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_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 11318 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2022 18:48:23 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 17 Dec 2022 18:48:23 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67EBE423E2; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 04:47:49 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vk1-f182.google.com (mail-vk1-f182.google.com [209.85.221.182]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 230F7423DF for ; Sun, 18 Dec 2022 04:47:44 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vk1-f182.google.com with SMTP id l17so2611611vkk.3 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2022 10:47:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8PbaknVeDhQzTKcjyg/8o9GySAGE5TSkx5EuRXFXjpQ=; b=XJUkjCCHiauDedBixLX0MIN4X9LLDPBm0kUDMfQ5qbgPbp0VTFMV1zzjCI459H5WLy lb48sfrf6WDVHXbT96axyfYk7imd7E6O2w9dmP21sztCH3+sT8lIlU9hWIGwLMOJ0937 UIsNrB93H0ekt6ecQVRkORuy1disjm6IZ8LF8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=8PbaknVeDhQzTKcjyg/8o9GySAGE5TSkx5EuRXFXjpQ=; b=w274x55SwInPUeJhuDNLDKORa2pz7dpCAgVcTTJIEwsMs7lnytBWLsotBtnlVbYAln 9e7ndB4XJahcDnTO219Nd4vUVBKTB4NymMNTYAtSI9mNSLe8bxIzJ5pFfPuREt8GtH+R yQmtovyff/HSw86huGX1XHIj+fLpPqFFVljreeXTadlA52VcJIouiNUEEjDMRFaTSfPI JRj0hrzkHorV2QmnK1mYQ8MPWKb1a1TtgvleT0XQLNUKCmKIUb41FiRWUnmSQRWWjeTq FYvCq6rqlQaIbQ8vS2UOqn2zuq3brKKZitHZt3bFOsYQR++2d334sxfBCqagxLZKYE+Z Gy6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kqovjz/uiQJVo0q7y1JQmfBo+eOuVge31+H8WB4L97QMZnWkYsW xxhY8l1ABmAbyyjvL9kTsorsHppv3DY5unD2h3skzDMCPhkejWhxbh8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXtnFfe9PLkguiZDSvxcEYjV9if1kpVpkeuNZEnePSN8XcEdwFvhJErjOW36lD7NXK7VqME2XvJRwMWKexglUd0= X-Received: by 2002:ac5:c1c1:0:b0:3c7:6a73:cd10 with SMTP id g1-20020ac5c1c1000000b003c76a73cd10mr1062915vkk.40.1671302803071; Sat, 17 Dec 2022 10:46:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2022 13:46:16 -0500 Message-ID: To: Tom Lyon Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e3b9da05f00a8110" Message-ID-Hash: CYF67YGZUU5KR3S5ACINNNAINIAYQQG2 X-Message-ID-Hash: CYF67YGZUU5KR3S5ACINNNAINIAYQQG2 X-MailFrom: clemc@ccc.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tuhs.tuhs.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Douglas McIlroy , TUHS main list X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: origin of null-terminated strings List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --000000000000e3b9da05f00a8110 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable typo... sigh... TSS was definitely a supported product throughout *the 1970s and into* the 1980s =E1=90=A7 On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 1:43 PM Clem Cole wrote: > Tom Lyon -- TSS was around and supported into the 80's. That said, I've > seen that May '71, but it might be a typo -- '81 sounds much more plausib= le > as it real death. IIRC Tom Haight has better dates in his book. > > FWIW: I was at CMU in the mid 70s [programming TSS including installing > fixes from the IBM support team]. Plus, my old boss, Dean Hiller, left C= MU > in the late 70s to work for IBM as a TSS system person [he retired from I= BM > years later and had moved to the AIX team at one point]. And I also hav= e > a copy of one of the TSS documents that has a printing date of 1980. > > It's also possible IBM stopped *selling new sites* in the early 70s, but > TSS was definitely a supported product throughout the 1980s. IBM had som= e > large and important customers running TSS, in particular, NASA and I > believe a couple of automotive ones -- maybe GM and Rolls Royce but I don= 't > know. IIRC: One of the original mechanical CAD programs had been > developed on it and users needed either MTS or TSS to run it properly. > > I also remember that in 77-78, when CMU started to move off the /67 to th= e > DEC-20s, IBM had counter-proposed an S370/168 with VM on it - which CMU h= ad > rejected. But Amdahl had proposed CMU could keep