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_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 2366 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2022 23:07:53 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 22 Dec 2022 23:07:53 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A63423C1; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:07:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-ed1-f44.google.com (mail-ed1-f44.google.com [209.85.208.44]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C39F7423C0 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:07:40 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-ed1-f44.google.com with SMTP id e13so4933270edj.7 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:07:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=q1OE0zoPjdD6eBhmK0DPY11+G6vWFlAMtYn0a+QQS7s=; b=wTElAZiV2zLNhdLXPEhTf4cVi/UHn8tBlh93EV6o6Nx/o9uCNeLLUplLah3QJcgadT osNSSnPpFmXaQUg2bLkovER1NrT2I+3biPGw+30g2EV/o0ZpzUWu8uEsTsXMNRvJ4DQW 2RtxlhJsjSij9QfZyI1I9f6bZfJUMLs77xwMIZdrO6TVmkKMNrJxAUytypB4iBQz7s2R PxJqNQHLWmu0yijF2ty0mKbx3LOFyHe1qP1chiV0yJfKpoob4MxQ6MsfK2vfoljA/+01 4dy7/zs5N7AY5IaA8GSKmQ6jrlkQ2aVuvhANZ1ywlHDR61IDL9nhtyU6mvBKof0ahiYd hctg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=q1OE0zoPjdD6eBhmK0DPY11+G6vWFlAMtYn0a+QQS7s=; b=WsyKmBFmdUO+cOtAGzOaEF+4qrQ7vxw46iSJjC5s8dkuiCy16R/dYToh3q/el2vSHL QH68N0qgsTSwhNkJLH8JpnH0iHPrTTzFg4cDDaanyWiRlnIu6/6zD7tRmijSRjrllWDQ xcreEIknPaNEsNLTUcy08AqytEEfdXYMj9wG9WtVF6/R6SxlbaSkMTQD/nbGI+VMLnLw veZrIGFHfFbYQEga6JI8CBpi4YoHKt8EHXuQSgWJfGG+F/PRIN6XviZnlE1WnTjM3TWi VNAFKVrWf38d2rp/6rt2JKSnv1oXHW2noEM2J8XZJ9ShTmJBqmSbLZq3VlxNWrpLBB/D jcqA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kqtebFz/Dauh6snhY9fG+xaWJ+dbMdMK3xa/6iOSd76CoyF1e9h ffTxVnCfaZ2X+WVKTdG3Rag7vjqKlhYrHr9WlzL2NRXE+h0VbYUs X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXsNzWg1y8zRxR2zwyojSicaKytov1EGD9A6Ffp6lzotrfgzyHSOfiHLrEUIWax9qq7Jirm57JwfAsBabd7zKSM= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c384:0:b0:46c:8a01:748e with SMTP id k4-20020aa7c384000000b0046c8a01748emr837694edq.48.1671750399204; Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:06:39 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221222172654.965D618C079@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 16:06:27 -0700 Message-ID: To: Noel Chiappa Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b2b5c005f072b878" Message-ID-Hash: CSDVKY3FUBJVOABF2GV4PLXAZH2B6LAX X-Message-ID-Hash: CSDVKY3FUBJVOABF2GV4PLXAZH2B6LAX X-MailFrom: wlosh@bsdimp.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: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: UNIX on (not quite bare) System/370 List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --000000000000b2b5c005f072b878 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 1:25 PM Warner Losh wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 10:27 AM Noel Chiappa > wrote: > >> > From: Bakul Shah >> >> > There is a further para: >> >> > Reducing external memory fragmentation to zero by utilizing the >> VAX- >> > 11/780 memory mapping hardware for scatter loading is high on the >> list >> > of things to do in the second implementation pass. >> >> I'm curious as to exactly what is meant by "external memory"? They must >> mean >> memory on the Synchronous Backplane Interconnect: >> >> http://gunkies.org/wiki/Synchronous_Backplane_Interconnect >> >> I.e. what most of us would call 'main memory'. >> >> If this code didn't even allocate main memory by pages, instead of in >> process-size blocks, it sounds like it's much like 32V (or is it 32V >> that's >> being discussed; I thought this thread had moved on to the Reiser demand >> paging version - my apologies it I've gotten lost). >> >> >> Also, this note: >> >> http://gunkies.org/wiki/Talk:CB-UNIX >> >> from Dale DeJager (which he kindly gave me permission to post) > > > It's quite similar to a note he posted to I think unix-wizards mailing > list back