[TUHS] lost ports

[clemc@ccc.com (Clem Cole)]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1716 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:23 PM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:

> Anyway, the question: with LinuxBIOS, we shipped a GPL-ed PALcode
> implementation. It was pretty dumb, it just did 1:1 virt to phys mapping
> for example, but it worked. I've always believed that was the only open
> source or at least GPL'ed PALcode out there -- can you tell me if I got
> this right?


I have no reason to believe it is otherwise - i.e. I have no knowledge of
anything else.   Your comment about PALcode being used as leverage, I never
saw that in practice and I worked with a lot of external folks.     I think
it was more of a delta-T between the time DEC engineering released the code
and DEC-Semi got it to the field and the integrators into their systems.

I don't think DEC systems sales tried to compete with the DEC-Semi
customers, although in practice​ I'm sure they were not very good at being
to have it both ways and certainly made mistakes.   Maurice Marks was the
lead techie @ DEC Semi in those days, and a colleague I used to see fairly
often then.   I know Maurice would have screamed pretty loud if he saw the
system side of DEC mucking up his business and I think G2-Bob would have
swatted folks if they had - he wanted revenue anyway he could get it.   As
I think you know my last DEC projects was the 1K Alpha were we spliced an
EV6 into a $799 AMD based system.   The DEC guys were the ones that hated
it (Compaq actually liked it because Dell could not do it).  Anyway,
Maurice and I were shaking our heads on that one.

Clem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170105/18422479/attachment.html>