From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 04cc33fe for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 00:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id ABFD69BB81; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:49:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02BC79B4F3; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:49:18 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="LVp4DCZh"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 044829B4F3; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:49:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wm1-f52.google.com (mail-wm1-f52.google.com [209.85.128.52]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C9119B4F2 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:49:16 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wm1-f52.google.com with SMTP id d16so1184460wme.2 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:49:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=eBMm5si7XyV25odBmPnlCHLI1we0nkthfe/rKkllYZ4=; b=LVp4DCZhCAKRrnk05jW5Mj4RTq7X38D9LcAJV6OZ5xJTOaA4ZTYdypDGD1nwKanL2v fRiqtC7K6pQppYKysztoykuxAo7TvCjixekGyN3+PAfSJrRiI+9Kumoww2Pra7zGw4Pd XWKmDoQ0W1GgTDzK/fUZDuFAsfwrpQfQy40jw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eBMm5si7XyV25odBmPnlCHLI1we0nkthfe/rKkllYZ4=; b=I94HFF8g51Phu/0QHwRiDLmxkJGgndLk97PZT07QmF6w6kzxpRMBOk3MFjyOgodn3U MSyFma0J+SLuSA/LbC98JTttgWdmamCQ7bre6h9FqkKKk8JIRmDf4e9o5eQ39ZzdGE0J +Fg/fB1yAXL0sOz4nsVXYHjjpasLuecPLKmg+CY44L17MvhY2UdiYom/oRO1Tnt3Wsqk Nt/N2QmayC4KiphJtNmyXllc+r8/aOETHn8/QdF4yCV6ESyVImTpOYIhaX3+x8LwRdVE WzyOsjj/KQbKZADGSjUVAlVV7zJrC5jhRH+VlKLYYc/pmdtsyi3SuIRUQLD76jBWyHSo Xfzw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU9snEiwgojtGLOlYtUfoU8odJ2OffV9JOaaTXajcqmCAnh1MLu JUF5j8Tct4K0VjKiWE+MsLx03XMh6b36jNisZadg7EM9Qk+98w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzuMCiiHE1+VkKqI+bkshmgpl3efHSdB67ovbRA91BH7QpOQQyeMBneUZz1428h/PUK36hB70YSe/pbDI0ITVc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:2310:: with SMTP id 16mr25218840wmo.8.1566866954810; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 17:49:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <13c5c36e-c84d-e020-d09e-51c8c502dc6d@kilonet.net> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 20:48:48 -0400 Message-ID: To: Warner Losh Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004091f705910ea4c1" Subject: Re: [TUHS] If not Linux, then what? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000004091f705910ea4c1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 7:28 PM Warner Losh wrote: > > BSD was in decent enough shape at the time to run on PCs. Though it > fragmented early through no fault of Linux. And the AT&T lawsuit created a > lot of FUD in the area without actually protecting System V. It's unclear > if another thing would have popped up to fill the void... Linux flourished > in the confusion, but without it, it's hard to know if something else would > have been developed before the AT&T lawsuit settled. > But what really allowed Linux to take off the AT&T vs. UCB/BSDi lawsuit. At the time Linux, didn't have networking much less a window manager etc... so lot of people, mysef included (incorrectly thinking is was a copyright case) thought we were going to lose a UNIX for our inexpensice (i.e. 'cheap' 386 based systems) so we all started started to hack on Linux 0.99xxx [my first real serious taste was an early Slackware version on a billion floppies fairly soon after Linus made it available and Patrick pulled together his first distribution]. But ... (and as I have point out elsewhere - see http://technique-societe.cnam.fr/la-recherche-sur-les-systemes-des-pivots-dans-l-histoire-de-l-informatique-ii-ii-988170.kjsp?RH=cdhte ], .... *if AT&T had won the case, all the other UNIX flavors* (Linux included would have had to have been pulled from the market). So in many ways, this question is not really a fair one. AT&T lost the case, and Linux got the ball and ran for it. That said, I'll drop into the hypotheical, if AT&T had lost and Linux had not been there ..... then... I do think some flavor of BSD would have been the winner. The two wild cards are from Sun and OSF/CMU. As Larry says is what about SunOS and Solaris, although the legals of Sun doing that I wonder. The other question is Mach/OSF (I know Larry does not like the codebase). But one of the *BSD, Mach or an FOSS Sun code base would have had the most legs. Clem --0000000000004091f705910ea4c1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mon, Aug 26, 2= 019 at 7:28 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp= .com> wrote:

=
BSD was in decent enough shape at= the time to run on PCs. Though it fragmented early through no fault of Lin= ux. And the AT&T lawsuit created a lot of FUD in the area without actua= lly protecting System V. It's unclear if another thing would have poppe= d up to fill the void... Linux flourished in the confusion, but without it,= it's hard to know if something else would have been developed before t= he AT&T lawsuit settled.


=
But what really allowed Linux to take off the AT= &T vs. UCB/BSDi lawsuit.=C2=A0 At the time Linux, didn't have netwo= rking much less a window manager etc...=C2=A0 =C2=A0so lot of people, mysef= included (incorrectly thinking is was a copyright case) thought we were go= ing to lose a UNIX for our inexpensice (i.e. 'cheap' 386 based syst= ems) so we all started started to hack on Linux 0.99xxx [my first real seri= ous taste was an early Slackware version on a billion floppies fairly soon = after Linus made it available and Patrick pulled together his first distrib= ution].=C2=A0=C2=A0

But ... (and as I have point out elsewhere - se= e=C2=A0
http://techniq= ue-societe.cnam.fr/la-recherche-sur-les-systemes-des-pivots-dans-l-histoire= -de-l-informatique-ii-ii-988170.kjsp?RH=3Dcdhte],
.... if AT&T had won the case, all the o= ther UNIX flavors (Linux included would have had to have been pulle= d from the market).
So in many ways,= this question is not really a fair one.

AT&T lost the case, an= d Linux got the ball and ran for it.

That said, I'll drop into = the hypotheical, if AT&T had lost and Linux had not been there ..... th= en... I do think some flavor of BSD would have been the winner.=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 The two wild cards are from Sun and OSF/CMU.=C2=A0 =C2=A0As Larry says = is what about SunOS and Solaris, although the legals of Sun doing that I wo= nder.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The other question is Mach/OSF (I know Larry does not lik= e the codebase).

But one of the *BSD, Mach or an FOSS Sun code base= would have had the most legs.

<= /font>
Clem

= --0000000000004091f705910ea4c1--