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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 19843 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2022 23:38:23 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 3 Jan 2022 23:38:23 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 00CC994A7C; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:38:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49B593FD1; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:38:10 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="RW2TmkTE"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 10F2293FD1; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:38:08 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-pj1-f41.google.com (mail-pj1-f41.google.com [209.85.216.41]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1796193FCC for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:38:07 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pj1-f41.google.com with SMTP id l16-20020a17090a409000b001b2e9628c9cso1255695pjg.4 for ; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 15:38:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=oBCZx/0v3a2z1uHKDUsE0VSGRoZwH69et7i2CVFZT84=; b=RW2TmkTEP4hFUFMuwimcY0kn2EqttQBNVP6zTuiMWRprLSX6G7eAWHbqreZxtsZDOC jTLJ3XefJdE+jX/KKh+p03A+9/0J14WgEeSyGFJO+6fdlBXotYgylDFOtSMHJLsQ/ns1 AckHXEreSSrsuaxgV8pZV7+yHKngO6XtrkSX1fbi6/GQP1TUIF7fo+UxQ5sHYc5BtMIa LUvIcl4gTb7ZsK6fRjdiRfkeqN7mW9At2OQRZ+bWktAracqj9gaxKzy/iyy1bUhkAA4G Bnhk3mDAQGBgx5jkW/RhGayF5TW4aIUwb6NImVIvmBOZj0DuVR/RpOjcJUDYPAA62LzM CBZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=oBCZx/0v3a2z1uHKDUsE0VSGRoZwH69et7i2CVFZT84=; b=mjcV9ou5zuJqPEmPZYddtsd6D1HxSI+6RLxqyWzGEyD+WKuH8BOUf5Nwi9/llC93yx R0b8KVyRkF0R7RUkaCq0A3Mg0yGKsoGbD9MGT1psz9i0NIy+YFOcqvDQ9ra78ytg5x9c TPYKfsJ1/2ZCE9hHf0GOz/nRUDpVbqfncZm424SP/G7hfwV/JIJPxrD3jXae9FNMKBXY khaxD1+Q5vgMuM6APOSaK0U+ZB2VBBGUrATU8XMt4UiWbE+OoHMLmamhFHQSpUoFwdxC u9fn/07CSUoc2rsumpaFFW6faPpLxiKmx3bUQ51v1KiWBoMLXrkoajuMTwUQka6Lp9/r k2Dg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530w1ew+ws73b2UYdaazjuC+gdtH0ciaOAeu0RIrngsHW2V9oLAp kgXBAT+VYfVmeK6iNP3BMG2N0hw/RDsobo7hy/8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzFNFiMk7iYv8mGlc8DV4lFJSvqc7wGcMunM6sbkVGhJL6uy3FbysimqLBjgN9Yxu9om9O1yk0N36CMFt494WI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3ec4:: with SMTP id rm4mr55213766pjb.104.1641253086418; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 15:38:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <97f563fa-5a17-424b-acc6-07cf127f496d@localhost> In-Reply-To: From: Adam Thornton Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2022 16:37:55 -0700 Message-ID: To: Doug McIntyre , The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000033db0705d4b603fd" Subject: Re: [TUHS] moving directories in svr2 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: , Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --00000000000033db0705d4b603fd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 2.5.1 was the first Solaris that didn't often make me scream that I wanted SunOS 4.1 back. Adam On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 4:32 PM Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 04:15:08PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:23 PM Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > > Yeah, to be fair, by the time Solaris 2.3 or 2.4 came around, it was > > > mostly up to par. (Or maybe it was because Moore's law meant that we > > > didn't care any more. :-) > > > > I have some vague memories that we had to do something like double the > > RAM in our SPARCstations to make Solaris 2 feel comfortable. At the > > time, that was a pretty serious outlay in an academic department. > > 2.5.1 felt like the first version that was _truly_ usable. > > I'd agree, 2.4 was pretty slow and chunky, 2.5 was alright, but 2.5.1 was > quite usable and stable. > Also by this time, the hardware was going in directions that SunOS > wouldn't keep up with. > > > --00000000000033db0705d4b603fd Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2.5.1 was the first Solaris that didn't often mak= e me scream that I wanted SunOS 4.1 back.

Adam
=


On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 4:32 PM Doug McIntyre <merlyn@geeks.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 03, 2022 at 04:15:08PM -050= 0, Dan Cross wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:23 PM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

> > Yeah, to be fair, by the time Solaris 2.3 or 2.4 came around, it = was
> > mostly up to par.=C2=A0 (Or maybe it was because Moore's law = meant that we
> > didn't care any more.=C2=A0 :-)
>
> I have some vague memories that we had to do something like double the=
> RAM in our SPARCstations to make Solaris 2 feel comfortable. At the > time, that was a pretty serious outlay in an academic department.
> 2.5.1 felt like the first version that was _truly_ usable.

I'd agree, 2.4 was pretty slow and chunky, 2.5 was alright, but 2.5.1 w= as quite usable and stable.
Also by this time, the hardware was going in directions that SunOS wouldn&#= 39;t keep up with.


--00000000000033db0705d4b603fd--