From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 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,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 20159 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2020 13:27:47 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (minnie.tuhs.org: domain of minnie.tuhs.org designates 45.79.103.53 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=45.79.103.53 envelope-from= Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 30 Mar 2020 13:27:47 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0BC829D9C4; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:27:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F09499D713; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:27:07 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="iU0tDS+c"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0194F9D713; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:27:05 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f170.google.com (mail-qk1-f170.google.com [209.85.222.170]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF52C9D712 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:27:02 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f170.google.com with SMTP id v7so18858266qkc.0 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:27:02 -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=o90Pc5ev4CEZ3vve+5pBCr5qDShe3xsK/OeXt5YkS8g=; b=iU0tDS+c2j19imnPInnMT4rETDoCN0/IpsVjnz9HL96jGg5jrhCqfqp7ZTNr9GL6+R dcgUfqE2o7O8OP/nfFphaloHD0WdLazKZ7mm8l4hyMx2mywNwc5cqb2tkaeEP4agjs7N G+Cwc0aoVef5QgmBqIVRFs+6Zi78x9gggha7E= 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=o90Pc5ev4CEZ3vve+5pBCr5qDShe3xsK/OeXt5YkS8g=; b=bH86Br+Uo634mm+Yy2/STiAkXOxlrWP21u2zHPfqkqmCez8VrZHGRadgLRM0Bp7hdE DaFOqKMRs4lURqtmrT1znzy3xqashBZnsLoqenPaRzMhBlIPaKSdXxCv7BFf3EZFhHIv /foI8HdscyLPs1WCMEuuyh8NRcueHyjUnr7Cv8F3ilYm4KJksESrxvUoKgHOY/k451+x aHmh6fsW9e7YhXUZlNPcVtN/ot5hlQb5ZzwbpjYRPM4wroLGdGgvZ1CirfOnyQDKN9eG xGaFXfXK2Od3hDQCe75FZGSnh6VdkV6y+pPgegFYAdnNWsUVUusG1Gn8fbty6YFunIlj yhTA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ24JF6Xvc2H3KnJTMzCGkndo+MLwYUrimnNVXB+lHu7gEIvLg8W MS7+fsJFRC1A3gPj2Pa88wT68v9dG2i2zkt4lTGLhQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vvjRA2dFWhFZw356RMKbHz7WXBSEUrO7uqZ2vCgSZq8iPPy/Q5FccPo2+W7fba2J7B6K8yJi6qQol4+EwHvc48= X-Received: by 2002:ae9:ebd3:: with SMTP id b202mr11637987qkg.476.1585574821570; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 06:27:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20C3B8BE-E371-4694-8A34-EEC6A5461FAD@planet.nl> <202003291404.02TE4dAI022916@freefriends.org> <2298456D-A786-40C2-9C68-26C99E2002E1@planet.nl> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 09:26:35 -0400 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000013b7005a2126867" Subject: Re: [TUHS] 8th Edition timeline 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 Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000013b7005a2126867 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul - see below.. On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 3:43 AM Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > To be honest, late 1981 sounds a bit too early for the merge. The 4.1 cod= e > was ready in June 1981 and the =E2=80=99select=E2=80=99 system call was f= irst proposed in > July 1981, so it is possible. However, in the BSD line =E2=80=99select=E2= =80=99 was not > fully implemented until March/April 1982. > Please be careful here. 4.1BSD is different from the pre-'4.2' released and 4.2BSD itself. 4.1aBSD was the first pseudo release[1] that started to have the major surgery to support Bill's sockets idea and splice in the UCB rewrite of the BBN code. 4.1BSD was the first system for the Vax that really wide distribution. 'Anyone' with an AT&T license could get it and most people did. Remember this is the system that BBN (Gurwitz) did the original IP/TCP support (sans sockets - i.e. /dev/ip /dev/tcp ...). Your date of June '81 for the 4.1BSD release seems late, but I'll accept it. 3BSD was 1979, and I thought 4BSD was a year later, with 4.1BSD a few months after 4BSD (few people actually got 4BSD) That said, Bill and Sam did the heavy lifting on select(2) first in 4.1aBSD and there were some issues (again I have forgotten the details -- I do remember, I was working on my thesis and I had a do a huge rewrite of the AP kernel support to handle select(2) properly). I remember talking to Sam (arguing with him most probably) about it one night before it was fully created. I want to say, he had worked on something similar at the firm he was at (the firm name I now forget -- si-mumble -- they were in Mt. View) before he joined CRSG. I don't remember now the issues I had, but I do remember it was a bit of mess to support the way the AP hardware assumed it could do DMA on the UBA[2] [1] 4.1a/4.1b/4.1cBSD was officially internal to UCB and some ARPA-sites, although I would have expected someone like Dennis in 1127 to have been sent it also, as wnj was in the process of leaving for Sun and he took them with him. For instance, I would take 4.1c to Masscomp. The key is that these were not as widely distributed as 4.1BSD. 4.2BSD would really accelerate BSD UNIX uptake, because of the networking support but there was more than 2-3 years between 4.1BSD and 4.2BSD. [2] The AP's MMU/DMA interface at the time, was causing me great hair, and that was likely to have been part of the reason I wanted some help/changes in the KPI interface - which is actually funny, they eventually came with the CMU Mach MMU changes of 4.4BSD (which was much more friendly to a multiprocessor/coprocessor architecture). FWIW: I never got them when I was at UCB. --000000000000013b7005a2126867 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Paul - see below..

