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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 24986 invoked from network); 2 May 2022 13:19:28 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 2 May 2022 13:19:28 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 374F59D461; Mon, 2 May 2022 23:19:27 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 211BA9D431; Mon, 2 May 2022 23:17:14 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Sm/91ZDF"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2F72B9D431; Mon, 2 May 2022 23:17:11 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-oa1-f45.google.com (mail-oa1-f45.google.com [209.85.160.45]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D18E9CE23 for ; Mon, 2 May 2022 23:17:10 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-oa1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-d6e29fb3d7so14196698fac.7 for ; Mon, 02 May 2022 06:17:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=s735iMbW756AhiGmDYbkw0GMg1JX3CsxzpveCLaPWeo=; b=Sm/91ZDF9kpO7tGPK5BCsJy92daB19bxf90nc6QGAwf0d3iT7O/6MHqbLUy+lrTyIE L74teXzMXHkqdNGMGlxccairpyYHXrRhJVpXGD6zLS54MynK/jBb8nUSyrBokl48iQ6D 2XrRk+WtRA2CaYVUPJnE/l8QepdeOYc7/znfaDECwAMju9O32YZ7Z3LXxQ9QATQ9W78f GqRGuDpXg46PjlW/tibNSoKu/ToMGHXByN0eb+cJUCjdrLQ8VPsfjJzsnagP4J+sIYAG 0k1kV7EU13vmN6sC97E0PvY/ESeSOrH+l7fsKCB/MKI7EXHzYVV8Uq1A9Y6ASEb8THUM cvYA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=s735iMbW756AhiGmDYbkw0GMg1JX3CsxzpveCLaPWeo=; b=feO8L85n8gAm/xtqUw385G0kFUS+KsTPipoCJxmI7DQqn2aZzmfeABg6wfReB/8fa2 Ya5k6zQlPRrUebnJzBNYvKgFii4+aU6dFsHv4i7NN63gvl6ICzYBLyXK5b5gosepzf2t FrK3L36hVfrVLNFjhUkVm5qzUArtO634YcRmEzZ4x7czo1DAFCEmifV4XMOS9+H5cjBb EHRWtq6z7w+252oZh/LAtASPhRZj1KeiRDAfMBAf6zeGHUFcj8tdrLXOJZzsRSLLln4m nEWNcX/HePRSXaXYWSv+RL1punLMawkG3l1xQ+R6VDeo7ZVDlEBzKXlfZwfD5U+8BYBe T3Gw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532rEaQrKTaf5ISEbm5Vr13Cr3SXOLVapsRLbnErMubRqEy+uNFN yDEEBpaliivd34XfKokpoVOKrZNBajMrAPRAQikp/ice5oc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw1/k0WlLpIgYqDnrpR1wvj464EFpgBDAFG5AbA5S4haMKr35FjWrGMwI27bsf+zZ20T2l2Xe+66AZg/0HIpfA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:e991:b0:de:e86c:99be with SMTP id r17-20020a056870e99100b000dee86c99bemr4547099oao.278.1651497429872; Mon, 02 May 2022 06:17:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <57977CE7-DDCC-4861-BBD2-843B9B9F51C2@ronnatalie.com> <202205020242.2422g30m074857@ultimate.com> In-Reply-To: <202205020242.2422g30m074857@ultimate.com> From: Dan Cross Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 13:16:58 +0000 Message-ID: To: Phil Budne Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a7b4b805de0735f5" Subject: Re: [TUHS] First Unix-like OSes not derived from AT&T code? 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" --000000000000a7b4b805de0735f5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, May 2, 2022, 2:43 AM Phil Budne wrote: > Ron Minnich 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." > > My memory, from having a "finger" program that tried to display the > foreground/active process for each tty/login/utmp entry, is that there > it was possible there were multiple code bases (tho it's possible > there was just one, and it mutated wildly across major versions), all > called "AIX" (and as my old boss, Barry Shein (BZS) at Boston > University said, they all "will remind you of Unix"), there were (at > least) versions for: > > RT PC > RS/6000 (POWER, PowerPC) > PS/2 > > I never had access to AIX/370, but BZS got a chance to try it out in a > VM on the academic computing S/390, and ISTR he said it finished > compiles before you hit return. > > There was also a (pretty clean, ISTR) port of 4.3 BSD to the RT called > "ACIS", but it might only have been available to academic sites. > The RT 4.3 port was called AOS (for the, "Academic Operating System"). It was mostly Tahoe with NFS and came with most of the sources, but some bits were distributed only as object code: I believe some of the MM bits? Perhaps the MMU code? I vaguely recall this being one of the things people had a hard time with when trying to port Reno and 4.4 to the RT. ACIS was, I believe a marketing term for the RT running AOS as sold to universities. The port was fairly faithful; the C compiler was a bit strange "High C" or "Hi C", bit GCC was available after a while, but had some bug and could not compile the kernel. Charlie Sauer kindly answered some AOS/RT questions on this list a few years ago, but as I'm typing this on my phone, I can't look them up right now. :-( My memory is also that IBM had a very broad license for SVR2 and when > the Open Software Foundation came together (with people who weren't > AT&T or Sun), IBM was able to offer that up as a code base. My understanding is that AIX on the mainframe was closer to OSF/1 than to AIX on the RS/6000, which was rather different than AIX on the RT. RS/6000 was the successor to the RT, and AIX on the latter stopped after version 2, so I'm guessing RS/6k was more evolved than RT AIX, while (as I heard it many years ago) mainframe AIX was its own thing; the name was mostly marketing. - Dan C. --000000000000a7b4b805de0735f5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, May 2, 2022, 2:43 AM Phil Budne <phil@ultimate.com> wrote:
Ron Minnich 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<= br> > code."

