Hello TUHS,
I recently have been working on the Plan 9 fs/v6fs and fs/v32fs programs,
another member of the community had noticed bugs within them and I wanted
to verify that the new code is working as expected. I haven't had an issue
verifying v6fs using files from the TUHS archive but v32fs has proved to
be a bit more tricky. After a little bit of work we were able to get the 'file2'
located at https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Distributions/USDL/32V/ to mount and read
files. But given that all the files here are binaries it was a bit hard to make sure
we're getting the correct information. I attempted to cross reference the files I get
against the file2.tar also located within that spot in the archive but I am getting tar
errors when extracting this file, so its not exactly obvious if what I am checking against
is correct.
So I would like to ask if someone here knows exactly what the sha1sums of these files are
supposed to be and/or has another image with known contents I could test against. I will
preface this with the fact that I am not very well versed in old UNIX filesystems so
please let me know if I've missed anything.
Thank you,
Jacob Moody
Hi
I am interested in reconstructing the Public Domain 32000 (PD32) which appeared in 1986 edition of MicroCornicopia.
It claimed to run Unix System V on a PC 8-bit ISA board using the NS32016 chip set. Does anyone remember this system and/or have any interest in it?
Here is a link from Hackaday more fully describing the effort:
ISA bus slave NS32016 processor board | Hackaday.io
Thanks, Andrew Lynch
> From: Paul Ruizendaal
>> the ambiguous phrase "had the first implementation of FTP", which
>> has been flagged as needing clarification
> From RFC 354 ... and from RFC 414
Those are NCP FTP, a slightly different protocol, and implementation, from TCP
FTP. (The code from the NCP one was sometimes recycled into the TCP one; see
e.g.:
https://github.com/PDP-10/its-vault/blob/master/files/sysnet/ftpu.161
which has both in one program.)
These RFC's you listed are obviously pre-TCP; the first TCP RFC is
RFC-675. (The first RFC that even mentions TCP seems to be RFC-661.) RFC's
are all NCP-related until around #700 or so, when the mix starts to change.
Maybe the "needing clarification" refers to these two different FTP's? Without
an explicit classifier, does that text refer to NCP FTP or TCP FTP?
Noel
> From: Bakul Shah
> He was part of NSFNet, so could have got first FTP on NSFnet or a
> later version of FTP.
You all are talking about _two separate FTP's_ (as I pointed out
previously). If you all would stop confusing yourselves, you'd be able to sort
out the bogons.
In this particular case, the NSFnet appeared at a _much_ later stage of the
growth of the Internet (yes, it is spelled with a capital 'I'; the morons at
the AP were not aware that 'internet' was a pre-existing word with a
_different meaning_) than when Dave was working with the Fuzzball, and by that
point there were _many_ TCP FTP's (e.g. the ITS one I previously sent the URL
to the source for), so the 'first FTP on NSFnet' is a non-concept.
The best bet for accurate data is to look at the TCP meeting minutes from the
IEN series:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/ien/ien-index.html
Looking quickly, the first one that Dave appears in might be IEN-160,
"Internet Meeting Notes -- 7-8-9 October 1980". (He wasn't in the "Attendees"
lists of any of the earlier ones I looked at.) Look in the "Status Reports"
sections to see if he says anything about where he's at. The one for this one
says:
"Dave described the configuration of equipment at COMSAT which consists of a
number of small hosts, mainly LSI-11s. ... COMSAT has also used NIFTP to
transmit files between their hosts and ISIE. The NIFTP software was provided
by UCL. ... COMSAT plans to .. arrange a permanent connection to the ARPANET."
I have no idea what a "NIFTP" might be. Also, there is a reason that serious
historians prefer contemporary written records, not people's memories.
Noel
> I see that the wording on his Wikipedia page has the ambiguous phrase "had
> the first implementation of FTP", which has been flagged as needing
> clarification, so I intend to provide it.
>
> In both this interview:
>
> https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/113899/oh403dlm.pdf
>
> ... and this video recording of Mills himself giving a lecture at UDel:
>
> https://youtu.be/08jBmCvxkv4?t=428
>
> ... it's quite clear that it's literally true - he authored, compiled,
> installed, implemented, and tested the very first (and apparently second)
> FTP server.
It may be impossible to provide hard evidence. From RFC 354 it seems to me that the protocol took on a recognisable shape around July 1972 and from RFC 414 it seems to me that there were a number of implementations by November 1972, and unfortunately Dave Mills is not mentioned. His recollection may well be correct, but finding proof he was the first in a 4 months time slot 50+ years ago may be too ambitious.
https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc354.txthttps://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc414.txt
Maybe the internet history list can shed some more light on the matter:
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
Dave Mills, of fuzzball and ntp fame, one time U Delaware died on the 17th
of January.
He was an interesting, entertaining, prolific and rather idosyncratic
emailer. Witty and informative.
