14 Dec
2015
14 Dec
'15
9:51 a.m.
Hi all, I've been in contact with Steven Schultz and I've set up a
mirror of his 2.11BSD patches at:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/2.11BSD/Patches/
I have no "git fu", but it would be nice to have a Git repository
with all the sources fully patched. Oh, and new boot tapes :-)
I should ask Santa for it.
Cheers, Warren
14 Dec
14 Dec
10:30 a.m.
Hi all, I've been in contact with Steven Schultz
and I've set up a
mirror of his 2.11BSD patches
I have no "git fu", but it would be nice to have a Git repository
with all the sources fully patched. Oh, and new boot tapes :-)
I should ask Santa for it.
I was kinda planning to retrofit all 2BSD releases and the 2.11 patch
series into a git repository. But I only got as far as collecting the
some of the inputs:
https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/2bsd
Pull requests are welcome! In particular, are there more releases
between 2BSD and 2.8BSD?
(WARNING: this repository WILL be mercilessly force pushed.)
11:01 a.m.
2.79BSD here: http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/
I think I've asked before: why did the numbering go from 2BSD to 2.79BSD?
Cheers, Warren
On 14 December 2015 8:30:40 pm AEST, Lars Brinkhoff <lars(a)nocrew.org> wrote:
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Hi all,
I've been in contact with Steven Schultz and I've set up a
mirror of his 2.11BSD patches
I have no "git fu", but it would be nice to have a Git repository
with all the sources fully patched. Oh, and new boot tapes :-)
I should ask Santa for it.
I was kinda planning to retrofit all 2BSD releases and the 2.11 patch
series into a git repository. But I only got as far as collecting the
some of the inputs:
https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/2bsd
Pull requests are welcome! In particular, are there more releases
between 2BSD and 2.8BSD?
(WARNING: this repository WILL be mercilessly force pushed.) 
16 Dec
16 Dec
12:02 a.m.
On 2015-12-14 12:01, Warren Toomey wrote:
2.79BSD here:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The archived one is at
patch 431.
12:19 a.m.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob Goense wrote:
On 2015-12-14 12:01, Warren Toomey wrote:
By pristine, do you mean a bootable tape with all the patches applied?
There isn't one. But it would be nice if someone made such a tape!
Cheers, Warren
2.79BSD here:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The archived one is at patch
431.
12:37 a.m.
On 2015-12-16 01:19, Warren Toomey wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob Goense
wrote:
I actually mean one with none of the patches. What fun is a git repo if
only the last 17 patch sets are in it?
On 2015-12-14 12:01, Warren Toomey wrote:
By pristine, do you mean a bootable tape with all the patches applied?
There isn't one. But it would be nice if someone made such a tape! 2.79BSD here:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The archived one is at
patch
431. 
4:37 a.m.
Jacob Goense <dugo(a)xs4all.nl> wrote:
On 2015-12-16 01:19, Warren Toomey wrote:
You could always use patch -R to reverse the patches to get back to
the original. (Yes, I'm joking.)
Arnold
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob
Goense wrote:
I actually mean one with none of the patches. What fun is a git repo if
only the last 17 patch sets are in it? On 2015-12-14 12:01, Warren Toomey wrote:
By pristine, do you mean a bootable tape with all the patches applied?
There isn't one. But it would be nice if someone made such a tape! 2.79BSD here:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The archived one is at
patch
431.
17 Dec
17 Dec
10:43 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob Goense wrote:
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The
archived one is at patch
431.
I heard from Steven Schultz. He says that there was never a version
control repository for 2.11BSD, so yes someone would have to patch -R
to get back to the pristine version with no patches.
I'm still trying to work out if I'm foolish/stubborn enough to try
doing it myself :-)
Cheers, Warren
10:45 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Is there a directory of 431 patches somewhere? :)
I'm guessing the answer is no, but I thought I'd ask the obvious question.
Warner
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob Goense
wrote:
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The
archived one is at patch
431.
I heard from Steven Schultz. He says that there was never a version
control repository for 2.11BSD, so yes someone would have to patch -R
to get back to the pristine version with no patches.