My memory, from having a "finger" program that tried to display t= he
foreground/active process for each tty/login/utmp entry, is that there
it was possible there were multiple code bases (tho it's possible
there was just one, and it mutated wildly across major versions), all
called "AIX" (and as my old boss, Barry Shein (BZS) at Boston
University said, they all "will remind you of Unix"), there were = (at
least) versions for:

RT PC
RS/6000 (POWER, PowerPC)
PS/2

I never had access to AIX/370, but BZS got a chance to try it out in a
VM on the academic computing S/390, and ISTR he said it finished
compiles before you hit return.

There was also a (pretty clean, ISTR) port of 4.3 BSD to the RT called
"ACIS", but it might only have been available to academic sites.<= br>

T= he RT 4.3 port was called AOS (for the, "Academic Operating System&quo= t;). It was mostly Tahoe with NFS and came with most of the sources, but so= me bits were distributed only as object code: I believe some of the MM bits= ? Perhaps the MMU code? I vaguely recall this being one of the things peopl= e had a hard time with when trying to port Reno and 4.4 to the RT.

ACIS was, I believe a marketing = term for the RT running AOS as sold to universities.

The port was fairly faithful; the C compiler w= as a bit strange "High C" or "Hi C", bit GCC was availa= ble after a while, but had some bug and could not compile the kernel.
=

Charlie Sauer kindly answered= some AOS/RT questions on this list a few years ago, but as I'm typing = this on my phone, I can't look them up right now. :-(

My memory is also that IBM had a very broad license for SVR2 and when
the Open Software Foundation came together (with people who weren't
AT&T or Sun), IBM was able to offer that up as a code base.

My understanding= is that AIX on the mainframe was closer to OSF/1 than to AIX on the RS/600= 0, which was rather different than AIX on the RT.
RS/6000 was the successor to the RT, and AIX on t= he latter stopped after version 2, so I'm guessing RS/6k was more evolv= ed than RT AIX, while (as I heard it many years ago) mainframe AIX was its = own thing; the name was mostly marketing.

=
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 - Dan C.

--000000000000a7b4b805de0735f5--