. >>> >>> Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents >>> for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. >>> Anyone got them?? >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>> >>>> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were >>>> static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >>>> >>>> Warner >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this >>>>> list, and primary sources rule. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to >>>>>> the UNIX implementations. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10233 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-16 14:57 ` Clem Cole @ 2025-08-17 0:21 ` Aron Insinga 2025-08-17 1:05 ` Larry McVoy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Aron Insinga @ 2025-08-17 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Clem Cole; +Cc: tuhs [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6256 bytes --] The RFC refers to "the Harvard PDP-10 System" and "Harvard's PDP-1" in the first paragraph, and the "MITDG PDP-6/10" (so that's 2 machines but eventually MIT had a gaggle of PDP-10s) in the second paragraph. And of course MIT had a PDP-1, where Spacewar was developed and first played. I don't know the arrival/exit dates of the machines. Here are some dates, but I don't know if they are just samples based on the earliest DECUS submission from there, or installation dates. The Harvard museum (which has pieces of the Mark I) may know more about when different machines were installed and removed. http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp1/PDP-1_SerialNumbers.txt > Sites known to have PDP-1's based on DECUS submissions: > ... > Harvard University Dec 64 > ... > MIT Lincoln Laboratory Group 22 May 65 > MIT Laboratory For Nuclear Science Apr 65 > MIT Project MAC Jul 64 > MIT RLE Sep 65 By serial number: > 05 PDP-1C MIT (RLE) > 26 PDP-1C MIT > 37 PDP-1C MIT Lincoln Labs 11/65 > 40 PDP-1C MIT (MAC) 64(?) > 41 PDP-1C Harvard > 53 PDP-1 MIT Side note: I saw the MIT PDP-6 with its chess trophies on top of it during the Blizzard of '78. (After I interviewed at DEC, I made my way from Marlborough through the rapidly-intensifying snow to Cambridge to visit someone from High School. I ended up crashing on a dorm sofa from the day the blizzard hit until the airport in Boston reopened which was about a week.) The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." - Aron On 8/16/25 10:57, Clem Cole wrote: > Right. What I do not know is what early machines Harvard had from > DEC. MIT had the 18 and 36 bit series which was what I was implying. > The key point though is that if Harvard was the root of the PTY tree > it would have been on one of those systems not a Unix system because > Unix did not come to Harvard until 1974 and RFC 89 was 1971 and RFC 46 > in 1970 > > Sent from a handheld expect more typos than usual > > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:50 PM Aron Insinga <aki@insinga.com> wrote: > > The https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc89 mentions a PDP-6 > and PDP-10s which are 36-bit twos complement machines, and a DEC > PDP-1 which was an 18-bit one's complement machine. The > "graphics-oriented" PDP-1 probably had the well-known Type 30 > display which used a large round radar-type CRT thanks to the > Project SAGE tradition, but there were a couple of other graphics > display options for the PDP-1. > https://www.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/graphics/ > > > - Aron > > > On 8/15/25 23:35, Clem Cole wrote: >> Watch the dates - that's not UNIX. In 1973, Version 4 Unix is >> first released outside of BTL, so the Harvard system being talked >> about in RFC 89 is probably an 18 bit ??PDP6 maybe??. >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 8:24 PM Bakul Shah via TUHS >> <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote: >> >> From RFC 89 (dated 19 January 1971) titled "Some historic >> moments in networking": >> >> Second, the Harvard system has temporarily implemented >> this remote >> network console interface feature using a DEC style >> pseudo-teletype >> (PTY). >> >> From RFC 46 (dated April 1970) titled "'ARPA Network Protocol >> Notes": >> >> 3. A standard way for a newly created process to initiate >> pseudo- >> typewriter communication with the foreign process which >> requested >> its creation. >> >> >>> On Aug 15, 2025, at 6:49 PM, ron minnich >>> <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> was there ever a telnet or other remote access program that >>> predated ptys on Unix? Was telnet the driving force for >>> ptys? Did the folks implementing Unix networking bring in >>> ptys before, or as part of, or after networking, i.e. did >>> folks building networking for Unix realize they needed ptys >>> once they started working on telnet, or did they plan for >>> ptys from the get go? I was an observer for some of this >>> stuff, but as a 20-year-old at UDEL I was also quite out of >>> the loop. >>> >>> I also realize there were multiple Unix networking efforts, >>> so this question is somewhat simplistic. >>> >>> I'm assuming rsh came a bit later. >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for >>> rlogin and telnet. >>> >>> Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's >>> design/planning documents for 4.2, which are not in the >>> TUHS archives. >>> Anyone got them?? >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh >>> <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>> >>> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and >>> rlogin. They were static, though. You had to