PC/IX
ᐧ

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 11:32 AM Mary Ann Horton <mah@mhorton.net> wrote:

> I recall having an IBM PC port of UNIX in the 1980s on floppy with a black
> 6x9 box and Charlie Chaplin with the red rose. I thought it was called AIX.
> I installed it, and recall it being very different from UNIX for sysadmin
> (different logs, different admin commands) but similar for users. I thought
> it was based on System III or thereabouts.
>
> I can't find any evidence of this. It appears AIX 1.0 wasn't for the
> original PC.
>
> Does anyone else recall this distribution and what it was called or based
> on?
>
> Thanks,
>
>     Mary Ann
> On 5/1/22 19:08, Kenneth Goodwin wrote:
>
> My understanding of AIX was that IBM licensed the System V source code and
> then proceeded to "make it their own". I had a days experience with it on a
> POS cash register fixing a client issue. The shocker - they changed all the
> error messages to error codes with a look at the manual requirement.
>
> Not sure if this is true in its entirety or not.
> But that's what I recall, thst it was not a from scratch rewrite but more
> along the lines of other vendor UNIX clones of the time.
> License the source, change the name and then beat it to death.
>
> On Sun, May 1, 2022, 2:08 PM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> in terms of rewrites from manuals, while it was not the first, as I
>> understand it, AIX was an example of "read the manual, write the
>> code."
>>
>> Unlike Coherent, it had lots of cases of things not done quite right.
>> One standout in my mind was mkdir -p, which would return an error if
>> the full path existed. oops.
>>
>> But it was pointed out to me that Condor had all kinds of code to
>> handle AIX being different from just about everything else.
>>
>>
>>