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 9814 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2022 15:54:32 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 Sep 2022 15:54:32 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C22CB41793; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 01:53:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-vs1-f54.google.com (mail-vs1-f54.google.com [209.85.217.54]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E85F641790 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2022 01:53:50 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-vs1-f54.google.com with SMTP id o123so18791913vsc.3 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2022 08:53:50 -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=47k8MC0MTz38mte815tRXGUe8kQ+iD+WSwvmCRCpMEM=; b=EIWuKyl1ErIHizVHVBaC82mPa3UbraXAp2ejZvBzJK7962ghMoC+2xDjlr5gRhGLBW TvYGBE33Qi84XsilGZy813UZ53OY7TQf/F+Dp6mIen/uLnq2u1fpbMlll0Uh2cV17zUg 9N+BOS9r9nHJ99/rRIenZZJstjFHn3L/fZxmlEjKDeyoaGAOCEJjPME2cJhhDwwWTWK0 tv5smoUz07/ZlsSnpgvL6CREDJYWlTe9KTO9F9ds2HvFI1CpbO5ddFfJowrwf+PgYvZC bcZ5MaJzMcq/HDfq4I2n+tOUgrdBxEB4umgnmL9ENmGK34GJOMibESCvUITkgUpzK+5D BfcQ== 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=47k8MC0MTz38mte815tRXGUe8kQ+iD+WSwvmCRCpMEM=; b=l7z9xGeQnDmcsz25lUPKno/rFuk/YOUpOMqAwpZvUugYUXtWcXVPV2ydP1pAcZ8z8o g5XBRs1XzLLco+qO0THtsS6V/FbRIvM7kdz+4hNWdREnJFfPCq7qxiLMkN0IUIlNaXDn DZsn03z6EVwl6Fa20UjG3m+Nl74VfqPkYS+Qid59SFwe7NtK3qrMShp3rPHvDTrxekoc sFcYRMS4ODF/XByV1Ncu+3FFrO5qZd08W3OEoXZzDpgCBJWZTZntwgfin1Mh2+3OwMCr bHta0A+YqP4w7EDhxyBXgPmY+JyoVwZAPXnl5CNk0stkpMUCJ3w+ce2C7CCh2P1jSMPc MBng== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo2TICzczqbwHtyO8x7/tfHw5aNhoIZGxyuQXNU5hUEhzlMtgmn6 Hzh8AjDR93otAzjdOjqxn7gn4MweueNTabSNmUUGpQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5ig832WVumwDznBqLQG0nMra5rM14i70tgOoad6QsN+ymAroKM75nBq8I0n8TooFaJv6thmT6a7HYeUCDq/tw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:38c6:b0:390:e7e4:8a7e with SMTP id k6-20020a05610238c600b00390e7e48a7emr3413928vst.38.1662652369861; Thu, 08 Sep 2022 08:52:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220907145631.GN31856@mcvoy.com> <8DDF5A51-AABF-41AF-993C-4D087903BDC9@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2022 09:52:38 -0600 Message-ID: To: ron minnich Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e413d905e82c6bfa" Message-ID-Hash: CFZNMZNWH574L3RSRJQOI5M56WW6DPA6 X-Message-ID-Hash: CFZNMZNWH574L3RSRJQOI5M56WW6DPA6 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: Steve Jenkin , TUHS X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Has this been discussed on-list? How Unix changed Software. List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --000000000000e413d905e82c6bfa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 9:05 AM ron minnich wrote: > I remember a comment someone at UDEL made when we'd been working with v6 > for a few years, starting in 1976. "v6 is fast as hell but it has its bug= s." > > It was a big deal, at least in 1976, to get through a week without a cras= h > of some sort. That's why we had all those pre-fsck programs for looking f= or > problems: icheck and ncheck existed for a reason. > > The -11 also had its corners, e.g. alignment traps to snag the unwary, an= d > hardware that, in several cases, did not completely honor the unibus spec= . > If the hardware has limits, or corners, and your kernel crashes because o= f > it, is it a bug that you did not accommodate the undocumented hardware > design? Given that you can't really go at your machine with a soldering > iron (well, not always; we all did some of that back then) it's arguably > your bug. > > Unix code was great, far better than a lot of what was out there, > certainly on the -11, but to say any of it shipped bug free certainly doe= s > not match my recollection. > In addition, when Dennis would talk about Coherent and his evaluation of the source code, he said he used the known to him, but not widely known bugs in Unix to try to catch copying. If there was copying, those would be copied. If it was freshly implemented, there's a high likelihood that they wouldn't. His conclusion was that someone had access to a lot of knowledge about the Unix system given the fidelity of the implementation, but the lack of bugs and novel ways of doing it suggested independent implementation. Warner > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 7:43 AM Paul Winalski > wrote: > >> On 9/7/22, Steve Jenkin wrote: >> > Would your folk ship code with a list of outstanding bug reports? >> >> ** Everyone ** ships code with known bugs. If you insist on getting >> things perfect your code never gets out the door. At some point you >> have to decide that what you have is good enough to be released. >> >> The trick is to decide what constitutes "good enough". Some of it >> depends on your target application and user base. What's good enough >> for Hunt the Wumpus may well not be good enough for process control >> software for a pacemaker or nuclear reactor. And if you're producing >> software for commercial sale, marketing and business factors enter the >> mix as well. >> >> > I don=E2=80=99t think Ken & Dennis did that. >> >> OTOH I'm certain that they did. >> >> -Paul W. >> > --000000000000e413d905e82c6bfa Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 9:05 AM ron mi= nnich <rminnich@gmail.com> = wrote:
I remember a comment someone at UDEL made when we'd been worki= ng with v6 for a few years, starting in 1976. "v6 is fast as hell but = it has its bugs."

