From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id da96d4f8 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 686D69B4F2; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 02:44:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF4DE93DBE; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 02:43:52 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="UAy9XBT5"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id DE85F93DBE; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 02:43:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f66.google.com (mail-vs1-f66.google.com [209.85.217.66]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0D8F93D9E for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 02:43:49 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f66.google.com with SMTP id a143so2691420vsd.9 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 08:43:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qLZ5LkTrF4Fc83l4C6HFuSZBqi0Xt0olXj72HfAHnAE=; b=UAy9XBT5kw2eJiK1Q8inK1CIPF4uX5H/WUsm95qWyCGrn7HiX98pCG0gISaNIR2wwt rBnxEEuRM1fyZON7x7OjfNy/GdAvuR71gREAyf3zZveAZce9bBsrf5zvxRkgPpNQqISs ZCRvt3sGOcHlP88mWkI1VPLl9+getN76qllZmmyeRyxP1F3J1Kgl9Xp8w84PvTNK65Fh FMIyky4U8Htk0Zu1N9LOCOaI8+cNpj/Ue1+Picz4sREVKqLcB4tVPXWPhBV27GOG74nS 38NLnxCRu4LHcNgE1XWjvft30Kux7mEL8YpQLVhnQ01xxJnzkpcofN1uUWX00uJadgmR 1a+Q== 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=qLZ5LkTrF4Fc83l4C6HFuSZBqi0Xt0olXj72HfAHnAE=; b=X18yHYEio7P9Rx4DZ2faVbjtDHsCXO9rLgO4zN6TXLvSr2mDnNb8C92r0V7BYM4ExM dwAywT7YhV6RrL+hE4GUAOkKDSci9pppEobAtOlLGqV4WbVJCgbDEJTG0N49UD2zXk9+ 3uSqP6q/c0qNmNTyjIiun9kRYrKiZ7CRLTIB+JYBVhC3ulXEdo7KCCNt9d5PcNAS2wd1 6jYG6SmiBLZ2Aa5hmNhXYTY7NIxaendubOTbvX2ggr0t+Yro4RA6NQDYm8oLS3Nk1GOk javhWcNkq+GK1xOUWDjvN2MbGksTes6qrENpO+eqBOI7RoVgYF4TkeCSTZ+gC9hGBrUy j7+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWlAqXwTNAiG1NYFJKUzml++/6e+rn1no6qqtF4jRI0GMfEbVUp y99Lh+xzlFJOUk+9J1shv3iXgyuWA1ozSI1IkdI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzaHPImqhcfPOi0XS+2h0vHZi6SXWF6f5+ZnwiG40R6CfVEsdhdqXsTJJQNJI2aROCoITKkWWoHlot3t/GwzEc= X-Received: by 2002:a67:d20e:: with SMTP id y14mr7238516vsi.16.1574354628785; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 08:43:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: greg travis Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 11:43:37 -0500 Message-ID: To: Dan Cross Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000066381d0597de00b2" Subject: Re: [TUHS] AOS and IBM/RT [Re: Amdahl UTS, AIX/370, AIX/ESA 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" --00000000000066381d0597de00b2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" You're quite right about the religious error messages. I used MetaWare High C under DOS briefly, comparing it to Turbo C and Watcom. (Watcom won.) It had extensions to C, such as a coroutine-ish 'yield' keyword. On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:20 AM Dan Cross wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 8:07 AM Brad Spencer > wrote: > >> For a brief time a long time ago, I used a 4.3BSD based Mt. Xinu, MACH >> microkernel, OS on the IBM-RT as an alternative to AOS. Ran well >> enough, but was disk and memory constrained. We had source to much of >> the system (or perhaps all of it, don't remember), but I seem to recall >> that compiling it was a big pain. Something like you had to use a >> specific compiler (perhaps referred to as High C?? hc command perhaps) >> to compile some of the source. gcc had a backend for the ROMP >> processor, but it had a hard time making usable binaries. I think that >> some variation of pcc was the usual compiler. I remember it being >> pretty stock 4.3BSD with NFS and minus YP/NIS. We used them mostly as X >> terminal workstations. >> > > "High C" (or perhaps "Hi C"? It's been a while...) was the name of the > system compiler on AOS; I thought it was installed as `cc`. I don't recall > a pcc-derived compiler, but apparently such a thing did exist and some > documentation says that High C was installed as `hc`, so my memory may be > off. This old post describes RT compilers: > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt/u7DUwY5U9kQ/uVqLP9FhqMEJ > > Hi-C was sort of an odd compiler. I gather IBM outsourced the development > of it to some third party (MetaWare) which was founded by very religious > people, and I have a vague memory of some of the documentation or perhaps > even error messages making biblical references. > > The kernel had to be built with High C, if I recall correctly, though GCC > worked OK for producing userspace binaries. I don't recall what the bug > was, but it was eventually found and fixed. Perhaps it had to do with > incomplete register saves on function entry interacting poorly with > interrupts or something. > > Some RT enthusiasts kept those machines running well beyond their prime. > Why? I'm not entirely sure; as you say, they were memory and disk > constrained. They were also very slow. Anyway, I have some vague > recollection that at some point the bug in the compiler was fixed so that > GCC could produce a working kernel; nascent NetBSD and OpenBSD ports were > planned, but I don't think they ever went anywhere. > https://www.openbsd.org/romp.html exists, though I don't know that the > NetBSD people ever got beyond the talking stage. The OpenBSD-romp mailing > list had some interesting information, but I can't find archives anymore. > > Oh well. The RT was an interesting footnote in the history of computing, > but it seems that, as a workstation, it was too little too late by the time > it actually hit the market. Had they released it a few years earlier? > Perhaps they could have cornered the market. > > - Dan C. > > > --00000000000066381d0597de00b2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
You're quite right about the religious error messages.= I used MetaWare High C under DOS briefly, comparing it to Turbo C and Watc= om. (Watcom won.) It had extensions to C, such as a coroutine-ish 'yiel= d' keyword.

