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=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, 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 d85f91ca for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:31:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 847359B9CD; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 01:31:42 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA9D99491B; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 01:31:24 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="WTnH1fNz"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4D9AB9491B; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 01:31:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qt1-f193.google.com (mail-qt1-f193.google.com [209.85.160.193]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C04694803 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2019 01:31:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qt1-f193.google.com with SMTP id l9so23765845qtu.6 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 08:31:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Et1x0q0hYHVFgTfhVbT/RPDlGGx/sOr3PKzpWvCWhUg=; b=WTnH1fNzq9cvjlgwUa+14NcEohzZr4od2Cw+pQfoLO4UAZd/BCgqBBsALUxO89aT6X lXigSD3og4/X21Asc40FH4Flzn+IJ4O7u9M9pZLx1R9Ktds74ln3ZnIVOgGAX0t2IA5s +7tDg9J2WywDAUFBzqfiyGPoNV7Xra8NMqAH3UzPt3tb8nsMz2PmUEQGEhNlyvPTMAjl qHQvY4dc8ic714pEVgD3U36LRKblj+vewRRkR6jQzt8b8/zNs/ywaumhbJ76EUakSiUK o7nFchEkrlvFhdeFnqOQHYbRV7o5Sc8Py4FHEbHEDDvOCtRbv88b0WWvjYaWol5i+YIz 9ODg== 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=Et1x0q0hYHVFgTfhVbT/RPDlGGx/sOr3PKzpWvCWhUg=; b=bczvfBeSWa1G3CrGykgUy1jKfeede3UafZHjRZ0L3V8UtVozrBSlTSO1gmZyAXEQCB hkkD3+tSYUk7A76iTyMA5mOdqQz8s/fZbGM/G5dvzdSoFBy+NZG9wjcLHz8VtCLvxJVR mHl12KilpjdwDaFBPcWBAJuMaMiwBSXu4ZWprx7bamnwdC58BPbXak/LEoMEEqFI/gXU izx8PBW3UQpd2MjTJcVORQlRFB5ibus99cn4+PRDMyIBxgKhJv8FFpzOiUcgZLmKmfQu y1u+4HlVmHGGpYMB2h1F8F/mTDE+KmBdS6/mEVF52or8CzCj+fsLGy4W1f3UOcNmU8hh OxqA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVyokK3Ii6OVnh+2vYEybjyxAiYWb6GfGFKeQIDfRgD3VXMI1z+ c7i4UmJdT9cRmV0AimYhPkFTrWe42HKq50MaQto= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwNvcbHkAppcsl4FXzKFGFh9kzJQ8OcxdaIhqJlIQkkz9Zk8B2e3+nsTSqCj4vnzsdaNVC2KGe+0VgXay8MZT0= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:acfb:: with SMTP id n56mr29333966qvc.87.1563377479557; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 08:31:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8235a090-c48a-4587-8974-23305233bc33@PU1APC01FT026.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <3CFC8159-08DD-4647-8CEF-FE8D196AB3C9@ccc.com> <610F6FCB-F24D-4788-953A-83E0E6456622@ccc.com> <017d16e0-3a7d-b3e7-29b8-8a454d78463f@e-bbes.com> <201907170810.x6H8AELx031974@freefriends.org> <20190717151101.GD16562@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: <20190717151101.GD16562@mcvoy.com> From: Warner Losh Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 09:31:08 -0600 Message-ID: To: Larry McVoy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000051bc78058de22fcc" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Old 386 Unix Versions, was: Re: PCC for the i386 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: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000051bc78058de22fcc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 9:11 AM Larry McVoy wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 02:10:14AM -0600, arnold@skeeve.com wrote: > > emanuel stiebler wrote: > > > > > On 2019-07-11 18:50, A. P. Garcia wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:31 PM Clem cole wrote: > > > > > > > Did Sun have anything to do with that? I seem to recall something > > > > called "Interactive Unix" for the 386, possibly marketed by Sun... > > > > > > "Interactive Unix" was pretty nice back than. > > > Anybody remembers ESIX? Still have the document wall for that ... > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > Sun had a '386 based system in early 90s-ish called the Road Runner. > > I never saw it. It ran SunOS 4.x and I think was discontinued by the > > time Solaris 2.x came along. > > Yep, can confirm. I was a fan but the powers that were at Sun at the > time just didn't want competition for SPARC. Which was sort of silly, > a 386 was nowhere near as fast as the SPARC chips of the day, that was > when RISC actually made sense. But perhaps they had a crystal ball > and could see that x86 was going to be as fast or faster down the > road? I tend to doubt it, they really looked down on the 386. > And wasn't it a weird version of SunOS? Support for the Roadrunners was only in a couple of releases too (4.0, 4.0.1 and 4.0.2 only). Most of the sunos sources that have fallen off a truck on the internet are 4.0.3 and newer, so there's no i386 support in them. I used a Sun386/250 at Wollongong to do testing. Mostly it ran X and was one of the available X workstations in the testing lab since it was weird enough people didn't want to use it (though the Sony News box next to it might also have come in a close second for weird). The wikipedia page says there was a Sun486 (code named apache) that was designed and a few built, but that was then cancelled before release. Warner --00000000000051bc78058de22fcc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 9:11 AM Larry= McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:
<= /div>
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019= at 02:10:14AM -0600, arnold@skeeve.com wrote:
> emanuel stiebler <emu@e-bbes.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2019-07-11 18:50, A. P. Garcia wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:31 PM Clem cole <clemc@ccc.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Did Sun have anything to do with that? I seem to recall some= thing
> > > called "Interactive Unix" for the 386, possibly ma= rketed by Sun...
> >
> > "Interactive Unix" was pretty nice back than.
> > Anybody remembers ESIX? Still have the document wall for that ...=
> >
> > Cheers
> >
>
> Sun had a '386 based system in early 90s-ish called the Road Runne= r.
> I never saw it. It ran SunOS 4.x and I think was discontinued by the > time Solaris 2.x came along.

Yep, can confirm.=C2=A0 I was a fan but the powers that were at Sun at the<= br> time just didn't want competition for SPARC.=C2=A0 Which was sort of si= lly,
a 386 was nowhere near as fast as the SPARC chips of the day, that was
when RISC actually made sense.=C2=A0 But perhaps they had a crystal ball and could see that x86 was going to be as fast or faster down the
road?=C2=A0 I tend to doubt it, they really looked down on the 386.

And wasn't it a weird version of SunOS? Su= pport for the Roadrunners was only in a couple of releases too (4.0, 4.0.1 = and 4.0.2 only). Most of the sunos sources that have fallen off a truck on = the internet are 4.0.3 and newer, so there's no i386 support in them. I= used a Sun386/250 at Wollongong to do testing. Mostly it ran X and was one= of the available X workstations in the testing lab since it was weird enou= gh people didn't want to use it (though the Sony News box next to it mi= ght also have come in a close second for weird).

T= he wikipedia page says there was a Sun486 (code named apache) that was desi= gned and a few built, but that was then cancelled before release.

Warner
--00000000000051bc78058de22fcc--