From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,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 bf51057f for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 21:53:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id DEBDD9BC7B; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:53:40 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 876D29BC44; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:53:05 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="oQ1hajvI"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 059079BC43; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:53:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f42.google.com (mail-wr1-f42.google.com [209.85.221.42]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E8259BC44 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:53:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f42.google.com with SMTP id x17so11741861wrl.9 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:53:01 -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=6Ryx4S+ABwLpxhF4XbXuO/SairxedujJt8a8fJsTNRQ=; b=oQ1hajvIrS2ZOX+SKU7WOt6ezl5flGZo9Vd8D8CbgIPKFFplERt/hwFfhWS6YGkam/ ZxuftAW7N/YDmoZ9KkyEnZNLwMI0NaOHK50lNhsCpuPnC//F+UbnLwxwIc/qtN3drwYD Lv9eLdcNEJp04cMUbCd9z3fkMIZhSle5VFpOA= 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=6Ryx4S+ABwLpxhF4XbXuO/SairxedujJt8a8fJsTNRQ=; b=lrH1GCN86Jidw+QW8YW+VJn0Cl07fUmhwN/goDoglxLtNAuddnR/vdAg05X5+84dbY aOTf9VO6fgQBjdMmDWvf7XX0MSahllsXr2mmA20BAEQ7I8dBATE8mDLJldtNTuixzFMQ q+Jj2wjh3StESOxXRrSqGD/9c4HFvVw3Nr+DaF6Jz88OZJVQvLzIMCsQTDP5DU12UXmE JZPMP9Jm0+fMPUo42TurA1fdNK8GGOidHtP8/pJu7ijxrtmR/hlf6cuSTCHKdpO5vmtn 5Pnosl92AtvSX2dkK4Q58MVH7TfMHx5subvLxhpI7VOl+NoTw7UWt+o7IqDxyDR/lUqV al1A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUKYqOyw3iLzPeKwnzLuSpqNAiKC5TasNhnnjeuSmuZ1rfdUCoU bNcJn3cugWQZ7O4RzuPeiHo9ocviloE5oa5AgKBgGQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy/06n4kdqH/b2GPfcjYUYQCgAklcXtEl0qQVc1IVEdjabqsbY6ziDpN056HK1zmD0HN2Cb2oGMgAxQvc2rQRU= X-Received: by 2002:adf:de90:: with SMTP id w16mr73638833wrl.217.1561326779708; Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:52:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8D0B5B0D-9956-47D7-8D36-1729BB1E1DA9@eschatologist.net> <5df8c6f6-2768-4bfb-9c47-3345098078a7@PU1APC01FT048.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2019 21:52:33 +0000 Message-ID: To: Henry Bent , Jason Stevens , Larry McVoy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000155091058c04b8c7" Subject: Re: [TUHS] CMU Mach sources? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000155091058c04b8c7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" A couple of thoughts... 1.) Mach2.5 and 3.0 was part of an *extremely successful research project* but also did suffer from issues associated with being so. CSRG BTW *was not a research project*, contrary to its name, it was a support contract for DARPA since BTL would not support UNIX the way DEC, IBM, *et al*, did with their products. The reality is that Mach more than Thoth**), V Kernel, QNX, Sol, Chrous, Minux or any other uK of the day, changed the way people started to think about building an OS. Give Rashid and team credit - it showed some extremely interesting and aggressive ideas could be made to work. 2.) Comparing Mach with BSD or SunOS 4.3 is not really a valid comparison. They had different goals and targets. Comparing Ultrix, Tru64, or Mac OSx with SunOS (or Solaris for that matter) is fair. They all were products. They needed to be clean, maintainable and extensible [as Larry likes to point out, Sun traded a great deal of that away for political reasons with Solaris]. But the bottom line, you are comparing a test vehicle to a production one. And I while I agree with Larry on the internals and a lot of the actual code in Mach, I was always pretty damned impressed with what they crammed into a 5 lbs bag in a very short time. 3.) Mach2.5/386/Vax/etc.. << OSF/1 386 the later is similar what MtUnix shipped. Both are 'hybrid' kernels. But while MtUnix created a product with it, they were too small to do what DEC would later do. But the investment was greater than I think they could really afford. 4.) Mach 3.0 was from CMU, Mach 4.0 (which is still sort of available) was from the OSF/1 [this is a pure uK]. 3.) DEC OSF/1 (for MIPS) << Tru64 (for Alpha) - *a.k.a.* Digital UNIX - yes both started with a Mach 2.5 hybrid kernel and the later was mostly the same as OSF/1386, and both supported the Mach2.5 kernel message system - but DEC's team rewrote darned near everything in the kernel -- which in fact was both a bless and a curse [more in a minute]. Ok, so why have I bothered with all this mess. The fact is Mach was able to be turned into a product, both Apple and DEC did it. Apple had the advantage of starting with NextOS which (along with machTen) was the first short at making a 'product' out of it. But they invested a lot over the years and incrementally changed it. Enough to create XNU. DEC was a different story (which I lived a bit of personally). The DEC PMAX (mips) and the Intel 386 were the first references from OSF. OSF had an issue. IBM was supposed to deliver an OS, but for a number of reasons was not ready when OSF needed something. CMU had something that was 'good enough.' This is probably where Larry and I differ a little on shipping code. I'm a great believer figure out one solid goal and nailing it, and the rest is 'good enough' - i.e. fix in version 2. I think OSF/1 as a reference system nailed it. Their job was get something out as a starting base that ran on at least 2 workstations (and one server - which IIRC was an HP, maybe an Encore box) but able to be shipped on an AT&T V.3 unlimited license [which IBM had brought to the table]. The fact that they did not spend a lot of time cleaning up about CMU at this stage was not their job. The kernel had to be good enough - and it was (Larry might argue Mach2.5 vs SunOS 4.3 it was not as good technically - and he might be right - but that was not their job). So DEC gets a new code based. They have Ultrix (a product) for the PMAX. OSF has released the reference port. From a kernel code quality standpoint, OSF1 1.0/PMAX < Ultrix/RISC 4.5. They also are moving to a new 64-bit processor that is not going to run either VAX or PMAX binaries ( *i.e.* you will have to recompile). Two technical decisions and one marketing one were made at the management level that would later doom Tru64. First, it was agreed that Tru64 was going to be 'pure 64-bit' and it turned out >>none of the ISVs had clean code. Moreover, there were no tools to help find 64-bit issues. This single choice cost DEC 3 years in the ability to ship Tru64/Alpha. The second choice was DEC's team decided to re-write OSF/1 subsystem by subsystem. The argument would be: the XXX system sucks. It will never scale on a 64-bit system and it will not work for clusters. XXX was at least Memory Management, Terminal Handler, Basic I/O, SCSI, File System. The >>truth<< is each of these was actually right in the small, they did suck. But the fact is, they all were good enough to get the system out the door and get customers and ISV's starting the process of using the system. Yes, Megasafe is an excellent FS, but UFS was good enough to start. The marketing decision BTW, that not to ship Tru64/PMAX. Truth is it was running internally. But Marketing held that Tru64 was the sexy cool thing and did not want to make it available. The argument was they would have to support it. But the truth is that asking ISV's and customers to switch Architecture and OS in one jump, opened the door to consider Sun or HP (and with Tru64/Alpha's ecosystem taking 3 more years, people left DEC). ** Mike Malcolm was the primary author of Thoth as his PhD from Waterloo. HIs officemate, Kelly Booth (of the 'Graphics Killer-Bs) had a tee-shirt made that exhaled: 'Thoth Thucks' and gave them to the lot of the Waterloo folks. BTW, Mike and Cheridon would later go to Stanford and create V. Two of their students would create QNX with still lives. > --000000000000155091058c04b8c7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A couple of thoughts...