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:20 AM Dan Cross <crossd@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 8:07 AM Brad Spence= r <brad@andui= n.eldar.org> wrote:
For a brief time a long time ago, I used a 4.3BSD based Mt. Xinu, MACH
microkernel, OS on the IBM-RT as an alternative to AOS.=C2=A0 Ran well
enough, but was disk and memory constrained.=C2=A0 We had source to much of=
the system (or perhaps all of it, don't remember), but I seem to recall=
that compiling it was a big pain.=C2=A0 Something like you had to use a
specific compiler (perhaps referred to as High C??=C2=A0 hc command perhaps= )
to compile some of the source.=C2=A0 gcc had a backend for the ROMP
processor, but it had a hard time making usable binaries.=C2=A0 I think tha= t
some variation of pcc was the usual compiler.=C2=A0 I remember it being
pretty stock 4.3BSD with NFS and minus YP/NIS.=C2=A0 We used them mostly as= X
terminal workstations.

"High C&quo= t; (or perhaps "Hi C"? It's been a while...) was the name of = the system compiler on AOS; I thought it was installed as `cc`. I don't= recall a pcc-derived compiler, but apparently such a thing did exist and s= ome documentation says that High C was installed as `hc`, so my memory may = be off. This old post describes RT compilers:=C2=A0https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt/u7DUwY5U9kQ/uVqLP= 9FhqMEJ

Hi-C was sort of an odd compiler. I ga= ther IBM outsourced the development of it to some third party (MetaWare) wh= ich was founded by very religious people, and I have a vague memory of some= of the documentation or perhaps even error messages making biblical refere= nces.

The kernel had to be built with High C, if I= recall correctly, though GCC worked OK for producing userspace binaries. I= don't recall what the bug was, but it was eventually found and fixed. = Perhaps it had to do with incomplete register saves on function entry inter= acting poorly with interrupts or something.

Some R= T enthusiasts kept those machines running well beyond their prime. Why? I&#= 39;m not entirely sure; as you say, they were memory and disk constrained. = They were also very slow. Anyway, I have some vague recollection that at so= me point the bug in the compiler was fixed so that GCC could produce a work= ing kernel; nascent NetBSD and OpenBSD ports were planned, but I don't = think they ever went anywhere.=C2=A0https://www.openbsd.org/romp.html exists, thou= gh I don't know that the NetBSD people ever got beyond the talking stag= e. The OpenBSD-romp mailing list had some interesting information, but I ca= n't find archives anymore.

Oh well. The RT was= an interesting footnote in the history of computing, but it seems that, as= a workstation, it was too little too late by the time it actually hit the = market. Had they released it a few years earlier? Perhaps they could have c= ornered the market.

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


--00000000000066381d0597de00b2--