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,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 23567 invoked from network); 1 May 2022 12:00:49 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 1 May 2022 12:00:49 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7D4479CF6E; Sun, 1 May 2022 22:00:47 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B4149CF0E; Sun, 1 May 2022 21:59:55 +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="qUcYQ3uO"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id ECC1D9CF0E; Sun, 1 May 2022 21:56:27 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-io1-f50.google.com (mail-io1-f50.google.com [209.85.166.50]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CAA59CF04 for ; Sun, 1 May 2022 21:56:24 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-io1-f50.google.com with SMTP id c125so13814996iof.9 for ; Sun, 01 May 2022 04:56:24 -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=eSEj0aNdoRFK1EUNB+/O7aGHssmoimW1BCL8DNpuwlU=; b=qUcYQ3uOmVjox19EVM03gYYPUDrIHVJemC2Tapox56J6k/u5Qerr5Ya4pVWOLSHO8m LqIovd1h1hhDyq85WnzHat1G3bnwj76zfJum9scChG6E7T+RXrMpgCLODqZsZZpauxHA KezIJvSF9ccsbXLRPrXZQoGFDShBFtawkaOz6yhke3pNGHeHhWLK0qcnbriseWc1mwYW sqvysCHeFidzBQNznrWtZ+W8KfKrFLvvF1S2AEkb09z9jHp8F946QLn8JA9rkt1Poyfw 4qzfUax9qF5Bjz7147LTuts4Ly0M13akD8szglFgZbGNUAvnzZ/1IU7nnYXEeviGxa95 TpQg== 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=eSEj0aNdoRFK1EUNB+/O7aGHssmoimW1BCL8DNpuwlU=; b=0YrTRDrW7C3Fgc9IQUpnxI0exa2HI0k2ZN6IR5PVlBXx2K/mQ7njQquQGrmOC332tr i3QpZ5ZkSVQNqHgW7V6phaUNRVu8bG9/0XQcEZ1OP2bWMFqtLz9GqwdFRDrA93ohHaeJ KjizZvgthknb2olHr39eMr6YF/jf2CSIeLW8U57n0hO3XKl3FcaY3fxpvbpsfJl7pFiQ QFcSRGGhIEZLGBlaPTX5RHtFgSRqmDpaHaZhUePJ25G6jpd0e9Hr2qZvVCS+7eGOuw3M zSE8rbtED4oWfZuedzs1m0pKN8bqvEpxlDZR7otQrZPWCcc1b6ErD7ydTO141abwRnLG yvSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532MSFW+7VvWC6vVA8lKsAdqAIjHWnoLj+zVdQSNTsnopL7kNQ0A amfWbL4Sn2hly95LDxBMVjNN5gRF2nYlfr+1lGA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxya4JmQiIdlZvkvsgNEUVki4RCQkhOcvOEeGQYHL+PQZywSeqS2Jf04Ji2db3FCVVPX7o5ZsZJ7uTazuXYtLM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:150f:b0:64c:6878:1ec8 with SMTP id g15-20020a056602150f00b0064c68781ec8mr2712851iow.143.1651406183325; Sun, 01 May 2022 04:56:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <57977CE7-DDCC-4861-BBD2-843B9B9F51C2@ronnatalie.com> In-Reply-To: <57977CE7-DDCC-4861-BBD2-843B9B9F51C2@ronnatalie.com> From: Rob Pike Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 21:56:12 +1000 Message-ID: To: Ron Natalie Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000efe86205ddf1f6ba" 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" --000000000000efe86205ddf1f6ba Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The folks at Bell Labs were asked to figure out if Mark Williams had copied Unix directly or via too much knowledge already obtained, or whether it was truly a clean room recreation. I don't remember all the details, but it became clear after a while that it was indeed a reasonably clean rewrite. This was done by looking for corner cases that were an accident of the original implementation and would be unlikely to appear in a version created separately. One detail that did stick with me was the discovery during this process that ppt, the paper tape simulator, mispunched a letter, I think "R", but the Mark Williams version did not. Was that compelling? Not on its own, but it was funny and memorable. -rob On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 9:46 PM Ron Natalie wrote: > Mark Williams Coherent was one I worked with on the PC many years ago. > > > On May 1, 2022, at 11:34, Andrew Warkentin wrote= : > > > > =EF=BB=BFWhat was the first "clone" functional Unix (i.e. an OS not der= ived > > from genetic Unix code but highly compatible with genetic Unix)? Idris > > is the earliest such OS of which I am aware (at least AFAIK it's not a > > genetic Unix), but was it actually the first? Similarly, which was the > > first "outer Unix-like" system (i.e. one with strong Unix influence > > but significantly incompatible with functional Unix)? Off the top of > > my head the earliest such system I can think of is Thoth (which > > predates Idris by almost 2 years), but again I'm not sure if it was > > actually the first. > > --000000000000efe86205ddf1f6ba Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The folks at Bell Labs were asked to figure out if Mark Wi= lliams had copied Unix directly or via too much knowledge already obtained,= or whether it was truly a clean room recreation. I don't remember all = the details, but it became clear after a while that it was indeed a reasona= bly clean rewrite.

This was done by looking for corner c= ases that were an accident of the original implementation and would be unli= kely to appear in a version created separately. One detail that did stick w= ith me was the discovery during this process that ppt, the paper tape simul= ator, mispunched a letter, I think "R", but the Mark Williams ver= sion did not. Was that compelling? Not on its own, but it was funny and mem= orable.

-rob


On Sun, May 1, 20= 22 at 9:46 PM Ron Natalie <ron@ron= natalie.com> wrote:
Mark Williams Coherent was one I worked with on the PC many year= s ago.

> On May 1, 2022, at 11:34, Andrew Warkentin <andreww591@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =EF=BB=BFWhat was the first "clone" functional Unix (i.e. an= OS not derived
> from genetic Unix code but highly compatible with genetic Unix)? Idris=
> is the earliest such OS of which I am aware (at least AFAIK it's n= ot a
> genetic Unix), but was it actually the first? Similarly, which was the=
> first "outer Unix-like" system (i.e. one with strong Unix in= fluence
> but significantly incompatible with functional Unix)? Off the top of > my head the earliest such system I can think of is Thoth (which
> predates Idris by almost 2 years), but again I'm not sure if it wa= s
> actually the first.

--000000000000efe86205ddf1f6ba--