MAKEDEV >>> enough units. >>> >>> Warner >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich >>> <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> That was my guess. I figured the people who did >>> the work are on this list, and primary sources rule. >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie >>> <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: >>> >>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat >>> garbled when it comes to the UNIX >>> implementations. >>> >>> >> > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 17702 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 0:21 ` Aron Insinga @ 2025-08-17 1:05 ` Larry McVoy 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2025-08-17 1:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Aron Insinga; +Cc: tuhs On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: > The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine > is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled "magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:05 ` Larry McVoy @ 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 1:16 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 2:02 ` Larry McVoy 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Lawrence Stewart 2025-08-17 1:56 ` [TUHS] Re: magic, was " John Levine 2 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 1:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tuhs On 8/16/25 6:05 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: >> The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine >> is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." > > Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled > "magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only > worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but > I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? > https://github.com/PDP-10/its/issues/1232 the switch still exists ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 1:16 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 2:02 ` Larry McVoy 1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tuhs On 8/16/25 6:13 PM, Al Kossow wrote: > On 8/16/25 6:05 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: >>> The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine >>> is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." >> >> Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled >> "magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only >> worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but >> I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? >> > > https://github.com/PDP-10/its/issues/1232 > > the switch still exists > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y0nVBpclIE ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:16 ` Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Al Kossow 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 1:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tuhs On 8/16/25 6:16 PM, Al Kossow wrote: > On 8/16/25 6:13 PM, Al Kossow wrote: >> On 8/16/25 6:05 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: >>>> The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine >>>> is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." >>> >>> Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled >>> "magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only >>> worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but >>> I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? >>> >> >> https://github.com/PDP-10/its/issues/1232 >> >> the switch still exists >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y0nVBpclIE > wow, that description is completely wrong. the PDP-6 was built from discrete PNP negative logic, not TTL, at which point I stopped listening it was useful for the picture of the switch though ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 1:16 ` Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 2:02 ` Larry McVoy 1 sibling, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Larry McVoy @ 2025-08-17 2:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Al Kossow; +Cc: tuhs On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 06:13:33PM -0700, Al Kossow wrote: > On 8/16/25 6:05 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > >On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: > >>The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine > >>is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." > > > >Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled > >"magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only > >worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but > >I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? > > > > https://github.com/PDP-10/its/issues/1232 > > the switch still exists Nice to know I didn't make all that story up in my boomer brain. That story is exactly as I remember it except for this I still have that switch in my basement. Maybe I'm silly, but I usually keep it set on "more magic". I hadn't heard that part. Thanks for the memories, it's part of the history. --lm ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:05 ` Larry McVoy 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow @ 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Lawrence Stewart 2025-08-17 1:56 ` [TUHS] Re: magic, was " John Levine 2 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Lawrence Stewart @ 2025-08-17 1:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Larry McVoy; +Cc: Lawrence Stewart, Aron Insinga, tuhs My favorite MIT 10 switch was something like “Split Sync Inhibit Enable Override” Never saw it myself. It had something to do with atomic instructions that required “split sync”. > On Aug 16, 2025, at 21:05, Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: >> The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine >> is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." > > Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled > "magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only > worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but > I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: magic, was pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:05 ` Larry McVoy 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Lawrence Stewart @ 2025-08-17 1:56 ` John Levine 2025-08-18 3:07 ` Aron Insinga 2 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread From: John Levine @ 2025-08-17 1:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: tuhs It appears that Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> said: >On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: >> The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine >> is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." PDP-6's were flaky even when they were new, due to large circuit cards with unreliable connectors. I gather a standard diagnostic technique was to tap all the cards with a rubber mallet to reseat them. The KA-10 used much smaller and more reliable Flip Chip cards. >Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled >"magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only >worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but >I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? Probably this one: https://boingboing.net/2022/08/11/a-story-about-a-weird-magic-switch-at-mit.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: magic, was pseudo tty history 2025-08-17 1:56 ` [TUHS] Re: magic, was " John Levine @ 2025-08-18 3:07 ` Aron Insinga 0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Aron Insinga @ 2025-08-18 3:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: John Levine, tuhs Yes, the problem with the large boards made DEC stick with the small Flip-Chip cards for many years. (Single height, single width Flip-Chips are about the same size as IBM SMS cards; they both used the same wire-wrap backplane and they both used the card edge to form an integral connector. At least for the PDP-8 they got to use some double height single width boards for things like the AC and registers bit slices.) (FWIW, I am curious about how that Sylvania backplane came about. A Sylvania idea? IBM? Gardner-Denver?) The problems with the PDP-6 and its large boards were one reason DEC co-founder Harlan Anderson left. (https://videogamehistorian.wordpress.com/2014/12/11/historical-interlude-from-the-mainframe-to-the-minicomputer-part-3-dec-and-data-general/) The PDP-11 and KL10 projects finally got around the fear of large boards at DEC. (IIUC, the very large boards in the Data General Nova were one reason for its low cost; I wonder if that helped too.) Maybe because they had 7400 TTL & Motorola ECL (respectively) ICs on the boards instead of discrete transistors. https://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/dec/pdp6/F-67_circuitInstr_May66.pdf These important bit-slice modules described on pp 32-33 of that manual: * 6205 AR, MQ, MB, and MI flip-flops. These were 36-bit registers. It is mentioned that it is 3x the area of DEC's then-standard modules (each of which had 1 22-pin connector) and to provide enough connections, it had 4 22-pin connectors, two on each end, side-by-side. Gordon Bell once described this module as "Bell's Folly. * 6206 MA, PC, and IR flip-flops. These were 18-bit (memory address) registers. It is mentioned that it is 2x the area of DEC's then-standard modules and to provide enough connections, it had 2 of the 22-pin connectors, one on each end. (I don't know if this was also a significant problem source, or if that was only the 6205.) The problems with these modules was that one end could plug into the backplane, but a bus cable had to be run across the back to connect to all of the modules of the same type. When a module had to be removed, it often resulted in breaking another module or the cable (I forget if it was one, the other, or both). I believe that the effort to construct the large hand-soldered wire-wrap backplane of the PDP-6 encouraged the company to look into the wirewrap backplane for Flip Chips in the classic PDP-8 (and PDP-7). This was absolutely critical to getting the PDP-8 down to its price point. Dave Gross [RIP] at DEC (a TX-0 and PDP-1 hacker at MIT before he joined DEC) once said that one problem was the PDP-6 design started with germanium transistors but switched to silicon transistors. (I haven't looked at the module design transistor types in the above-referenced manual to verify this.) So by the time of the PDP-8 and especially the KL10, I think they had a lot more experience with silicon transistors and the transistors themselves were better. So, with virtually the same architecture & instruction set as the PDP-6, the PDP-10 (KA10) was a big winner. There were a lot of them on the ARPAnet. It was not the only time that DEC's first product in a space did not do well, but a successor did very, very well. - Aron On 8/16/25 21:56, John Levine wrote: > It appears that Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> said: >> On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 08:21:30PM -0400, Aron Insinga wrote: >>> The PDP-6 had a sign on it that said something like "This machine >>> is old and flaky so don't touch it unless you know what you are doing." > PDP-6's were flaky even when they were new, due to large circuit cards > with unreliable connectors. I gather a standard diagnostic technique > was to tap all the cards with a rubber mallet to reseat them. The KA-10 > used much smaller and more reliable Flip Chip cards. > >> Wasn't there a PDP-<something> at MIT, I think, that had a switch labeled >> "magic" and "more magic" that had wires that went nowhere but it only >> worked when set to "more magic"? I'm sure I have the details wrong but >> I have a pretty strong memory of that. Anyone able to confirm? > Probably this one: > > https://boingboing.net/2022/08/11/a-story-about-a-weird-magic-switch-at-mit.