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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST, 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 8525fadb for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 15:45:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 587BB94FC4; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:45:15 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D5694FBC; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:44:40 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="SdbFsZbX"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id EC40194FB9; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:44:37 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD98694FB7 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:44:36 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id y8so2472629wmi.4 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 07:44:36 -0800 (PST) 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=gQNrVzSi0kFzDqfdt4f6Xs+ic7yA2EPTOuHzqAPoXu8=; b=SdbFsZbX5UGV6LVRC0mgU8K5aI+VNRRk4SwfOSQB6lboAiK/m2pQpyUyWL3X7ITXy0 JtPw6fC2PBFXxvY5ofTJ3ghQIVErCWmXDWuhmyUxdQEDO5yUyqGuY+ELwLF1p1Pu/4SU gjs9f1kF9Z64MxbtEOZGbFDYJpvD6QcEZ2OeM= 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=gQNrVzSi0kFzDqfdt4f6Xs+ic7yA2EPTOuHzqAPoXu8=; b=ktwxs2cletUKNAHA0aV8/at7Kg3oQxudAFe7WLtOpUhoYTi9J3LO9NvwI2nk6iYk5s ErdBEbNzyJiGQ1IUbVusNReJ5oxyeUWeymnB3lKVxAV65jAJ1SPIiWQeeowgK8p3D3M2 e8DBST7w10SMo52MIJoh7verkqq/0Ut0xVLl/c+vvgVAzw4c5owwVAMZhcikzOc8T7HB XMXUJmNpyDn5Jx1ix18tjlOx1aHnS2JpevFpHfL2pSQKPCZPGtFMoMyXcj3lAA/ruPgZ nc3uKXAtvL+fI/v3FmNU/SDfT8hvPzBcM3JYj2Vgbo4XbFjX0517z4mzF9dNXSGmg994 RmRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukelLnw0dUPnL/mbIsHjMq1WYUuMQk2RCBing31UJm/fWttfExza njTCBVeo9jN9jUG5Yy4+rXr7MTGjIX+coUA5pGw65wCYoc0b0w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7VACrQ0s7NttHBSV+u/NB6+Ms+Ml0VghlRpYWf2GUbYDpgXBpR3WGTnlbZDGBgdhxlUGWMqgyyZQ7RD3leRMw= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1383:: with SMTP id 125mr8339991wmt.71.1547653474940; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 07:44:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 10:44:08 -0500 Message-ID: To: alan@alanlee.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009c1c05057f952786" Subject: Re: [TUHS] The John Snow's of the UNIX family 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: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000009c1c05057f952786 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Let me see if I can illuminate from a little I was aware. I know some of the histories from my time at Locus when DG was a customer of ours. Although, I'm going to show my old f*rt, cultural illiteracy (not a TV person) by having no idea who 'John Snow' is, so I can not comment on that reference ;-) I think you are right that some of the histories tend to tided to people's experience at their college or universities and I'm not sure how well DG sold in those markets. Plus they bet on Moto, who fumbled with the 68000 replacement (88k), compared to IBM's PPC and later Intel's remarkable recovery with the 386. Since they joined the losing side of the chip war, I suspect that also hurt them, even though the system was actually well done. At one time I had access to the sources of DG/UX and yes you are correct it was very clean and easy to understand (and fairly well documented). At the time, we (LCC) had the sources to DG/UX, Ultrix, Tru64, OSF/1, SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Prime, as well as all of the AT&T releases. (The management at Locus used to say we were the Swiss of the UNIX industry - we sold arms to all the sides of the war). As for DG/UX, their kernel seemed like it was a rewrite (I never knew how much of it was the SW folks in NC (who had been building their failed "Fountainhead" system that the Soul-Of-The-New-Machine book talks about, and how much was the MA folks that did Clarion later on). It was definitely the sanest of all of the UNIX kernels we had access and had the least amount of cruft in it of the commercial systems. The locking scheme was the one of the cleanest, I ever saw (Stellar's Stellix was the only one that was as good, IMO). The memory system was really impressive. I remember when we were doing the TNC distributed FS work that what would become the TruCluster FS for DEC at the same time. The DG/UX version was the simplest (and the HP/UX version the most twisted confused). I'm now mixing up the differences in my mind, but I think I remember DG/UX had some sort of file system stacking scheme at the inode level. I'm not sure if it ever shipped, but we worked on a Union file system for them; that I remember was very cool (Plan9ish in splicing file system namespaces together). I seem to remember it was all made possible because of the lower level memory scheme. But I might be mixing that up with one of the systems we were hacking (it was definately not OSF/1 or its child Tru64). As you said, the user space API was basically System V, but DG did support a lot of BSDism also; so bringing networking code from 4.2/4.3 was not terrible; although since it was not fish or fowl, you had to be careful. The big issue when it came out, is that SunOS (and later Solaris) had become the defacto system at most universities, where much 'free software' was being produced. Since it was more System V user API at the heart (which was good for DG's targetted ISVs), it did suffer from the porting issues. Since it was an 88K and SunOS had been 68K, the Endian issues of the free SW was less of a problem, but not only was not a VAX, but it was not BSD. Clem > =E1=90=A7 --0000000000009c1c05057f952786 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Let me see if I can illuminate from a = little I was aware.=C2=A0 I know some of the histories from my time at Locu= s when DG was a=C2=A0customer of ours.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Although, I'm going = to show my old f*rt, cultural illiteracy (not a TV person) by having no ide= a who 'John Snow' is, so I can not comment on that reference ;-)