It was a big deal, at least in 19= 76, to get through a week without a crash of some sort. That's why we h= ad all those pre-fsck programs for looking for problems: icheck and ncheck= =C2=A0existed for a reason.=C2=A0

The -11 also had= its corners, e.g. alignment traps to snag the unwary, and hardware that, i= n several cases, did not completely honor the unibus spec. If the hardware = has limits, or corners, and your kernel crashes because of it, is it a bug = that you did not accommodate the undocumented hardware design? Given that y= ou can't really go at your machine with a soldering iron (well, not alw= ays; we all did some of that back then) it's arguably your bug.

Unix code was great, far better than a lot of what was ou= t there, certainly on the -11, but to say any of it shipped bug free certai= nly does not match my recollection.

=
In addition, when Dennis would talk about Coherent and his evaluation = of the source code, he said he used the known to him, but not widely known = bugs in Unix to try to catch copying. If there was copying, those would be = copied. If it was freshly implemented, there's a high likelihood that t= hey wouldn't. His conclusion was that someone had access to a lot of kn= owledge about the Unix system given the fidelity of the implementation, but= the lack of bugs and novel ways of doing it suggested independent implemen= tation.

Warner
=C2=A0

On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 7:43 AM Paul Winalski= <paul.wina= lski@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/7/22, Steve Jenkin <sjenkin@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Would your folk ship code with a list of outstanding bug reports?

** Everyone ** ships code with known bugs.=C2=A0 If you insist on getting things perfect your code never gets out the door.=C2=A0 At some point you have to decide that what you have is good enough to be released.

The trick is to decide what constitutes "good enough".=C2=A0 Some= of it
depends on your target application and user base.=C2=A0 What's good eno= ugh
for Hunt the Wumpus may well not be good enough for process control
software for a pacemaker or nuclear reactor.=C2=A0 And if you're produc= ing
software for commercial sale, marketing and business factors enter the
mix as well.

> I don=E2=80=99t think Ken & Dennis did that.

OTOH I'm certain that they did.

-Paul W.
--000000000000e413d905e82c6bfa--