in the late 80s. I found it for my early unix talk and it's why I > call cbunix the first fork. > Looks to be comp.unix on Jan 17, 1984 in our archive as Usenet/comp.unix/1984-January/007696.html and while it is somewhat similar to the gunkie's talk page, it differs in a number of ways. So I think Dale wrote these notes independently and didn't repost his earlier effort more recently. The gunkies note says it was retired in favor of Unix 4.0, but the earlier post says it was 5.0. this is also my source for the New Jersey Bell reference, though the above link also says that (I didn't see this before my last message). Of note for this thread, that article says: >>Note that CB-UNIX was not a derivative of UNIX/RT, but >>of Version 6 and Version 7. PWB UNIX was also a derivative of Version 7. >>USG UNIX was originally a derivative of Version 6 and 7 with some CB-UNIX >>facilities added. Eventaully a decision was made to consoldate to two >>versions of UNIX: UNIX/TS and UNIX/RT. RT was a derivative of MERT, and >>TS a derivative of PWB UNIX. RT was to be used by Operations Systems, but >>was never too widely accepted. Eventually, UNIX/TS was augmented to have >>many of the features present in CB-UNIX (this was done by Roger Faulkner >>at Indian Hill, BTL. This, in turn, became the base for UNIX 4.0, which >>was never released externally. While this augmentation was going on, UNIX/TS >>was being changed into UNIX 3.0 which was release externally as SYSTEM III. which gives a few more details, but it still leaves us wanting more. PWB 1.0 was Version 6 based (since V7 hadn't come out yet when it was released), so maybe it's talking about a later PWB that was V7 based? But last time this came up, people disputed that CB-Unix never ran on anything newer than the 11/70... > gives a fair >> amount of detail on the relationship between the Research and CB/UNIX >> versions, with a brief mention of USG - precisely the era, and >> relationships, >> that are so poorly documented. Interestingly, he indicates that the early >> versions of what later became CB/UNIX used something in the V1/V3 range >> (V4 >> was the first one in C), so it dates back earlier than most people >> apparently >> assume. >> > > For my early unix talk, I think I pegged that at V2. Running on the 11/20 > coupled with V3 manual strongly suggesting running on 11/20 would be better > with v1 or v2. > > If anyone else has any first-hand notes (i.e.from people who were there at >> the >> time), about the relationship between all the early systems, for which the >> author has given permiosssion to post it, please send it to me and I will >> add it to the appropriate article on the CHWiki >> > > The source I had said it was NJ Bell that did the productization of v2 in > 1972 or 1973 for the SCCS project. I have a memory of reading somewhere > that Columbus took over maintenance once they deployed and out of that grew > cbunix. I'll see if I can find that again. It matches other things I've > read that Columbus provided support for the operating companies deploying > unix. > I do wish I had pointers to more posts or notes from 'back in the day' from the early 80s with memories still relatively fresh. Warner > Warner > > Probably the most needed is more about the roots of USG; Dale has filled in >> CB/UNIX, and the roots of PWB are covered fairly well in the BSTJ article >> on it: >> >> https://archive.org/details/bstj57-6-2177 >> >> at least, for PWB1. Anything that covers the later PWBs would likewise be >> gratefully receied. >> >> >> I suppose I should also write up the relationships of the later UNIXen - >> 32V >> and its descendants too - any material sent to me about them will be most >> gratefully received. (If anyone want a CHWiki account, to write it up >> themselves, please let me know). >> >> Noel >> > --000000000000b2b5c005f072b878 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 1:25 PM Warne= r Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:<= br>


On Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 10:27 AM Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrot= e:
=C2=A0 =C2=A0= > From: Bakul Shah

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 > There is a further para:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >=C2=A0 Reducing external memory fragmentation to zero by = utilizing the VAX-
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >=C2=A0 11/780 memory mapping hardware for scatter loading= is high on the list
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 >=C2=A0 of things to do in the second implementation pass.=

I'm curious as to exactly what is meant by "external memory"?= They must mean
memory on the Synchronous Backplane Interconnect:

=C2=A0 http://gunkies.org/wiki/= Synchronous_Backplane_Interconnect

I.e. what most of us would call 'main memory'.

If this code didn't even allocate main memory by pages, instead of in process-size blocks, it sounds like it's much like 32V (or is it 32V th= at's
being discussed; I thought this thread had moved on to the Reiser demand paging version - my apologies it I've gotten lost).


Also, this note:

=C2=A0 http://gunkies.org/wiki/Talk:CB-UNIX

from Dale DeJager (which he kindly gave me permission to post)
=

It's quite si= milar to a note he posted to I think unix-wizards mailing list back in the = late 80s. I found it for my early unix talk and it's why I call cbunix = the first fork.

Looks to be com= p.unix on Jan 17, 1984 in our archive as=C2=A0Usenet/comp.unix/1984-January= /007696.html and while it is somewhat similar to the gunkie's talk page= , it differs in a number of ways. So I think Dale wrote these notes indepen= dently and didn't repost his earlier effort more recently. The gunkies = note says it was retired in favor of Unix 4.0, but the earlier post says it= was 5.0. this is also my source for the New Jersey Bell reference, though = the above link also says that (I didn't see this before my last message= ). Of note for this thread, that article says:

>= ;>Note that CB-UNIX was not a derivative of UNIX/RT, but
>>of V= ersion 6 and Version 7.=C2=A0 PWB UNIX was also a derivative of Version 7.<= br>>>USG UNIX was originally a derivative of Version 6 and 7 with som= e CB-UNIX
>>facilities added.=C2=A0 Eventaully a decision was made= to consoldate to two
>>versions of UNIX: =C2=A0UNIX/TS and UNIX/R= T. RT was a derivative of MERT, and
>>TS a derivative of PWB UNIX.= RT was to be used by Operations Systems, but
>>was never too wide= ly accepted. Eventually, UNIX/TS was augmented to have
>>many of t= he features present in CB-UNIX (this was done by Roger Faulkner
>>= at Indian Hill, BTL. This, in turn, became the base for UNIX 4.0, which
= >>was never released externally. While this augmentation was going on= , UNIX/TS
>>was being changed into UNIX 3.0 which was release exte= rnally as SYSTEM III.

which gives a few more d= etails, but it still leaves us wanting more. PWB 1.0 was
Version = 6 based (since V7 hadn't come out yet when it was released), so maybe
it's talking about a later PWB that was V7 based?
But last time this came up, people disputed that CB-Unix never= ran on anything newer
than the 11/70...
=C2=A0
gives a fair
amount of detail on the relationship between the Research and CB/UNIX
versions, with a brief mention of USG - precisely the era, and relationship= s,
that are so poorly documented. Interestingly, he indicates that the early versions of what later became CB/UNIX used something in the V1/V3 range (V4=
was the first one in C), so it dates back earlier than most people apparent= ly
assume.

For my early unix talk, I think I pegged that at V2. Running on the = 11/20 coupled with V3 manual strongly suggesting running on 11/20 would be = better with v1 or v2.

If anyone else has any first-hand notes (i.e.from people who were there at = the
time), about the relationship between all the early systems, for which the<= br> author has given permiosssion to post it, please send it to me and I will add it to the appropriate article on the CHWiki

The source I had said it was= NJ Bell that did the productization of v2 in 1972 or 1973 for the SCCS pro= ject. I have a memory of reading somewhere that Columbus took over maintena= nce once they deployed and out of that grew cbunix. I'll see if I can f= ind that again. It matches other things I've read that Columbus provide= d support for the operating companies deploying unix.

I do wish I had pointers to more posts or notes from= 'back in the day' from the early 80s with memories still relativel= y fresh.

Warner
=C2=A0
W= arner

Probably the most needed is more about the roots of USG; Dale has filled in=
CB/UNIX, and the roots of PWB are covered fairly well in the BSTJ article on it:

=C2=A0 https://archive.org/details/bstj57-6-2177=

at least, for PWB1. Anything that covers the later PWBs would likewise be gratefully receied.


I suppose I should also write up the relationships of the later UNIXen - 32= V
and its descendants too - any material sent to me about them will be most gratefully received. (If anyone want a CHWiki account, to write it up
themselves, please let me know).

=C2=A0 =C2=A0Noel
--000000000000b2b5c005f072b878--