[TUHS] Latest 2.9BSD and 2.11BSD
imp at bsdimp.com
Fri May 29 10:59:22 AEST 2020
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 3:49 PM Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:40:55AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > What's the canonical source for patches to 2.9BSD and 2.11BSD?
> Steven Schultz is still the canonical source for 2.11BSD patches. He
> sends them to me and I add them to the TUHS archive.
> Recently I asked him to roll a new install tape which had all the patches
> applied, at
Yea. The oldest one we have is patch 195. which is good news!
> > I see we have 2.11BSD patch 469 dated last month in the archive. Where
> > does it come from? Has anybody climbed the hill to import all the
> > patches into a git repo?
> I know somebody tried a while back and reported here. They found it wasn't
> possible to apply all the patches sequentially. I'd have to go look in
> the mail archive for details.
> Maybe it's time for someone else to have a go!
I think so. There's 40 files that appear on a line starting with 'rm ' or
'Xrm ' (well maybe a few more if you count a non-functional lint removed,
no way to know for sure due to the '*').
10 of these files are either binaries, or are rendant man pages (meaning
the canonical copy is elsewhere and in a pinch we could have a very close
copy just omitting them entirely or copying from the canonical place). The
binaries can be regenerated. There's 3 files in pcc that can likely be
snagged from 2.10.1. There's 8 files named 'shortnames.h' that can be had
from 2.10.1 as well. There's 2 files that were created and then later
deleted. There's one non-existent file that was deleted. there's 10
toolchain related files that we can get from 2.10.1 and/or the CSRG SCCS
tree (haven't checked to see if the PDP-11 versions are there, they aren't
in the easily browsable svn conversion). The entire source for ar, nm and
ld are removed, but I think that 2.10.1 are the same, and/or CSRG repo
fallback. That leaves nsys.c as the only file not existing in 2.10.1, which
makes sense... it implements the new system call convention in 2.11, and it
too may be in the SCCS tree...
So based on that, I think it's worth giving it a try... :) Comments?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the TUHS