From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 12700 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2021 16:05:11 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 2 Apr 2021 16:05:11 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 345269CA0C; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 02:05:08 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779DC9C641; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 02:04:11 +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="b5Vu1XFa"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id D6CC19C641; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 02:04:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f173.google.com (mail-qk1-f173.google.com [209.85.222.173]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1017E9C63F for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2021 02:04:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f173.google.com with SMTP id x11so5611451qkp.11 for ; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 09:04:09 -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=2DOVVW2okXnng9QNxxizV1uzWZz12uu97LRGrnLv+Ys=; b=b5Vu1XFaLiY48CInXVrWHFp/020v7xKzXHyYSGlIu+3OFVefXkzI7uoNqofd0wvDFy kc/CW7onmxV1SM7Q5cvezFYdAkGuMzvuqonGFTAeMO6BzFZ5E6Vg5xIjoWG3H+x/RpBw YPWkf6QE7yyXjM824YU9Kbum/O14Pp/ZVe/WA= 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=2DOVVW2okXnng9QNxxizV1uzWZz12uu97LRGrnLv+Ys=; b=ITBPDJ9/BWNoFD3bu4PX1clX+0Kk2q5llvT95e2hnMil9KztThfTW+A8PtpHiNTOI/ vTSxRE2x8EsKxQYPltjs3Kh8z405unmpA2QMvugoD/cEW5C+q7/3Xnd71GxxlorIfVWb t1vGIg/qRcXIJTtk62RE7vah1+MoY1sfUi/kjaWXwNDpJvlnoxDE0optjMNRjaJxgbeF uHe+T4jef4NgNml9e0zFMCv5M6UQEXvR9HxTxTSuTlz/hzO6bUHfteM4nyq33ocWNhSy 2xX2AN8h0iWSRmEiH0K0oyXF41cYvtXgOzRQiqAqh97S81Wt3AluDAWUxKe1zZVG3ioP ieag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5311jH9hfTyfDW0gA1of/hcnTw4sHTtelFxS9KnQrX4xEp0hLCuv vGDxmHKC3dyfeB0pY7j2Soj8RoCel7nmd5Z0ueath76g3w87IQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxMGYeLcnUlHHhMUqyQ8xYY7ejBESWGA90qWOB+vJQIDkFHi2G3lQ2FhQ7hjef4sMV76BdpvfKs9KBzeWARl6I= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:12ae:: with SMTP id x14mr13962148qki.25.1617379447678; Fri, 02 Apr 2021 09:04:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210401145025.GA1202@naleco.com> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 12:03:41 -0400 Message-ID: To: Wesley Parish Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000072394405beff7f57" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Zombified SCO comes back from the dead, brings trial back to life against IBM 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 , Josh Good Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000072394405beff7f57 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 11:54 PM Wesley Parish wrote: > I don't think anybody was even thinking of porting any of > the *BSD to IBM mainframes till much later, am I right? > No. BSD was very much on IBM's radar in the late 1970s and 1980s. Long before Linus released Linux into the wild in 1990 for the >>386<< much less any other ISA, IBM had been shipping as a product AIX/370 (and AIX/PS2 for the 386); which we developed at Locus for them. The user-space was mostly System V, the kernel was based on BSD (4.1 originally) pluis a great deal of customization, including of course the Locus OS work, which IBM called TCF - the transparent computing facility. It was very cool you could cluster 370s and PS/2 and from >>any<< node run a program of either ISA. It has been well discussed in this forum, previously. A for AIX/370 a quick history which Charlie can fill in more from the IBM side, was that in the last 60s and early 70s, IBM had a strange hold on the education/research market with the S/360; but lost it because of the lack of timesharing to DEC and PDP-10 based systems as IBM was more and more focused on the commercial sector where there was much more money to be made. But ... there was a drive in the IBM educational/research team to be able to reenter that market and Locus was hired to develop AIX/370 (and later PS2) as it was felt that UNIX was considered an important offering for those customers. After it was released as a product, it turned out purchasing AIX/370 was exceedingly difficult (for a number of reasons), although it was extremely well received by those that ran it, but getting it was difficult. In fact, I have been told by folks that there at the time, that using TCF was an important feature here at Intel for the success of the simulation for the 486 and Pentium. Again, Charlie can tell you the history but IBM also developed AIX for the RS/6000 which was the same OS (only different) from IBM Austin (no TCF, but supported DS which was cool in its own right). Locus was actually contracted to develop a UNIX subsystem for the AS/400 also, but I'm not sure if that ever shipped. I had left Locus and had gone to DEC by then. --00000000000072394405beff7f57 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 11:54= PM Wesley Parish <wobblygong@gm= ail.com> wrote:
=C2=A0I don't think anybody was even thinking of porting any of<= br> the *BSD to IBM mainframes till much later, am I right?
No.=C2=A0 =C2=A0BSD was very much on=C2=A0IBM's radar in the late= 1970s and 1980s.

Long befor= e Linus released Linux into the wild in 1990 for the >>386<< mu= ch less any other ISA, IBM had been shipping as a product AIX/370 (and AIX/= PS2 for the 386); which we developed at Locus for them.=C2=A0 The user-spac= e was mostly System V, the kernel was based on BSD (4.1 originally) pluis a= great deal of customization,=C2=A0including of course the Locus OS work, w= hich IBM called TCF - the transparent computing facility.=C2=A0 It was very= cool you could cluster 370s and=C2=A0PS/2 and=C2=A0from >>any<<= ; node run a program of either ISA.=C2=A0 =C2=A0It has been well discussed = in this forum, previously.

A= for AIX/370 a quick history which Charlie can fill in more from the IBM si= de, was that in the last 60s and early 70s, IBM had a strange hold on the e= ducation/research market with the S/360; but lost it because of the lack of= timesharing to DEC and PDP-10 based systems as IBM was more and more focus= ed on the commercial sector where there was much more money to be made.=C2= =A0 =C2=A0But ... there was a drive in the IBM educational/research team to= be able to reenter that market and Locus was hired to develop AIX/370 (and= later PS2) as it was felt that UNIX was considered an important offering f= or those customers.=C2=A0 After it was released as a product, it turned out= purchasing AIX/370 was exceedingly difficult (for a number of reasons), al= though it was extremely well received by those that ran it, but getting it = was difficult.=C2=A0 In fact, I have been told by folks that there at the t= ime, that=C2=A0using TCF was an important feature here at Intel for the suc= cess of the simulation for the 486 and Pentium.=C2=A0
=
Again,=C2=A0Charlie can tell you the history but = IBM also developed=C2=A0AIX for the RS/6000 which was the same OS (only diffe= rent)=C2=A0from IBM Austin (no TCF, but supported DS which w= as cool in its own right).=C2=A0 Locus was actually contracted to dev= elop a UNIX subsystem for the AS/400 also, but I'm not sure if that eve= r shipped.=C2=A0 I had left Locus and had=C2=A0gone to DEC by then.
= --00000000000072394405beff7f57--