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=-0.8 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 743a5030 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 03:33:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id A949BA370D; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:33:51 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85E05A3704; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:32:48 +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="jviWbcEm"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 304DCA3704; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:32:46 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qt1-f178.google.com (mail-qt1-f178.google.com [209.85.160.178]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FA3EA3705 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 13:32:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qt1-f178.google.com with SMTP id k12so46339342qtf.7 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2019 19:32:45 -0800 (PST) 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=4HbjgRw+h6Y6tNlUNVNqq1odxGbYhfeH/uVncgJaF0I=; b=jviWbcEm+yyFB4a3H48Gz7cKr1fuUIc0RIk2PuzXKg/3a4dseEzBpyUPnUPsjUMfJe 2223w48n74oqxNBYgfldtwao7hi6kdTD69gD7P5FB8wWkjXRjNMQOGEI9zfSVlG3ZOoB f82c7pLCGeWxCTVRHjulOqh17WU3Nechw464kB+zVc7gXZIR/DTjY6/qkJmAZlPbOVoa 1piZszWiT3cKTQ6tx20F7D1f4XYde8WnZy4aniPPQhssCJBZlXmXFl73cfN/od98JMvE 5OHxGh9DHfQbsUNwKGT/otYpWws7iGQKz75PbO+D2kYVPtxyXkGTGSN73CWD0ZpXpBxP xV4w== 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=4HbjgRw+h6Y6tNlUNVNqq1odxGbYhfeH/uVncgJaF0I=; b=BXQ0gA1h8TAaWvvIh5lrT1Dygi6XTiRfijGGFKbQ2yB4uaFEqdxf57OLMQ29oOlYyK 7sRbn5CUtQ3QNngqQrhpKdMI97aPHNoeNj58t7i8Z5uTPRncmGdCI6rLBZb/VsW+5gaF BJUaMbdxZ1moxrc1eeegyq4EpTeB5ssOhhyVA6mAWO6ECQ9q+JJKBQ94D9rOcWoMsbvj bwONItgpTHG51NwszpQpbq5u9JS6WZaLee+lXyDL7W444O0195ena3S92EFDI0LGRs7c 07V9nk6Cv9E3dMe5ouxXG6SKD/0NLd/fA/B61m+dBpF1uMGdYVTYusczg7zrPFMmTExG F1XQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdddd3ubDLxcv7OYdWL+O+NsMvW7BWSYExEEkaspvvmzBWvPUzV K/bW60sIR7JpsMdkXvGQ3uR9aQ5iI4xcERjPLSOlng== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5BBU1o+j08tsT8Tdt8oa6bWUA5Az83D2OHpO6pyMKOpA2saw2xM9wUCW5thBsKSadSLSNe1nx2jYeUH08qOqE= X-Received: by 2002:a0c:bd15:: with SMTP id m21mr59151455qvg.57.1546831964299; Sun, 06 Jan 2019 19:32:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <201901062341.x06NfXe2021557@darkstar.fourwinds.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 20:32:32 -0700 Message-ID: To: "A. P. Garcia" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c27a20057ed5e124" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Isaacson v Unix [really RMS bashing] 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" --000000000000c27a20057ed5e124 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sun, Jan 6, 2019, 7:59 PM A. P. Garcia > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2019, 9:39 PM Warner Losh >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2019, 7:06 PM Steve Nickolas > >>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019, A. P. Garcia wrote: >>> >>> If not for GNU, Unix would still have been cloned. Net/2 happened in >>> parallel, did it not? >>> >> >> Berkeley actively rewrote most of unix yes. Net/1 was released about the >> same time GNU was getting started. Net/2 and later 4.4 BSD continued this >> trend, where 4.4 was finally a complete system. BSD386 only lagged Linux by >> about a year and had much stronger networking support, but supported fewer >> obscure devices than linux... >> >> Warner >> >> Ps I know this glosses over a lot, and isn't intended to be pedantic as >> to who got where first. Only they were about the same time... and I'm >> especially glossing over the AT&T suits, etc. >> > > It's really hard to say. How would you compile it? Clang didn't come along > until 2007. The Amsterdam Compiler Kit, perhaps? > The portable c compiler PCC was used to bootstrap a lot of this. It kinda sucked, but was decent enough. Early unix vendors used it on a variety of platforms. Here different universities produced different back ends. But there was no central clearing house. Gcc was a bit innovative in that it provided that, which allowed people to cooperate enough to make it better than PCC, at first. Then better or comparable to vendor compilers. Competition with gcc in large measure drove Sun to unbundle its compilers so there was a revenue stream that could be pointed at technology improvements. Somewhere between 4.3 and 4.4 BSD started using gcc over pcc since it was easier to distribute. The gnu project was important, but not because it rewrote the kernel. It provided the enabling compilers for that... Warner > --000000000000c27a20057ed5e124 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


= On Sun, Jan 6, 2019, 7:59 PM A. P. Garcia <a.phillip.garcia@gmail.com wrote:


On Sun, Jan 6, 2019, 9:39 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com= wrote:
=

On Sun, Jan 6, 2019, 7:= 06 PM Steve Nickolas <usotsuki@buric.co wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019, A. P. Garcia wrote:
If not for GNU, Unix would still have been cloned.=C2=A0 Net/2 happened in =
parallel, did it not?

Berkeley actively rewrote most of unix yes. Net/1 was = released about the same time GNU was getting started. Net/2 and later 4.4 B= SD continued this trend, where 4.4 was finally a complete system. BSD386 on= ly lagged Linux by about a year and had much stronger networking support, b= ut supported fewer obscure devices than linux...
Warner

Ps I know this glosses over a lot, and isn't intended to be p= edantic as to who got where first. Only they were about the same time... an= d I'm especially glossing over the AT&T suits, etc.

It's= really hard to say. How would you compile it? Clang didn't come along = until 2007. The Amsterdam Compiler Kit, perhaps?

The portable c comp= iler PCC was used to bootstrap a lot of this. It kinda sucked, but was dece= nt enough. Early unix vendors used it on a variety of platforms. Here diffe= rent universities produced different back ends. But there was no central cl= earing house. Gcc was a bit innovative in that it provided that, which allo= wed people to cooperate enough to make it better than PCC, at first. Then b= etter or comparable to vendor compilers. Competition with gcc in large meas= ure drove Sun to unbundle its compilers so there was a revenue stream that = could be pointed at technology improvements. Somewhere between 4.3 and 4.4 = BSD started using gcc over pcc since it was easier to distribute. The gnu p= roject was important, but not because it rewrote the kernel. It provided th= e enabling compilers for that...

Warner
--000000000000c27a20057ed5e124--