Johnny Billquist bqt at Update.UU.SE
Wed Jan 27 06:36:49 AEST 1999

On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:

Sigh. I guess I shouldn't get into a new squabble with/over Solokov, but
here I go again...

> On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 03:40:19AM -0500, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> > Thor Lancelot Simon <tls at rek.tjls.com> wrote:
> > 
> > You may believe whatever you want, but I will only remark that several very
> > prominent VAX hardware gurus (some of them on this list) support my work very
> > eagerly. Whatever you or the NetBSD gang may believe, my True UNIX is the only
> > UNIX system that is really a VAX OS and can truly drive a VAX the way it's
> > supposed to be driven.

I'd argue that VMS is the true driver of VAXen, and nothing else...
Unix is kindof a side track altogether. No matter what religious beliefs
you have.

> When it "drives" most VAXen, I encourage you to let me know.  It won't even
> run on most of the VAXen I have, and I don't expect that to change any
> time soon.  But if your definition of "the way it's supposed to be driven"
> is "not at all", I guess I have no quibble with your logic, at least.  I
> want support for the hardware I own, and features like mmap() and NFS.
> Between those, I think you'll find quite a bit of the bloat you're complaining
> about.  I also want some user-convenience features like dynamic libraries and
> a compiler that can actually optimize code worth a damn, even if it's GCC,
> which I think you'd probably find even more objectionable.  So any system
> you produce is not likely to be useful to me.  Let's agree to disagree
> about this.

No, Solokov isn't likely to please you.

> > > Despite the great temptation to do so, neither the NetBSD nor the FreeBSD
> > > project have taken up the mantle of CSRG [...]
> > 
> > Excellent! This gives me the luxury of being free from competitors.
> Look, if you're going to mixmaster my text like this, I'm not about to
> respond to yours any more and give you more material to play with.  As
> I said, I have an interest in old Unices mostly for historical reasons;
> you appear to have an interest because you want to branch new development
> from them -- fine, that's as may be, who cares?  There's certainly room
> for both points of view, and I fail to see why you're being so combative.

Solokov has in the past been more than just combative. I'd say he's more
or less on the hate list of a lot of people on the NetBSD/vax list for
raving all the time. He finally ceased posting there, to most everyones
Unfortunately he started posting here instead.

Couldn't we do a real split of the pdp-11-stuff, and all other historical
Unix stuff. I'm really not interested in historical Unix. I'm first and
foremost interested in pdp-11, that's why I got into this list. Unix is a
secondary issue to me, and historical Unix isn't my playfield.

The other option would be to get out of this list totally, but some people
actually need help with pdp-11 stuff, and there I can contribute.


Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at update.uu.se           ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id HAA17274
	for pups-liszt; Wed, 27 Jan 1999 07:52:20 +1100 (EST)

More information about the TUHS mailing list