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_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 2977 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2021 18:41:07 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 6 Jun 2021 18:41:07 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4AA959CA2E; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:41:07 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE059C9DA; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:40:53 +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="AA0vJBB2"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0E6719C9DA; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:40:52 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qv1-f43.google.com (mail-qv1-f43.google.com [209.85.219.43]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCF6D9C9D6 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 04:40:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qv1-f43.google.com with SMTP id x2so7080860qvo.8 for ; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 11:40:50 -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=gwDFOSG7TNblkQVzoY+X58kiRf4WUiyIsCfTqF26VOg=; b=AA0vJBB2gC+D+WLfeMyhD/C8SmC2sqxHdFHdi/V52xhxMVe/Vgzi7kB3LwHM2fgs6d KwIyhlHZevNmfj7RxR5UD/wck7lxF3W+sXVlkB3rz90JDRnB676ChwbG0grxV8WP8w3P 3Qsvc+V/EVtjpdc7s6UUhxX0TiS9N1aSLImR+zXnDkTRhMyMeo4yQsuxP2kOJXDoQK8d 6ho3s0JALyFA0QQrC8jj1YNilXONNRS3yqovMQmYqJQsu1Znp9Biwh1HtzSIEdalUOtA ribfb7QUWSoHO1Vc/SNKKG0Z9SrM4hFQgoBXuNfHvlLxtiJE5Dq+vXMhiqNBTs0HREw2 iQEg== 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=gwDFOSG7TNblkQVzoY+X58kiRf4WUiyIsCfTqF26VOg=; b=NpYornDxZYRhtPnp7IQbq8P5jf9VjfohjXFCYu3lQQIv8AL+K86IXuFwMZfusvLSy4 ur2CTmpSY4O+wfq8GGU0sAPp0FPju0/KLUF/qBRoDiRbWU4S+6k4AwHyBwl2lKnojiHW GHyhqy8T+wlfbmMuzIwgjhACAjW22N7AV+lRYhpn+pYZyk5G3k6Md8eBOydims9H78b5 Vy0Hxw8kRuDkB8Q0cK+AnUCswm1nExEc58M3ReZY1PRKDkcDPab+rEJF83AfGyuIURGX dfEbqjM+d09YtMplH9Pw3vrdKksXUkDvia5mgEwy1+tVoAn4WG+bqRj/q6KmPJm2khKr PLGg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yckt08MqC3lX55qK3sdfzWXkv87AMD3+uHGJFFWc6M7Z26tj+ t4dkJQARqa9eYIdq8FWifGT1Q8hZAvdobAlhvNtQsA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxh62T5Gb5Kd+Whhj6V/YiVQkqcABNTKBN7ZZxWr69QacJHLPk94UO1RVm9tpphVZz8Y5ZoQP/Z1DouvDuD5NI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:16c1:: with SMTP id d1mr14272168qvz.62.1623004849907; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 11:40:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9CE2AC05-6B4E-475F-874F-426DD51A8859@planet.nl> <20210606183011.GA10697@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2021 12:40:38 -0600 Message-ID: To: Clem Cole Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008c3cf205c41d4379" Subject: Re: [TUHS] 32V memory management: not quite V7 style swapping -- source code update 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 , Paul Ruizendaal Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --0000000000008c3cf205c41d4379 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 6, 2021, 12:36 PM Clem Cole wrote: > 4.2 had networking, 4.1 did not. 32V did not either. I'm asking 32V vs > 4.1 > =E1=90=A7 > My info is from the 4.2 time frame... Warner On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 2:30 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > >> BSD had networking. Once you had that, you don't look back. Sys V (and >> prior) so far as I know, didn't get networking until Coherent did their >> STREAMS stack that somehow ended up at Lachman - I ported it to a crazy >> super computer and to SCO Unix. SCO was pretty stock AT&T code and let >> me tell you, it felt pretty crappy after having used BSD and then SunOS. >> It was a giant step backwards. >> >> I just think the BSD folks were moving forward faster. Rob with start >> talking about cat waving its tail, I get it, not everything was better >> but a lot was. Solid networking that performed was very pleasant. >> >> On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 02:23:49PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: >> > Paul, >> > >> > You got me thinking and I'm curious if anyone really knows historicall= y >> how >> > many sites ran a 32V system? In those days (late 70s/early 80s) the >> > universities that knew and and even many sites inside the Bell System, >> the >> > Vaxen I ran 4.1BSD (say the Marx's brothers at Whippany along with the >> Vax >> > in the underseas research lab were we put the AP I did for my thesis). >> > There were a couple in Summit I know, and probably Homdel and I'm >> guessing >> > in some of the operating companies, but I never got the feeling 32V wa= s >> > popular. The folks with Vaxen that I knew, if you were able to run BS= D >> > (4.1 and eventually 4.2), did. Later on the only non-'pure-joy' >> systems I >> > knew were a couple of Ultrix systems because they wanted the support >> from >> > DEC and IIRC were using FORTRAN and wanted the DEC compiler which only >> ran >> > on Ultrix or VMS. Inside of AT&T, I personally think I knew more folk= s >> > with VMS (Fortran being the key anchor) than those that ran 32V. >> > ??? >> >> -- >> --- >> Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com >> http://www.mcvoy.com/lm >> > --0000000000008c3cf205c41d4379 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sun, Jun 6, 2021, 12:36 PM Clem Cole <clemc@ccc.com> wrote:
4.2 had networking, 4.1 did not.=C2=A0= =C2=A032V did not either.=C2=A0 I'm asking 32V vs 4.1
3D""= =E1=90=A7

=
My info is from the 4.2 time frame...

Warner=C2=A0

On Sun= , Jun 6, 2021 at 2:30 PM Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:
BSD had networking.=C2=A0 On= ce you had that, you don't look back.=C2=A0 Sys V (and
prior) so far as I know, didn't get networking until Coherent did their=
STREAMS stack that somehow ended up at Lachman - I ported it to a crazy
super computer and to SCO Unix.=C2=A0 SCO was pretty stock AT&T code an= d let
me tell you, it felt pretty crappy after having used BSD and then SunOS. It was a giant step backwards.

I just think the BSD folks were moving forward faster.=C2=A0 Rob with start=
talking about cat waving its tail, I get it, not everything was better
but a lot was.=C2=A0 Solid networking that performed was very pleasant.

On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 02:23:49PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
> Paul,
>
> You got me thinking and I'm curious if anyone really knows histori= cally how
> many sites ran a 32V system?=C2=A0 =C2=A0In those days (late 70s/early= 80s) the
> universities that knew and and even many sites inside the Bell System,= the
> Vaxen I ran 4.1BSD (say the Marx's brothers at Whippany along with= the Vax
> in the underseas research lab were we put the AP I did for my thesis).=
> There were a couple in Summit I know, and probably Homdel and I'm = guessing
> in some of the operating companies, but I never got the feeling 32V wa= s
> popular.=C2=A0 The folks with Vaxen that I knew, if you were able to r= un BSD
> (4.1 and eventually 4.2), did.=C2=A0 Later on the only non-'pure-j= oy' systems I
> knew were a couple of Ultrix systems because they wanted the support f= rom
> DEC and IIRC were using FORTRAN and wanted the DEC compiler which only= ran
> on Ultrix or VMS.=C2=A0 Inside of AT&T, I personally think I knew = more folks
> with VMS (Fortran being the key anchor)=C2=A0 than those that ran 32V.=
> ???

--
---
Larry McVoy=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 l= m at mcvoy.com=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0http://www.mcvoy.com/lm
--0000000000008c3cf205c41d4379--