I think you are right that some of the histories tend to= tided to people's experience at their college or universities and I= 9;m not sure how well DG sold in those markets.=C2=A0 Plus they bet on Moto= , who fumbled with the 68000 replacement (88k), compared to IBM's PPC a= nd later Intel's remarkable recovery with the 386.=C2=A0 Since they joi= ned the losing side of the chip war, I suspect that also hurt them, even th= ough the system was actually well done.

At one tim= e I had access to the sources of DG/UX and yes you are correct it was very = clean and easy to understand (and fairly well documented).=C2=A0 =C2=A0At t= he time, we (LCC) had the sources to DG/UX, Ultrix, Tru64, OSF/1, SunOS, So= laris, HP-UX, AIX, Prime, as well as all of the AT&T releases.=C2=A0 (T= he management at Locus used to say we were the Swiss of the UNIX industry= =C2=A0 - we sold arms to all the sides of the war).=C2=A0 =C2=A0
As for=C2=A0 DG/UX, their=C2=A0kernel seemed like it was a rewri= te (I never knew how much of it was the SW folks in NC (who had been buildi= ng their=C2=A0failed "Fountainhead" system that the Soul-Of-The-N= ew-Machine book talks about, and how much was the MA folks that did Clarion= later on).=C2=A0 It was definitely the sanest of all of the UNIX kernels w= e had access and had the least amount of cruft in it of the commercial syst= ems.=C2=A0 The locking scheme was the one of the cleanest, I ever saw (Stel= lar's Stellix was the only one that was as good, IMO).=C2=A0 The memory= system was really impressive.=C2=A0 I remember when we were doing the TNC = distributed FS work that what would become the TruCluster FS for DEC at the= same time.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The DG/UX version was the simplest (and the HP/UX v= ersion the most twisted confused).=C2=A0

I'm now m= ixing up the differences in my mind, but I think I remember DG/UX had some = sort of file system stacking scheme at the inode level.=C2=A0 I'm not s= ure if it ever shipped, but we worked on a Union file system for them; that= I remember was very cool (Plan9ish in splicing file system namespaces toge= ther).=C2=A0 =C2=A0I seem to remember it was all made possible because of t= he lower level memory scheme.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But I might be mixing that up wit= h one of the systems we were hacking (it was definately not OSF/1 or its ch= ild=C2=A0Tru64).=C2=A0

As you said, the=C2=A0user=C2= =A0space API was basically System V, but DG did support a lot of BSDism als= o; so bringing networking code from 4.2/4.3 was not terrible; although sinc= e it was not fish or fowl, you had to be careful.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The big issue= when it came out, is that SunOS (and later Solaris) had become the defacto= system at most universities, where much 'free software' was being = produced.=C2=A0 Since it was more System V user API at the heart (which was= good for DG's targetted ISVs), it did suffer from the porting issues.= =C2=A0 Since it was an 88K and SunOS had been 68K, the Endian issues of the= free SW was less of a problem, but not only was not a VAX, but it was not = BSD.=C2=A0

Clem
=
3D""==E1=90=A7
--0000000000009c1c05057f952786--