G
What is the best public, unambiguous, non-YouTube reference I can cite for
the late David Mills' initial FTP work?
I see that the wording on his Wikipedia page has the ambiguous phrase "had
the first implementation of FTP", which has been flagged as needing
clarification, so I intend to provide it.
In both this interview:
https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/113899/oh403dlm.pdf
... and this video recording of Mills himself giving a lecture at UDel:
https://youtu.be/08jBmCvxkv4?t=428
... it's quite clear that it's literally true - he authored, compiled,
installed, implemented, and tested the very first (and apparently second)
FTP server. But Wikipedia's guidelines discourage YouTube-only citations,
and the text in the interview seems insufficiently detailed to have
citation value.
What is the best reference I can cite?
Thanks!
--
Royce
Hi Lennart,
At 2024-01-18T15:45:55+0000, Lennart Jablonka wrote:
> Quoth John Gardner:
> > Thanks for reminding me, Branden. :) I've yet to get V7 Unix working with
> > the latest release of SimH, so that's kind of stalled my ability to develop
> > something in K&R-friendly C.
>
> I went ahead and write a little C/A/T-to-later-troff-output converter in
> v7-friendly and C89-conforming C:
>
> https://git.sr.ht/~humm/catdit
This is an exciting prospect but I can't actually see anything there.
I get an error.
"401 Unauthorized
You don't have the necessary permissions to access this page. Index"
> I’m not confident in having got the details of spacing right (Is that
> 55-unit offset when switching font sizes correct?)
I've never heard of this C/A/T feature/wart before. Huh.
> and the character codes emitted are still those of the C/A/T,
> resulting in the wrong glyphs being used.
The codes should probably be remapped by default, with a command-line
option to restore the original ones. I would of course recommend
writing out 'C' commands with groff special character names.
> I created the attached document like this:
>
> v7$ troff -t /usr/man/man0/title >title.cat
> host$ catdit <title.cat | dpost -F. -Tcat >title.ps
>
> (Where do the two blank pages at the end come from?)
Good question; we may need to rouse a C/A/T expert.
> PS: Branden, for rougher results, if you happen to have a Tektronix
> 4014 at hand (like the one emulated by XTerm), you can use that to
> look at v7 troff’s output. Tell your SIMH to pass control bytes
> through and run troff -t | tc.
I'd love to, just please make your repo available to the public. :)
Regards,
Branden
John Gardner wrote:
> I'm a professional graphic designer with access to commercial typeface
> authoring software. Send me the highest-quality and most comprehensive
> scans of a C/A/T-printed document, and I'll get to work.
Are you offering to donate your labor in terms of typeface design, or
will it be a type of deal where the community will need to collectively
pitch in money to cover the cost of you doing it professionally?
In either case, the "C/A/T-printed document" of most value to this
project would be the same one G. Branden Robinson is referring to:
> If you don't have my scan of CSTR #54 (1976), which helpfully dumps all
> of the glyphs in the faces used by the Bell Labs CSRC C/A/T-4, let me
> know and I'll send it along. I won't vouch for its high quality but it
> should be comprehensive with respect to coverage.
The paper in question is Nroff/Troff User's Manual by Joseph F. Ossanna,
dated 1976-10-11, which was indeed also CSTR #54. The document is 33
pages long in its original form, and page 31 out of the 33 is the most
interesting one for the purpose of font recreation: it is the page that
exhibits all 4 fonts of 102 characters each. Here are the few published
scans I am aware of:
1) Page 245 of:
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/att/unix/7th_Edition/UNIX_Programmers_Manual_Seven…
2) Page 235 of:
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/att/unix/7th_Edition/UNIX_Programmers_Manual_Seven…
3) Page 239 of:
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/att/unix/7th_Edition/VA-004A_UNIX_Programmers_Manu…
4) Page 499 of:
https://archive.org/details/uum-supplement-4.2bsd
Question to Branden: the scan you are referring to as "my scan", how
does it compare to the 4 I just linked above? If your scan has better
quality than all 4 versions I linked above, can you please make it
public?
M~
> All, I got this e-mail from Holger a while back. Somehow it went into
> a folder and has lurked unseen for way too long.
>
> Does anybody know any more about PCS Unix and, if so, where should
> I place the code that Holger has donated into the Unix Archive?
I don’t know much about PCS Unix, but I did come across many references to Newcastle Connection (and Unix United) when researching early networking and the various approaches to giving early Unix a networking API. I think there is no other set of surviving sources for this. Maybe Holger disagrees, but I would say that PCS Unix is best placed in the “Early networking” section.
By the way, for those interested, here is a start to read up on Unix United: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcastle_Connection
To some extent, it is similar to the “RIDE” software developed at Bell Labs Naperville by Priscilla Lu and to S/F Unix developed by GWR Luderer at Murray Hill. As far as I know the sources for both of those have been lost to time, afaik.