1.) Mach2.5 and 3.0 was part of an extremely successful research = project but also did suffer from issues associated with being so.=C2=A0= CSRG BTW was not a research project, contrary to its name, it was a= support contract for DARPA since BTL would not support UNIX the way DEC, I= BM, et al, did with their products.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The reality is that = Mach more than Thoth**), V Kernel,=C2=A0QNX, Sol, Chrous, Minux or any othe= r uK of the day, changed the way people started to think about building an = OS.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Give Rashid and team credit - it showed some extremely int= eresting and aggressive ideas could be made to work.

2= .) Comparing Mach with BSD or SunOS 4.3 is not really a valid comparison.= =C2=A0 =C2=A0They had different goals and targets.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Comparing Ul= trix, Tru64, or Mac OSx with SunOS (or Solaris for that matter) is fair.=C2= =A0 =C2=A0They all were products.=C2=A0 They needed to be clean, maintainab= le and extensible [as Larry likes to point out, Sun traded a great deal of = that away for political reasons with Solaris].=C2=A0 =C2=A0But the bottom l= ine, you are comparing a test vehicle to a production one.=C2=A0 And I whil= e I agree with Larry on the internals and a lot of the actual code in Mach,= I was always pretty damned impressed with what they crammed into a 5 lbs b= ag in a very short time.

3.) Mach2.5/386/Vax/etc.. <= ;< OSF/1 386 the later is similar what MtUnix shipped.=C2=A0 Both are &#= 39;hybrid' kernels.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But while MtUnix created a product with= it, they were too small to do what DEC would later do.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But the= investment was greater than I think they could really afford.

