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_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 16528 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2022 10:33:04 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 16 Jul 2022 10:33:04 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7EB4071C; Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:32:27 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f53.google.com (mail-vs1-f53.google.com [209.85.217.53]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C051406FE for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:32:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f53.google.com with SMTP id a184so6294153vsa.1 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2022 03:32:22 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5YYcrJphvJ8vCRT348HTKbmAO7KLcIb+QV9xLAcEZ8E=; b=jaXlca8DMnqluxU8gwo9L3TVxMgQ4OINICAZWxT37v+wpDZTYbW4umiakGcPR49wXu Mfm+dhs7BpM7YB7udJyGgiFD+CfeshvNz/LIjmKzEIemRBsFOgZXQ6F5Gu0iVZEFm1fI X6nA3u2kLuzPYHdp0327kxkMgZD0sc8D3RAyIOCk242i0l+owp0KlLs74Tecg+oGotFR f1oe171mbsuuzGxkUJV7PhsgBXhq70jhx+cWZq05Px0dg4RUepkGG/8MXN88h0KSZMz2 swZUma2D+wv/5g3w2b8/9gUYLovX1mfOTJJQ46aYZQ6FzVS33VKHybTW03faNtta+7g5 HYIw== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5YYcrJphvJ8vCRT348HTKbmAO7KLcIb+QV9xLAcEZ8E=; b=ol3OIKQVGm4vELGzoY2Xpy1OiwQeD4pFD7CiURKtyA9Avxrh3Sx8+iH9SjKi18dNE8 vIf3jy6PHF5FRC4VTDUFu8x++0FDHV5XR9z3j+9xJe86LU10mnXPdQcVNrc96GSa8xTa lMakcFfm0jVOvfMlPGi1asKEJQ1cXabv59DbvYMurKBXuQtLQQdk5tGvWDqxWeQgfF+4 XdDtmQsQ5ZlrR4rZucEjJUZwiddcetPSheRsf2V9PH99uDpHq3hCslEaipSCvRLgnA/6 3lV7sZIKnse2NKBHdIMfG53zKpp2lSoiXvEzNGaopo3gaESs+sk2tToKtzJEBqbpjWfz NfZA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora9MaQp8FX5zaJTXUfl7rYAI37/zIZYG8YOywWmowDAx0groRmnM tdbx7u1L3Kjo2X66CUNv+KfyCEGbsxv6h5AnqMI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tTz+S9pnnQ/dV2qgGR+zyaR7n7uKO3jHqv+XmPUqKLgkvKCSvyjiR1AshipZPui8YqTy5yb/P7BKbgXDvj0KY= X-Received: by 2002:a67:cd94:0:b0:357:7a44:9a1a with SMTP id r20-20020a67cd94000000b003577a449a1amr7528079vsl.8.1657967481287; Sat, 16 Jul 2022 03:31:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2hK72A6Itq5yUS4eqzueKuU8hSC1JCR3XQbiHWTXnp-VS1V-eItyJ1gscCj2QR-0knXF7ukWVBxxzrC6e4TaN86l_2WAYK1eGrae2cskPb4=@protonmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Pike Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:31:10 +1000 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID-Hash: 6UPDB7JUFLOE52ZPFY2Y3GH4ODSYHZSY X-Message-ID-Hash: 6UPDB7JUFLOE52ZPFY2Y3GH4ODSYHZSY X-MailFrom: robpike@gmail.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: segaloco , The Eunuchs Hysterical Society X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: V8 4BSD or 32V Based? (was: Unix V8 Chaosnet, any takers?) List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: That sounds mostly right, from memory. V8 was definitely adapted from some 4BSD, not 32V - there was major internal friction on that decision. I will admit to being a defender of Reiser and London's VAX port, which was screamingly fast. However. Regarding select, I recall that Dennis implemented it and passed it to Berkeley*, but maybe not. He certainly had a hand in its design; I distinctly remember talking to him about it after one of his trips out west. -rob A note for the historians: Bell Labs's Unix Support Group (USG), which did development work for Unix, and was not even in the same building as Research, was run by Berkley (sic) Tague. Thus we had Berkeley Unix and Berkley's Unix and no end of fun and confusion on that score. On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 7:32 PM Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > > > > > On 15 Jul 2022, at 19:15, segaloco wrote: > > > Not trying to be combative by any means, but I've been doing a bit of r= esearch lately into when V8 was snapped from BSD and where Bell and Berkele= y then diverged from that last major confluence, especially with a focus on= init and other early stages of userland. > > Not taken as combative - always working on the basis of my 'current under= standing=E2=80=99 and that is evolving continuously as new views and facts = present themselves. > > My comments were intended around the kernel code, not the userland. That = said, I=E2=80=99ve looked into this a bit more and I think you were more ri= ght than I was. > > > "Research Unix 8th Edition started from (I think) BSD 4.1c, but with en= ormous amounts scooped out and replaced by our own stuff." - Dennis Ritchie > > That is a good quote, but I think there is a better way to look at this, = which is Warren=E2=80=99s tool to establish similarity between files (it is= integrated with the Unix Tree webpage on TUHS). > > > There's definitely a good chunk of code from 4BSD. Compare init, getty= , locore.c (as opposed to .s in V7 back). Heck, even the main.c between th= e two kernels are more similar to each other than V7. I would almost opt t= owards calling that being rebased on 4BSD rather than V7 with bits and piec= es of BSD added. I could see it being more beneficial to start with 4BSD a= nd tack on necessary Bell bits rather than take V7/32V and try and shoehorn= in the VM implementation for VAX. > > Looking at various kernel files in the V8 tree, it would seem that the mo= st comparable file in the TUHS database (and excluding V9-V10) would typica= lly be =E2=80=9CBBN-TCP=E2=80=9D, closely followed by =E2=80=9C4BSD=E2=80= =9D. This BBN-TCP kernel code is based on a snapshot of BSD from August 198= 0 (see its history file). Joy sent it to Gurwitz for integration of the BBN= TCP stack with the BSD kernel. I think it is (or is close to) 4.1BSD. > > From the output of Warren=E2=80=99s tool, it also seems that 4.1c deviate= d/evolved considerably from that base. It would require a more in-depth com= parison to say more, but based on this quick check I think it is reasonable= to say that V8 started from 4.1BSD (and not 32V as I thought, or 4.1c as d= mr remembered). It would be interesting to see what the "enormous amounts s= cooped out=E2=80=9D exactly were -- but maybe this refers more to the userl= and than the kernel. > > Some bits - like select() - were not in 4.1BSD and would have come from 4= .1c. The V8 kernel still has a lowcore.s (next to lowcore.c). Interestingly= , this has the best match with later BSD versions. In all likelihood, there= was cross-fertilisation after the initial code fork. > > > The 4.1cBSD copy on the archive does appear to be pretty different, so = in terms of raw comparison, I suspect the basis is 4BSD rather than 4.1cBSD= . I don't know that we have a clean copy of 4.1BSD gold, I'd be interested= to see if the structure of the source code changed between 4.1 and 4.1c, a= s 4.1c does exhibit the new organization by the BSD folks, 4BSD still shows= folders like cmd, lib, and so on. > > Yes, we have (now) reached the same conclusion, but don=E2=80=99t forget = that V8 adds a lot of innovation on top of that (streams, file system switc= h, virtual proc file system, networking, remote file system, support for th= e Blit terminal, etc.). Networking in the V8 kernel (including Chaos) is or= ganised very differently from 4.1cBSD. > > Paul >