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,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 26660 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2022 22:29:30 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 Sep 2022 22:29:30 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2110417AC; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 08:29:25 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f41.google.com (mail-vs1-f41.google.com [209.85.217.41]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2BF7417A9 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 08:29:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f41.google.com with SMTP id n125so19806203vsc.5 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2022 15:29:22 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=HfYTmkjL0jB3NVqf1hl01s5xJ1v228PqhskbeR4qBk4=; b=zwFFPxR7oEga8RdTGe+Ygsp/qlY4ToofxJTmtLWHQtAyHlCDuPUHTQGhn1dH0KUW9f JsXQG+NuM2I5zubQDxp3BqjYuVUbFtlTtl6MQfwFGsQ+McKjkxXXzxsZ2Mgfrj5Hhx+H E4UhuKf0akuwvksa5177xRHU4l1jALrg1/yOqXVaOYzHILKogfTwyr7DyQ3W6cBKDqnJ 8q0aNRuaWv+mUvdYBNPnno9ysByxYbJ3zuDLDRX1HLx84emeaMQu15aCC3jO0T++sEu6 SW5zN/g6irzliaU13iViqXqevIVPd2Cf/nwG3TJDRdlf63MFxTrBWvG3Y2QleLrJNTIb PCOg== 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; bh=HfYTmkjL0jB3NVqf1hl01s5xJ1v228PqhskbeR4qBk4=; b=SDyW4NYgejuSXwwo4R//mLJSmY9Bjilvw8WVzUfBM1OV7+38wOGu/++axR6YgIeC5+ Xj3zZrnDlwJzkHerXm6BxZ5hF2aePWyCAibiNarRnqaNBR2PwdYRo0fM7by7gYMfP0Co 5iWfPVjFdQCMJGAF04x2Oz0ESIF1xWEl5zE8BkBd5bjMzaG50bollgMOfsCsx0m+5etQ hXvL0RUC/ua75ESuegu/HbCw3m+Ll2jS5N4q8+mrMMDmDxZjvLJxHttzV/6qjQxf+DtA rIjW77+Xjd3o3/Dmjn6bt874r+loJLkWaiVt0rZJObzWg/lvec1FEzHpWvlhm/Njt5Sq vZkg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1E+mJdrCQc1K61FOqQ7PBBrx+6HGetY9cKk/4mNLssT+l6kcDN fUaGaoYc7LjVzVflQbE2F9pojIfIU04U66zo/ahIOw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5HRyRvfv2ejWH1CB7qCDxKE46fqnXThw263Wo22MynGV9BS7jq3wiNJcSc+TyQjNIEroVngLc39bPGdBBnFSg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:38c6:b0:390:e7e4:8a7e with SMTP id k6-20020a05610238c600b00390e7e48a7emr4070275vst.38.1662676101896; Thu, 08 Sep 2022 15:28:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220908221639.GR11929@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2022 16:28:10 -0600 Message-ID: To: Larry McVoy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006e2d6805e831f2f3" Message-ID-Hash: YWOKQWLZYJZT4IPZ37W6UF65ISP7CHE6 X-Message-ID-Hash: YWOKQWLZYJZT4IPZ37W6UF65ISP7CHE6 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: segaloco , TUHS X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Re-implementations/Clean-Rooms et al. List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --0000000000006e2d6805e831f2f3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:26 PM Warner Losh wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:16 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 05:50:37PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote: >> > > BSD is a different beast, as they were literally replacing the AT&T >> source >> > > code before their eyes, so there isn't much argument that can be made >> for >> > > 4.4BSD being a "clean-room" implementation of UNIX. >> > >> > It was not a clean-room as Arthur defined it. It was rewritten over >> time, >> > which replaced AT&T's implementation. Which is all that was ever >> claimed. >> >> And it's a false claim. Go look at the Bell Labs bmap() and the BSD >> bmap(), the last time I looked they were bit for bit identical. >> > > Yea, this was part of the de minimis copying that was acknowledged... > It was mostly rewritten with most of AT&T's code gone. It's 110 lines of > code, > out of ~18,000 lines of kernel code. And the structure in 4.4BSD is > somewhat > different with balloc() being completely different than the rest of V7's > subr.c. > I should have added it was one of the 23 files in 4.4lite that was acknowledged as having some AT&T code that AT&T agreed to release... > I looked there because I split bmap() into bmap_read() and bmap_write() >> because the read path is trivial and the write path is quite a bit more >> difficult (this was all for the work srk imagined, and I did, to get >> rid of the rotational delays). So I was pretty familiar with that >> code path and as of about 20 years ago, well past 4.4BSD, bmap() was >> unchanged from either v7 or 32v. >> > > But it likely didn't matter, since 32v likely lost its copyright > protection due > to AT&T distributing too many copies without the required copyright > markings. > At least that was the preliminary ruling that caused the suit to be > settled... > AT&T didn't want it finalized, though the cat was somewhat out of the bag > at this point... > > >> The weird thing is it isn't that hard to write something that would >> walk the code and find other examples. Nobody seemed to care. >> > > Yea, most of the rest of the code around it was rewritten, but not that. > > Warner > --0000000000006e2d6805e831f2f3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:26 PM Warner= Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
=


On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 4:16 PM Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:
<= /div>
On Thu, Sep 08, 2022= at 05:50:37PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
> > BSD is a different beast, as they were literally replacing the AT= &T source
> > code before their eyes, so there isn't much argument that can= be made for
> > 4.4BSD being a "clean-room" implementation of UNIX.
>
> It was not a clean-room as Arthur defined it.=C2=A0 =C2=A0It was rewri= tten over time,
> which replaced AT&T's implementation.=C2=A0 Which is all that = was ever claimed.

And it's a false claim.=C2=A0 Go look at the Bell Labs bmap() and the B= SD
bmap(), the last time I looked they were bit for bit identical.

Yea, this was part of the de minimis copying that = was acknowledged...
It was mostly rewritten with most of AT&T= 's code gone. It's 110 lines of code,
out of ~18,000 line= s of kernel=C2=A0code. And the structure in 4.4BSD is somewhat
di= fferent with balloc() being completely different than the rest of V7's = subr.c.

I should have add= ed it was one of the 23 files in 4.4lite that was acknowledged
as= having some AT&T code that AT&T agreed to release...
=C2= =A0
I looked there because I split bmap() into bmap_read() and bmap_write()
because the read path is trivial and the write path is quite a bit more
difficult (this was all for the work srk imagined, and I did, to get
rid of the rotational delays).=C2=A0 So I was pretty familiar with that
code path and as of about 20 years ago, well past 4.4BSD, bmap() was
unchanged from either v7 or 32v.

But it= likely didn't matter, since 32v likely lost its copyright protection d= ue
to AT&T distributing too many copies without the required = copyright markings.
At least that was the preliminary ruling that= caused the suit to be settled...
AT&T didn't want it fin= alized, though the cat was somewhat out of the bag
at this point.= ..
=C2=A0
The weird thing is it isn't that hard to write something that would
walk the code and find other examples.=C2=A0 Nobody seemed to care.

Yea, most of the rest of the code around it wa= s rewritten, but not that.

Warner=C2=A0
--0000000000006e2d6805e831f2f3--