PUPS and BUPS (burp!) thoughts (what have we started?)

User Rdkeys Robert D. Keys rdkeys at seedlab1.cropsci.ncsu.edu
Thu Jul 30 03:57:22 AEST 1998

> Not an undesireable thing.  May the best win... for the rest of us any 
> is better than zero.

Well said, but perhaps we need to frame that with something like,
``all will win, even the least....''

> <    0. The only higher-than-PDP-11 computers that can be allowed to run U
> < are DEC VAXen. I oppose the idea of running UNIX on PeeCees and shit lik
> < that.
> That is also wrong, as Interdata 8/32, IBM System/370 and Honeywell 6000
> are recognized as ports by K&R in their docs!  the latter three systems 
> while interesting are not general collectors fare as they tend to be a 
> bit large.

Can anyone refresh my memory of what machines specifically were listed
in the V7 and 32V and 2/3/4BSD docs?  I would like to get that clear,
for reference purposes.  Also, what specific machines were ported out
of these main sources by the odd vendors.  The majority was pdp11ish,
but about V7 time the 68000 and Z8000 and other oddities pop up.

> <    1. I consider it the ultimate in blasphemy to attempt to create "UNI
> < clones" that people dare to call "Unix" but don't really contain any cod
> < written by God Ritchie, God Thompson, or God Kernighan. I never use any
> < "free Unices" like FreeBSD and NetBSD. Right now I use Ultrix and SunOS
> It was God Bell Labs (nee WE) that K&R worked for that put the odious 
> license fees on unix, in 1980 it was a mere $24,000 for the sources which 
> were a must have.  People started doing clones to break free of the 
> license and distributions that didn't contain sources.  It made possible 
> to get on platforms that were unsupported/unsupportable without source 
> code or at least for the commercial versions at lower cost to the user.  
> Venix for Pro350 is such an example (it's v6 or v7 code!).  I'm not 
> saying the clones are good or bad, only born of necessity.  Of course 
> they couldn't contain and of said God code due to licenses.

I would agree on the necessity.  Back in '88 I went shopping for an office
machine, and could find nothing under around 25 kilobucks.  I opted out
for a peanuts budget machine (PS/2 model 80 with AIX) at around 10K bucks
and the silly thing is still whirring away as my remote tape dumper.
Alas, it is a much maligned PC, but it functions nontheless, and IS a
real unix.  Alas, these days, its steam is a little underpowered trying
to scrape the web, so it idles in the background.  Technically, it is
a 32 bit abandoned unix, and for hypotheticals, it ought to be something
workable in a BUPS sort of archive, with proper Big Blue nodding.  The
same thing should occur for the RT.  It would probably be a nightmare
of paperwork between SCO and IBM and us, tho.....

> Like all gods their feet are of clay.

The gods were hacking away fine.... alas the beanyheads upstairs had
their feet stuck, if I am reading my history correctly.

> Since the goal is to preserve unix and unix like OSs there is no crime,
> even if the varients are not direct decendents.  So long as people 
> understand the lineage preservation should certainly should proceed.

The goal is to save it if possible, BEFORE it becomes vaporware, for
purely hobby/historical purposes, with the big player's graces and

If we don't dream a little and oil some squeeky wheels, it will never
get done.....

> Allison


Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA14668
	for pups-liszt; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:18:07 +1000 (EST)

More information about the TUHS mailing list