I'm still trying to work out if I'm foolish/stubborn enough to try
doing it myself :-)
Cheers, Warren
_______________________________________________
TUHS mailing list
TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org
http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
12:34 a.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
I sent out the 2.11 tapes at one point. We just shipped out whatever we
had in the latest package build. No version control. So I wouldn't call
them patches, more like new subversions.
So the question might be, does anyone have a really old 2.11 tape? It
would have to be from around 1980. I did not save a 2.11 in my collection.
On 12/17/2015 02:43 PM, Warren Toomey wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob Goense
wrote:
Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The
archived one is at patch
431.
I heard from Steven Schultz. He says that there was never a version
control repository for 2.11BSD, so yes someone would have to patch -R
to get back to the pristine version with no patches.
I'm still trying to work out if I'm foolish/stubborn enough to try
doing it myself :-)
Cheers, Warren
_______________________________________________
TUHS mailing list
TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org
http://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tuhs 
2:02 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Maybe USENIX has archives? They handled the orders for Bostic and
Leedom's 2.10 and 2.10.1, and Schultz's 2.11BSD release (of July 1987,
March 1989, and January 1991).
10:31 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 08:02:48AM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
Maybe USENIX has archives? They handled the orders
for Bostic and
Leedom's 2.10 and 2.10.1, and Schultz's 2.11BSD release (of July 1987,
March 1989, and January 1991).
I've just added Tom Ivar Helbekkmo's version of 2.11BSD into the Unix Archive
at http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/2.11BSD-pl195.tar
If someone can find an earlier version then I'd also be happy to add it
to the collection.
Cheers & thanks Tom, Warren
11:04 a.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org> writes:
I heard from Steven Schultz. He says that there was
never a version
control repository for 2.11BSD, so yes someone would have to patch -R
to get back to the pristine version with no patches.
That's not going to be easy. Some of the patch level transitions
involve removing old source files. Of course, if one is lucky, the
files that got removed along the way will turn out to have been created
at some earlier transition... Quite the puzzle to figure out, anyway.
Going the other way, one might start with a 2.10 source kit. Of course,
it is known that the initial 2.11 was 2.10 plus a lost set of changes,
but with luck, it might turn out that the files that cannot be traced
backward from current 2.11 can, in fact, be traced forward from 2.10
using 2.11 patches.
So working backward, while regenerating individual removed or
overwritten files by patching them forward from 2.10, *might* succeed.
I'm almost tempted to bring the necessary data when we go to our
mountain cabin for New Year's... :)
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
19 Dec
19 Dec
2:16 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
I wrote:
So working backward, while regenerating individual
removed or
overwritten files by patching them forward from 2.10, *might* succeed.
For what it's worth, I've begun. So far, I've worked backward from
patchlevel 195 to 177. I've had to patch files forward from 2.10.1 a
couple of times, and that's gone without a hitch.
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
10:44 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
I wrote:
For what it's worth, I've begun. So far,
I've worked backward from
patchlevel 195 to 177. I've had to patch files forward from 2.10.1 a
couple of times, and that's gone without a hitch.
Ran into trouble with patch 141. The /usr/src/bin/ld.c file from 2.10.1
is too old; patches from between that and the initial 2.11 are missing,
and the file gets deleted and replaced at a later level of 2.11 patches,
breaking the history. Patch 141 uncovers the problem.
I can make the patches work, of course - but it means that for much of
the resulting 2.11 history, /usr/src/bin/ld.c will be wrong.
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
11:55 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
My $0.02: Stop at exactly where you know it's still completely clean and
document well (i.e. this email copied into a README somewhere with the
distro) what's blocking you. If you proceed with force, it maligns the
goal, here, which was stated as "pristine." Many, many thanks for the push
this far, however!
--jake
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <tih(a)hamartun.priv.no>
wrote:
I wrote:
For what it's worth, I've begun. So
far, I've worked backward from
patchlevel 195 to 177. I've had to patch files forward from 2.10.1 a
couple of times, and that's gone without a hitch.
Ran into trouble with patch 141. The /usr/src/bin/ld.c file from 2.10.1
is too old; patches from between that and the initial 2.11 are missing,
and the file gets deleted and replaced at a later level of 2.11 patches,
breaking the history. Patch 141 uncovers the problem.