running TSS on their > then-newest system which was at least the V7 (maybe the V8 as I have > forgotten when the latter was released). > > Around that same time, Michigan had stayed with MTS but had switched to > Amdhal as the vendor. > =E1=90=A7 > > On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 1:15 PM Tom Lyon wrote: > >> Clem doesn't mention CP-67/CMS, which IBM kept trying to kill in favor o= f >> CMS. >> From Melinda Varian's amazing history of VM, I gleaned these factoids: >> CP-67 - 8 sites by May '68 >> Feb of 68 - IBM decommits from TSS >> Apr 69 - IBM rescinds decommit of TSS >> CP-67 - 44 sites by 1970, ~10 internal to IBM >> May 71 - TSS finally decommitted >> >> So TSS was a rocky road, while CP&VM were simple and just worked. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 9:13 AM Clem Cole wrote: >> >>> Given the number of ex-MTS (Bill Joy and Ted Kowalski, to name two) and >>> TSS hackers that were also later to be UNIX hackers after their origina= l >>> introduction to system programming as undergrads. I will keep this rep= ly >>> in TUHS, although it could be argued that it belongs in COFF. >>> >>> Note good sources for even more of the background of the history >>> politics at both IBM & GE can be found in Haigh and Ceruzzi's book: "A >>> New History of Modern Computing >>> " - >>> which I have previously mentioned as it is a beautiful read. >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 5:27 PM Douglas McIlroy < >>> douglas.mcilroy@dartmouth.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> IBM revealed Gerrit Blaauw's skunk-works project, the 360/67, >>>> but by then the die had been cast. Michigan bought one and built a >>>> nice time-sharing system that was running well before Multics. >>>> >>> All true, but a few details are glossed over, and thus, this could be >>> misinterpreted - so I'm going to add those as one of the people. >>> >>> TSS and the /67 was IBM's answer to Multics, as Doug mentions. Note >>> that the /67 could run as a model /65, which as I understand it, most >>> of the ones IBM sold did. >>> >>> At the time, IBM offered the /67 to Universities at a >>> substantial discount (I believe even less than the /65). Thus, several >>> schools bought them with Michigan, CMU, Cornell, and Princeton that I a= m >>> aware of; but I suspect there were others. >>> >>> TSS was late, and the first releases could have been more stable. >>> Cornell and Princeton chose to run their systems as /65 using the orig= inal >>> IBM OS. CMU and Michigan both received copies of TSS with their system= s. >>> Michigan would do a substantial rewrite, which was different enough th= at >>> became the new system MTS. CMU did a great deal of bug fixing, which = went >>> back to IBM, and they chose to run TSS. [I believe that CMU runs OS/36= 0 by >>> data and TSS at night until they felt they could trust it to not crash]= . >>> Nominally, TSS and MTS should share programs, and with some work, both >>> could import source programs from OS/360 [My first paid programming job= was >>> helping to rewrite York/APL from OS/360 to run on TSS]. So the compile= rs >>> and many tools for all three were common. >>> >>> MTS and TSS used the same file system structure, or it was close enough >>> that tools were shared. I don't know if OS/360 could read TSS disk pac= ks - >>> I would have suspected, although the common media of the day was 1/2" m= ag >>> tape. >>> >>> This leads to a UNIX legacy that ... Ted's fsck(8) - which purists kno= w >>> as a different name in the first version - was modeled after the disk >>> scavenger program from TSS and MTS. icheck/ncheck et al. seem pretty >>> primitive if you had used to see the other as a system programmer first= . >>> Also, a big reason why all the errors were originally in uppercase was= the >>> IBM program had done it. In many ways, neither Ted nor I knew any bett= er >>> at the time. >>> >>> Clem >>> >>> >>> >>> --000000000000e3b9da05f00a8110 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
typo... sigh...=C2=A0

