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_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 26689 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2021 03:58:58 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 4 Apr 2021 03:58:58 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 9C3689CA4C; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:58:52 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423249C641; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:58:26 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qInRmilD"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 23BF69C641; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:57:18 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-pg1-f179.google.com (mail-pg1-f179.google.com [209.85.215.179]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6ED159C63F for ; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 13:57:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-pg1-f179.google.com with SMTP id g35so1323513pgg.9 for ; Sat, 03 Apr 2021 20:57:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZyUXqlSPo1X5o/a4SJrP2qmxW9fUyPiNICn0UlKvZEA=; b=qInRmilD1spz5hCw781dyZE+uw6EmIhfrhRfe9Ou8Iyfudn5rmxN3htnKy70+ZZVvx OR3HjOu+50DEys5U8VMbsUm3YEg2fXd4McLBzLr1mjw+rCUBs9BtdYQviR2IMp+va/nW 7GBaL0XMxh/YLOOIPHgvC/k4WEJp+Z/aQEYKgFdlzDM59ZRzo+1hEKl2BMGvM1Ubi/OG AAbqVCjmNv47rZZuOl78EIigK3/bXjw8/WR0mJQ7r6oX7Odd1g7Q3iirmPq8dKvxh6Oa zubEkMgyOjZw0BFaE7M5fEMOQz9XaG/v34F0lUmZURf1/PTz8gjmVFZN3DCccwBw9BkV s7dA== 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=ZyUXqlSPo1X5o/a4SJrP2qmxW9fUyPiNICn0UlKvZEA=; b=cJSROEcqJvtvlS0+VmDcGlKC2wm25AHeECHvFDLApaGei1bNkrn3LxF1UgbMxvmBGH t04r+URv4GkDDOYQI+iyWX9V0ZYgwBd55lFCTNdbD4lUeQEtyXeVoUgpVzs++mgFQctL teT+2QskQ3tr0QwCqxL+kFfeewZ78zEPjbP9VrNu6CgieF9Q3jMV47SiAR3PHXUdGyE4 bh33qK072ob2z9R6H+SyRpikdIDljYRcnl3y+yzOFruVAxFwYjnI2hygBkxz0FLQHAv+ 2NqrZ8NaVnvKUtcGuhJFrg9UkufPlU0q0kPfObnZFMjqCMvFZdcg7mnDHwiqCBPUFUr5 99hw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lYBu03SwXCAgJNW+70wwkahzrRD1lh/z5t8hJbNgbgUGLQIPu SG4FEGaJcSggmFNfw8s9GXTMDBstsXwT7pOajlAnkeO72hU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy2hCCSiUdnzoH1PqRRFgnJH6KWHFRze+azvZLHgL0EWQOPrI1cR1skdS77juObq4qHg0oW6FzNDdQ8/ExV6DA= X-Received: by 2002:a65:47ca:: with SMTP id f10mr18230511pgs.206.1617508636805; Sat, 03 Apr 2021 20:57:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210401145025.GA1202@naleco.com> In-Reply-To: From: Adam Thornton Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2021 20:57:05 -0700 Message-ID: To: Gregg Levine Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b7d07905bf1d93ef" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Zombified SCO comes back from the dead, brings trial back to life against IBM 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: TUHS main list , Josh Good Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000b7d07905bf1d93ef Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It=E2=80=99s possible I am conflating two conferences in my head and the Ne= tBSD thing was NYC not Atlanta. On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 8:42 PM Gregg Levine wrote: > Hello! > Adam? Seriously? That was the case when I visited them at one year's > LinuxWorld. (I think it was the one when we met.) And yes at the > System Z Council meetings I would catch up with them. > > Larry? It is funny, but earlier on I did mention all of that in a > completely different thread. > > But why would the characters at what was SCO start this > stupidity all over again? I seem to be missing something. > ----- > Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8@gmail.com > "This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again." > > On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 10:48 PM Adam Thornton wrote= : > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 8:54 PM Wesley Parish > wrote: > >> > >> So from IBM's POV, they could > >> support Linux - which by then had already been ported to the VM/370 > >> and there was already talk of porting it to the later mainframe > >> iterations. I don't think anybody was even thinking of porting any of > >> the *BSD to IBM mainframes till much later, am I right? > > > > > > This is not how I remember it going down. > > > > There was an external-to-IBM "Bigfoot" port to S/390 (not S/370) that > IBM was ignoring until it got alarmingly close to booting, and then all o= f > a sudden there was an IBM port to S/390. Clearly (well, *I* thought it w= as > clear) they'd had a skunkworks project for some time and Bigfoot forced > their hand. (Unix v7 *did* run on S/370, and resurrecting that is one of > my hobby projects that hasn't really gotten off the ground). > > > > I was the system administrator of the first publicly-accessible > Linux-on-S/390 machine--penguinvm.princeton.edu--and indeed in the late 9= 0s > I and my mentor David Boyes met with some pretty high-level people at IBM > to advise them how we thought they should proceed. They seemed to take > much of our advice, but then again I don't think we said anything very > crazy. (At the time, and for years thereafter, I was with Sine Nomine > Associates. They're still around.) > > > > I also later managed the port of OpenSolaris to zSeries, which, if IBM > had bought Sun rather than Oracle, would have made my life very different= . > Neale Ferguson did most of the heavy lifting on that port, but I did a lo= t > of the tool porting and wrote a disk driver. Alas, IBM tightened the > screws a little too far and apparently didn't know that Sun had an offer > from Oracle in its back pocket. > > > > But back to the S/390 port--I went to a Linux conference in Atlanta in > the late 90s ('99, I think) to speak about Linux on S390/Z, and I actuall= y > went by the NetBSD booth to say, "hey, I can maybe hook you guys up with = a > development virtual machine," and what I got was an earful about "your > so-called portability" from someone who was clearly much more invested in > hating Linux than in, you know, saying, "wow, OK, I realize you're not > offering me cycles on a super-awesome machine, but, yeah, it's not nothin= g, > cool, here's who you should talk to if you're interested in getting a por= t > going." > > > > So I don't think you can lay all the blame on BSD inaction on Linux, is > all I'm saying. By '99, I think it was, maybe if NetBSD, which already h= ad > its reputation for spectacular portability, hadn't staffed its booth with= a > jackass still trying to fight the Unix Wars, that story might have turned > out differently. > > > > Adam > --000000000000b7d07905bf1d93ef Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It=E2=80=99s possible I am conflating two = conferences in my head and the NetBSD thing was NYC not Atlanta.