I can make the patches work, of course - but it means that for much of
the resulting 2.11 history, /usr/src/bin/ld.c will be wrong.
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
20 Dec
20 Dec
2:41 a.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Jacob Ritorto writes:
My $0.02: Stop at exactly where you know it's
still completely clean
and document well (i.e. this email copied into a README somewhere with
the distro) what's blocking you. If you proceed with force, it maligns
the goal, here, which was stated as "pristine." Many, many thanks for
the push this far, however!
Maybe that's one goal, but a pristine copy could just as well be a means
to a different end - e.g. being able to do a "git annotate" on any file
to see what changes were made when.
12:12 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Random832 <random832(a)fastmail.com> wrote:
Maybe that's one goal, but a pristine copy could just as well be a means
to a different end - e.g. being able to do a "git annotate" on any file
to see what changes were made when.
Good point.
9:37 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On 2015-12-19 23:44, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
Ran into trouble with patch 141. The
/usr/src/bin/ld.c file from
2.10.1
is too old; patches from between that and the initial 2.11 are missing,
and the file gets deleted and replaced at a later level of 2.11
patches,
breaking the history. Patch 141 uncovers the problem.
Grepping through the utzoo USENET archive I found one patch that might
help piecing this together. Post at http://oldbsd.org/c.b.2bsd.167.txt
21 Dec
21 Dec
9:19 a.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Jacob Goense <dugo(a)xs4all.nl> writes:
Grepping through the utzoo USENET archive I found one
patch that might
help piecing this together. Post at http://oldbsd.org/c.b.2bsd.167.txt
I found that one in Google's archive of comp.bugs.2bsd, too -- but
there's a least one ld.c patch still missing, from November 1990.
I just heard from Steven Schultz, who is surprised that we don't have
the original 2.11 distribution in the archive. Steven says:
I was certain that a base 2.11 is in the TUHS
archive. There was a
tapeset sent down under and I recall someone working on a way to
simulate a tape drive over a serial line so 2.11 could be loaded.
Does this ring a bell, anyone?
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
2:06 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On 2015-12-21 10:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
I just heard from Steven Schultz, who is surprised
that we don't have
the original 2.11 distribution in the archive. Steven says:
From the PUPS mailing list archives:
===== cut =====
Received: from dolphin by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.6.8/8.3) with SMTP id
JAA00214; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:19:40 +1100
Received: by dolphin (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
id AA13088; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:19:42 +1100
From: wkt at dolphin.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Message-Id: <9511202219.AA13088 at dolphin>
Subject: Re: mknod device numbers
To: Milo.Velimirovic at uwlax.edu
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:19:41 +1100 (EST)
Cc: oldunix at minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
In-Reply-To: <9511151722.AA02396 at fingers.acs.uwlax.edu> from "Milo
Velimirovic 31 Wing 785-8030" at Nov 15, 95 11:22:22 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
In atricle by Milo Velimirovic 31 Wing 785-8030:
I was certain that a base 2.11 is in the TUHS
archive. There was a
tapeset sent down under and I recall someone working on a way to
simulate a tape drive over a serial line so 2.11 could be loaded.
Does this ring a bell, anyone?
BTW, is there anywhere one can get a "legal license" to run V6, V7,
2.XBSD on
my pdp11/34's and 11/44?
Nobody, not even Dennis Ritchie, knows how to get a license for any of
these.
Hopefully, when the Unix source finishes its current migration to SCO
and HP,
we can ask them for an answer.
P.S Back from holidays, the machine minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au died (out of
swap)
on Saturday, and I've just rebooted her, so the mailing list is back up.
I've also moved 2.11BSD into the ftp archive on henry.cs.adfa.oz.au.
Thanks
to Steven Schultz for the copy.
Cheers,
Warren
===== cut =====
7:05 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On 2015-Dec-21 15:06:21 +0100, Jacob Goense <dugo(a)xs4all.nl> wrote:
On 2015-12-21 10:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
...