TSS was defi= nitely a supported product throughout the = 1970s and into=C2=A0the 1980s
3D""=E1=90= =A7

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 1:43 PM Clem Cole <clemc@ccc.com> wrote:
Tom Lyon -- TSS was around a= nd supported into the 80's.=C2=A0 That said, I've seen that May = 9;71, but it might be a typo -- '81 sounds much more plausible as it re= al death.=C2=A0 =C2=A0IIRC Tom Haight has better=C2=A0dates in his book.

FWIW: I was at CMU in the mid 70s [programming TSS inclu= ding installing fixes from the IBM=C2=A0support team].=C2=A0 Plus, my old b= oss, Dean Hiller, left CMU in the late 70s to work for IBM as a TSS system = person [he retired from IBM years=C2=A0later and had moved to the AIX=C2=A0= team at one point].=C2=A0 =C2=A0And I also have a=C2=A0copy of one of the T= SS documents that has a printing date of 1980.

It'= s also possible IBM stopped selling new sites in the early 70= s,=C2=A0 but TSS was definitely a supported product=C2=A0throughout=C2=A0th= e 1980s.=C2=A0 IBM had some large and important customers running TSS, in p= articular, NASA and I believe a couple of automotive ones -- maybe GM and R= olls Royce but I don't know.=C2=A0 =C2=A0IIRC: One of the original mech= anical=C2=A0CAD programs had been developed on it and users needed either M= TS or TSS to run it properly.

I also remember that in = 77-78, when CMU started to move off the /67 to the DEC-20s, IBM had counter= -proposed an S370/168 with VM on it - which CMU had rejected.=C2=A0 But Amd= ahl had proposed CMU could keep running TSS on their then-newest system whi= ch was at least the V7 (maybe the V8 as I have forgotten when the latter wa= s released).=C2=A0 =C2=A0

Around that same time, Michi= gan had stayed with MTS but had switched to Amdhal as the vendor.
3D""=E1=90=A7

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 1:15 PM Tom Lyon <pugs78@gmail.com>= wrote:
Clem doesn't mention CP-67/CMS, which IBM kept trying to kill = in favor of CMS.
From Melinda Varian's amazing history of VM, I gle= aned these factoids:
CP-67 - 8 sites by May '68
Feb= of 68 - IBM decommits from TSS
Apr 69 - IBM rescinds decommit of= TSS
CP-67 - 44 sites by 1970, ~10 internal to IBM
May = 71 - TSS finally decommitted

So TSS was a rocky ro= ad, while CP&VM=C2=A0were simple and just worked.

<= div>

On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 9:13 AM Clem Cole <clemc@ccc.com> wrote:
Given the number of ex-MTS (Bill Joy and Ted Kowalski, to name= two) and TSS hackers that were also later to be UNIX hackers after their o= riginal introduction to system programming as undergrads.=C2=A0 I will keep= this reply in TUHS, although it could be argued that it belongs in COFF.

Note good sources for even more of the background of th= e history politics at both IBM & GE can be found in Haigh and Ceruzzi&#= 39;s book: "A New History= of Modern Computing" - which I have previously mentioned as it is= a beautiful read.

On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 5:2= 7 PM Douglas McIlroy <douglas.mcilroy@dartmouth.edu> wrote:
IBM revealed Gerrit Blaauw's skunk-works project, the 360/67,
but by then the die had been cast. Michigan bought one and built a
nice time-sharing system that was running well before Multics.
All true, but a few details are glossed=C2=A0over, and = thus, this could be misinterpreted - so I'm going to add those as one o= f the people.

TSS and the /6= 7 was IBM's answer to Multics, as Doug mentions.=C2=A0 Note that the /67 could run a= s a model /65, which as I understand it, most of the ones IB= M sold did.=C2=A0

At the time, IBM = offered the /67 to Universities at a substantial=C2=A0discount (I believe e= ven less than the /65).=C2=A0 Thus, several schools bought them with Michig= an, CMU, Cornell, and Princeton that I am aware of; but I suspect there wer= e others.

TSS was late, and the first releases could h= ave been more stable.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Cornell and Princeton chose to run their= =C2=A0systems as /65 using the original IBM OS.=C2=A0 CMU and Michigan both= received copies of TSS with their systems.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Michigan would do a= substantial rewrite, which was different enough that became=C2=A0the new s= ystem MTS.=C2=A0 =C2=A0CMU did a great deal of bug fixing, which went back = to IBM, and they chose to run TSS.=C2=A0 [I believe that CMU runs=C2=A0OS/3= 60 by data and TSS at night until they felt they=C2=A0could trust it to not= crash].=C2=A0 Nominally, TSS and MTS should share programs, and with some = work, both could import source programs from OS/360 [My first paid programm= ing job was helping to rewrite York/APL from OS/360 to run on TSS].=C2=A0 S= o the compilers and many tools for all three were common.

MTS and TSS used the same file system structure, or it was close enou= gh that tools were shared.=C2=A0 I don't know if OS/360 could read TSS = disk packs - I would have suspected, although the common media of the day w= as 1/2" mag tape.

This leads to a UNIX legacy tha= t ...=C2=A0 Ted's fsck(8) - which purists know as a different name in t= he first version -=C2=A0 was modeled after the disk scavenger=C2=A0program = from TSS and MTS.=C2=A0 =C2=A0icheck/ncheck et al. seem pretty primitive if= you had used to see=C2=A0the other as a system programmer first.=C2=A0 =C2= =A0Also, a big reason why all the errors were originally in uppercase was t= he IBM program had done it.=C2=A0 In many ways, neither Ted nor I knew any = better at the time.

Clem


<= /span>

--000000000000e3b9da05f00a8110--