On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 8:42= PM Gregg Levine <gregg.drwho8= @gmail.com> wrote:
Hello!
Adam? Seriously? That was the case when I visited them at one year's LinuxWorld. (I think it was the one when we met.) And yes at the
System Z Council meetings I would catch up with them.

Larry? It is funny, but earlier on I did mention all of that in a
completely different thread.

But why would the <DELETED!> characters at what was SCO start this stupidity all over again? I seem to be missing something.
-----
Gregg C Levine = gregg.drwho8@gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."

On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 10:48 PM Adam Thornton <athornton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 8:54 PM Wesley Parish <wobblygong@gmail.com> wrote: >>
>> So from IBM's POV, they could
>> support Linux - which by then had already been ported to the VM/37= 0
>> and there was already talk of porting it to the later mainframe >> iterations. I don't think anybody was even thinking of porting= any of
>> the *BSD to IBM mainframes till much later, am I right?
>
>
>=C2=A0 This is not how I remember it going down.
>
> There was an external-to-IBM "Bigfoot" port to S/390 (not S/= 370) that IBM was ignoring until it got alarmingly close to booting, and th= en all of a sudden there was an IBM port to S/390.=C2=A0 Clearly (well, *I*= thought it was clear) they'd had a skunkworks project for some time an= d Bigfoot forced their hand.=C2=A0 (Unix v7 *did* run on S/370, and resurre= cting that is one of my hobby projects that hasn't really gotten off th= e ground).
>
> I was the system administrator of the first publicly-accessible Linux-= on-S/390 machine--penguinvm.princeton.edu--and indeed in the late 90s I and= my mentor David Boyes met with some pretty high-level people at IBM to adv= ise them how we thought they should proceed.=C2=A0 They seemed to take much= of our advice, but then again I don't think we said anything very craz= y.=C2=A0 (At the time, and for years thereafter, I was with Sine Nomine Ass= ociates.=C2=A0 They're still around.)
>
> I also later managed the port of OpenSolaris to zSeries, which, if IBM= had bought Sun rather than Oracle, would have made my life very different.= =C2=A0 Neale Ferguson did most of the heavy lifting on that port, but I did= a lot of the tool porting and wrote a disk driver.=C2=A0 Alas, IBM tighten= ed the screws a little too far and apparently didn't know that Sun had = an offer from Oracle in its back pocket.
>
> But back to the S/390 port--I went to a Linux conference in Atlanta in= the late 90s ('99, I think) to speak about Linux on S390/Z, and I actu= ally went by the NetBSD booth to say, "hey, I can maybe hook you guys = up with a development virtual machine," and what I got was an earful a= bout "your so-called portability" from someone who was clearly mu= ch more invested in hating Linux than in, you know, saying, "wow, OK, = I realize you're not offering me cycles on a super-awesome machine, but= , yeah, it's not nothing, cool, here's who you should talk to if yo= u're interested in getting a port going."
>
> So I don't think you can lay all the blame on BSD inaction on Linu= x, is all I'm saying.=C2=A0 By '99, I think it was, maybe if NetBSD= , which already had its reputation for spectacular portability, hadn't = staffed its booth with a jackass still trying to fight the Unix Wars, that = story might have turned out differently.
>
> Adam
--000000000000b7d07905bf1d93ef--