On Mon, Mar 30= , 2020 at 3:43 AM Paul Ruizendaal <pnr@= planet.nl> wrote:
To be honest, late 1981 sounds a bit too early for the merge. Th= e 4.1 code was ready in June 1981 and the =E2=80=99select=E2=80=99 system c= all was first proposed in July 1981, so it is possible. However, in the BSD= line =E2=80=99select=E2=80=99 was not fully implemented until March/April = 1982.
Please be careful here. 4.1BSD is different from t= he pre-'4.2' released and 4.2BSD itself. 4.1aBSD was the first pseu= do release[1] that started to have the major surgery to support Bill's = sockets idea and splice in the UCB rewrite of the BBN code.=C2=A0 4.1BSD wa= s the first system for the Vax that really wide distribution.=C2=A0 'An= yone' with an AT&T license could get it and most people did.=C2=A0 = Remember this is the system that BBN (Gurwitz) did the original IP/TCP supp= ort (sans sockets - i.e. /dev/ip /dev/tcp ...).=C2=A0 Your date of June = 9;81 for the 4.1BSD release seems late, but I'll accept it.=C2=A0 3BSD = was 1979, and I thought 4BSD was a year later, with 4.1BSD a few months aft= er 4BSD (few people actually got 4BSD)

= That said, Bill and Sam did the heavy lifting on select(2) first in 4.1aBSD and there were some issues (again I have forgot= ten the details -- I do remember, I was working on my thesis and I had a do= a huge rewrite of the AP kernel support to=C2=A0handle=C2=A0select(2) = properly).=C2=A0 I remember talking to Sam (arguing with him most pr= obably) about it one night before it was fully created.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I want = to say, he had worked on something similar at the firm he was at (the firm = name I now forget -- si-mumble -- they were in Mt. View) before he joined C= RSG.=C2=A0 I don't remember now the issues I had, but I do r= emember it was a bit of mess to support the way the AP hardware assumed it = could do DMA on the UBA[2]


[1] 4.1a/4.1b/4.1cBSD was officially internal to UCB and some ARPA-si= tes, although I would have expected someone like Dennis in 1127 to have bee= n sent it also, as wnj was in the process of leaving for Sun and he took th= em with him.=C2=A0 For instance, I would take 4.1c to Masscomp.=C2=A0 The k= ey is that these were not as widely distributed as 4.1BSD.=C2=A0 =C2=A04.2B= SD would really accelerate BSD UNIX uptake, because of the networking suppo= rt but there was more than 2-3 years between 4.1BSD and 4.2BSD.
=C2=A0[2] The AP's MMU/DMA interface at the time, was causing= me great hair, and that was likely to have been part of the reason I wante= d some help/changes in the KPI interface - which is actually funny, they ev= entually came with the CMU Mach MMU changes of 4.4BSD (which was much more = friendly to a multiprocessor/coprocessor architecture).=C2=A0 FWIW: I never= got them when I was at UCB.

--000000000000013b7005a2126867--