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 23:19 ` Tom Lyon 2025-08-16 0:53 ` Jonathan Gray 2025-08-16 1:49 ` ron minnich @ 2025-08-16 3:20 ` Clem Cole 2 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Clem Cole @ 2025-08-16 3:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Lyon; +Cc: Bakul Shah, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 964 bytes --] That version came from the BBN code. On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:19 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I was thinking that 4.1c BSD must've had them for rlogin and telnet. > > Which got me looking for Fabry and Bill Joy's design/planning documents > for 4.2, which are not in the TUHS archives. > Anyone got them?? > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 4:15 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > >> At the very least, 4.2BSD had them for telnet and rlogin. They were >> static, though. You had to MAKEDEV enough units. >> >> Warner >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 5:00 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> That was my guess. I figured the people who did the work are on this >>> list, and primary sources rule. >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the >>>> UNIX implementations. >>>> >>>> >>>> [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2296 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 22:56 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-15 23:00 ` ron minnich @ 2025-08-16 3:19 ` Clem Cole 1 sibling, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Clem Cole @ 2025-08-16 3:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ron Natalie; +Cc: Bakul Shah, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 834 bytes --] Boy, that's an understatement. As best I can tell, the Rand UNIX( ??Bruce Borden??) had them first, then they were in the UofI NCP (Steve Holmgren) and migrated to several places like MIT's ChaosNet, long before the BSD implementation. BSD got them from the BBN TCP, which I think came from MIT's flavor. Still, it might have been from any of the other versions that were around at the time - I must have had a couple of different versions in different kernel sources for different V6 kernel hacks in those days, and I did not write any of them. If you look at the old USENIX tapes, you will likely see a couple of versions. Clem On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:56 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote: > I think that wikipedia history is somewhat garbled when it comes to the > UNIX implementations. > > > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1472 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* [TUHS] Re: pseudo tty history 2025-08-15 22:28 [TUHS] pseudo tty history ron minnich 2025-08-15 22:33 ` [TUHS] " Bakul Shah via TUHS @ 2025-08-16 1:19 ` Jeremy C. Reed 1 sibling, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread From: Jeremy C. Reed @ 2025-08-16 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ron minnich; +Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society "In January 1981, Toy worked on adding the pseudo-teletype (ptty) drivers that were overhauled and ported to VMUNIX by Borden in July 1980. (This ptty code came from Borden's earlier Harvard work.)" (Borden told me it came from his Harvard work.) SCCS also shows ../archives/1980s/4.1c.1/sys/sys/SCCS/s.tty_pty.c- * Overhauled, and ported to VAX/VMUNIX (V7) Bruce Borden, July 80 ../archives/1980s/4.1c.1/sys/sys/SCCS/s.tty_pty.c: * Modified and integrated into 4bsd by Kipp Hickman and Michael Toy Several commits around there for toy echo Fbzrqnl V jvyy svavfu zl obbx. | \ tr "VFnoqrsuvxyzabfjl" "ISabdefhiklmnoswy" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-08-18 3:07 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 25+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2025-08-15 22:28 [TUHS] pseudo tty history ron minnich 2025-08-15 22:33 ` [TUHS] " Bakul Shah via TUHS 2025-08-15 22:56 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-15 23:00 ` ron minnich 2025-08-15 23:15 ` Warner Losh 2025-08-15 23:19 ` Tom Lyon 2025-08-16 0:53 ` Jonathan Gray 2025-08-16 1:49 ` ron minnich 2025-08-16 2:48 ` Ron Natalie 2025-08-16 3:23 ` Bakul Shah via TUHS 2025-08-16 3:35 ` Clem Cole 2025-08-16 3:50 ` Aron Insinga 2025-08-16 14:57 ` Clem Cole 2025-08-17 0:21 ` Aron Insinga 2025-08-17 1:05 ` Larry McVoy 2025-08-17 1:13 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 1:16 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Al Kossow 2025-08-17 2:02 ` Larry McVoy 2025-08-17 1:25 ` Lawrence Stewart 2025-08-17 1:56 ` [TUHS] Re: magic, was " John Levine 2025-08-18 3:07 ` Aron Insinga 2025-08-16 3:20 ` [TUHS] " Clem Cole 2025-08-16 3:19 ` Clem Cole 2025-08-16 1:19 ` Jeremy C. Reed
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).