=
4.) Mach 3.0 was from CMU, Mach 4.0 (which is still sort of availa= ble) was from the OSF/1 [this is a pure uK].

3.) DEC= OSF/1 (for MIPS) << Tru64 (for Alpha) - a.k.a. Digital UNIX -= yes both started with a Mach 2.5 hybrid kernel and the later was mostly th= e same as OSF/1386, and both supported the Mach2.5 kernel message system - = but DEC's team rewrote darned near everything in the kernel -- which in= fact was both a bless and a curse [more in a minute].

Ok, so why have I bothered with all this mess.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The fact is Mac= h was able to be turned into a product, both Apple and DEC did it.=C2=A0 = =C2=A0Apple had the advantage of starting with NextOS which (along with mac= hTen) was the first short at making a 'product' out of it.=C2=A0 Bu= t they invested a lot over the years and incrementally changed it.=C2=A0 En= ough to create XNU.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 DEC was a different story (which I lived a= bit of personally).

The DEC PMAX (mips) and the Int= el 386 were the first references from OSF.=C2=A0 =C2=A0OSF had an issue.=C2= =A0 IBM was supposed to deliver an OS, but for a number of reasons was not = ready when OSF needed something.=C2=A0 =C2=A0CMU had something that was = 9;good enough.'

This is probably where Larry and I= differ a little on shipping code.=C2=A0 I'm a great believer figure ou= t one solid goal and nailing it, and the rest is 'good enough' - i.= e. fix in version 2.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I think OSF/1 as a reference system nailed= it.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Their job was get something out as a starting base that ra= n on at least 2 workstations (and one server - which IIRC was an HP, maybe = an Encore box) but able to be shipped on an AT&T V.3 unlimited license = [which IBM had brought to the table].=C2=A0 =C2=A0The fact that they did no= t spend a lot of time cleaning up about CMU at this stage was not their job= .=C2=A0 =C2=A0The kernel had to be good enough - and it was (Larry might ar= gue Mach2.5 vs SunOS 4.3 it was not as good technically - and he might be r= ight - but that was not their job).

So DEC gets a new = code based.=C2=A0 They have Ultrix (a product) for the PMAX.=C2=A0 OSF has = released the reference port.=C2=A0 =C2=A0From a kernel code quality standpo= int, OSF1 1.0/PMAX < Ultrix/RISC 4.5.=C2=A0 =C2=A0They also are moving t= o a new 64-bit processor that is not going to run either VAX or PMAX binari= es (i.e. you will have to recompile).=C2=A0 =C2=A0Two technical deci= sions and one marketing one were made at the management level that would la= ter doom Tru64.=C2=A0 =C2=A0First, it was agreed that Tru64 was going to be= 'pure 64-bit' and it turned out >>none of the ISVs had clean= code.=C2=A0 Moreover, there were no tools to help find 64-bit issues.=C2= =A0 This single choice cost DEC 3 years in the ability to ship Tru64/Alpha.= =C2=A0 =C2=A0The second choice was DEC's team decided to re-write OSF/1= subsystem by subsystem.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The argument would be:=C2=A0 the XXX s= ystem sucks.=C2=A0 It will never scale on a 64-bit system and it will not w= ork for clusters.=C2=A0 XXX was at least Memory Management, Terminal Handle= r, Basic I/O, SCSI, File System.=C2=A0 The >>truth<< is each of= these was actually right in the small, they did suck.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But the = fact is, they all were good enough to get the system out the door and get c= ustomers and ISV's starting the process of using the system.=C2=A0 =C2= =A0Yes, Megasafe is an excellent FS, but UFS was good enough to start.=C2= =A0 =C2=A0The marketing decision BTW, that not to ship Tru64/PMAX.=C2=A0 = =C2=A0Truth is it was running internally.=C2=A0 But Marketing held that Tru= 64 was the sexy cool thing and did not want to make it available.=C2=A0 The= argument was they would have to support it.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But the truth is t= hat asking ISV's and customers to switch Architecture and OS in one jum= p, opened the door to consider Sun or HP (and with Tru64/Alpha's ecosys= tem taking 3 more years, people left DEC).=C2=A0 =C2=A0

<= div class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif= ">



** Mike Malcolm was t= he primary author of Thoth as his PhD from Waterloo. HIs officemate, Kelly = Booth (of the 'Graphics Killer-Bs) had a tee-shirt made that exhaled:= =C2=A0 'Thoth Thucks' and gave them to the lot of the Waterloo folk= s.=C2=A0 =C2=A0BTW, Mike and Cheridon would later go to Stanford and create= V.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Two of their students would create QNX with still lives.=C2= =A0
--000000000000155091058c04b8c7--