I just heard from Steven Schultz, who is
surprised that we don't have
the original 2.11 distribution in the archive. Steven says:
From the PUPS mailing list archives:
From: wkt at dolphin.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:19:41 +1100 (EST) I was certain that a base 2.11 is in the TUHS
archive. There was a
tapeset sent down under and I recall someone working on a way to
simulate a tape drive over a serial line so 2.11 could be loaded.
Does this ring a bell, anyone? I've also moved 2.11BSD into the ftp archive on
henry.cs.adfa.oz.au.
There are several copies of 2.11BSD in the TUHS archives, the oldest appears
to be http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_rl02/ but
it's at patch level 303.
--
Peter Jeremy
10:30 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On 2015-12-21 20:05, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2015-Dec-21 15:06:21 +0100, Jacob Goense
<dugo(a)xs4all.nl> wrote:
There was at least one older set in the archives.
http://minnie.tuhs.org/PUPS/archive_details.html mentions:
2.11BSD
-------
This is a complete distribution of 2.11BSD up to patch level 277,
sent in
by Steven Schultz. The distribution includes the tape bootstrappers.
Patch 277 was from around Oct 28 1995, which closely matches Warren's
post.
A late 1992 USENET post from Schultz regarding corrupt files in the
base 2.11BSD master tapes doesn't give me the idea they were real
keepers.
Post at http://oldbsd.org/c.b.2bsd.10ccd2.txt
On 2015-12-21 10:19, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote:
...
I just heard from Steven Schultz, who is
surprised that we don't have
the original 2.11 distribution in the archive. Steven says:
From the PUPS mailing list archives:
From: wkt at dolphin.cs.adfa.oz.au (Warren Toomey)
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:19:41 +1100 (EST) I was certain that a base 2.11 is in the TUHS
archive. There was
a
tapeset sent down under and I recall someone working on a way to
simulate a tape drive over a serial line so 2.11 could be loaded.
Does this ring a bell, anyone? I've also moved 2.11BSD into the ftp archive
on henry.cs.adfa.oz.au.
There are several copies of 2.11BSD in the TUHS archives, the oldest
appears
to be http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_rl02/ but
it's at patch level 303.
22 Dec
22 Dec
12:44 a.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 11:30:48PM +0100, Jacob Goense wrote:
http://minnie.tuhs.org/PUPS/archive_details.html
mentions:
2.11BSD
This is a complete distribution of 2.11BSD up to patch level 277
I found it on my old backups. I've put it back into the Unix Archive at:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/ucb/2.11BSD_patch277/
Thanks Jacob for digging up the old details.
Cheers, Warren
9:12 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, Jacob Goense wrote:
Blimey, but that goes back a bit...
(For the young'uns here, PUPS (PDP Users Preservation Society) predates TUHS.)
--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will
suffer."
Does this ring
a bell, anyone?
From the PUPS mailing list archives:
===== cut =====
Received: from dolphin by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.6.8/8.3) with SMTP id
JAA00214; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 09:19:40 +1100
18 Dec
18 Dec
1:27 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Warren Toomey <wkt(a)tuhs.org> writes:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:02:19AM +0100, Jacob Goense
wrote:
> Is there a pristine copy of 2.11BSD as well? The archived one is at patch
> 431.
Incidentally, I have a kit from Steven here that's at patch level 195.
That's more than half way back, if one were to start 'patch -R'-ing.
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
1:50 p.m.
New subject: Pristine version of 2.11BSD
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo <tih(a)hamartun.priv.no> writes:
Incidentally, I have a kit from Steven here
that's at patch level 195.
That's more than half way back, if one were to start 'patch -R'-ing.
...and the requests for it have already started flowing in. :)
It's at https://www.hamartun.priv.no/tih/2.11BSD-pl195.tar
-tih
--
Elections cannot be allowed to change anything. --Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble
3047
days inactive
3055
days old
27 comments
12 participants
participants (12)
-
arnold＠skeeve.com -
Dave Horsfall -
Jacob Goense -
Jacob Ritorto -
Jeremy C. Reed -
Lars Brinkhoff -
Mary Ann Horton -
Peter Jeremy -
Random832 -
Tom Ivar Helbekkmo -
Warner Losh -
Warren Toomey