[TUHS] UINX Program Description: For V6 Unix.

[Clem Cole via TUHS]

below

On Fri, Jan 2, 2026 at 2:33 PM segaloco via TUHS <tuhs at tuhs.org> wrote:

> ...
>
>
> For those following along at home, this specifically describes the USG
> Program Generic II kernel,

I believe (as I was told at the time the kernel that Armando Stettner and
the late Ted Kowalski worked on at Summit in the Unix Support Group
(USG) was supposed to be called UNIX/TS.  There is a note I wrote in pencil
in my copy, to use this over Lion's in the future.  Ted always talked about
UNIX/TS as if it were going to be the official thing.


> so may have slight differences regarding stock V6 (and/or stock PDP-11/45
> C kernel <xyz>).

And V7 for that matter.  Without looking at it again, my >>memory<< is that
this document defines the kernel that Research took back.  There was a push
tio to unify the different flavors (CB/Unix, PWB, Risner's kernel, et al).
 USG was chartered by folks fairly high up in the AT&T food chain
(similarly to how CSRG was chartered by DARPA); to create and support UNIX
for the Bell System at large.  I always understood that the action of
importing the Summit kernel at that time was that Al Arms was starting the
V7 licensing.   As I understand it, Dennis did not want to be the "release
engineer" for V7 (I believe srb put it together), but since V7 was going to
go outside of Bell to the "general population" in the CS research
community, it seemed like that was a good time to take back some it (by V8
they stopped trying and Research and Summit diverged).



> Does anyone on-list know the providence of this document by the way?

It was written at USG.  I do not know by whom.  That would be a good
question to ask aps, as he and Ted were officemates at Summit.  He might
not. I have no idea if they had professional tech writers or if it was a
new "product" from USG for the operating companies.

BTW: the scan that archive.org has is missing at least the last 6 pages.



>   The scan edges indicate it came from a comb-bound volume, I'd be curious
> if these were the only pages,

Ted's copy was bound withg both holes the funky 2 pin standard AT&T binder,
as well as industry standard 3 hole.



> if that volume contained other UNIX stuff,

no



> and especially if this implies other comb-binding of manuals at the time.
>
GBC-style binding was used for things like the core UNIX manual set.  In
fact, Brian Redman (*a.k.a.* ber) took his 8.5 x 11 master for 4.1BSD, the
same printer that USG was using, to make the first set of 6" x 9" GBC-bound
BSD manuals.  I've forgotten the details, but USENIX eventually took over
get those printed (and offering them for sale to USENIX members).  By the
time of 4.3BSD, it had become a standard practice.

>
> Reason I ask is I seem to recall reading a post here or on a Usenet list
> by Ted Dolotta I believe detailing that the Release 3.0 manuals got
> approval to be printed on the same comb-bound stock used for internal phone
> directories, and that it was the first time USG had "published" a manual so
> formally.

Hmmm - I'm not so sure of this.  I thought PWB 1 and PWB 2 had 6" x 9"
GBC-bound.  Since Ted was part of PWB, it is likely that PWB 1.0, which
Dolotta created, was the  6" x 9" GBC-bound "standard" for UNIX.

I do know this: when 4.4 BSD was released, USENIX transferred the
publishing task over to Tim O'Reilly.  I remember having a conversation
with him about the GBC binding.  If he continued it, it would significantly
increase the cost of each book, compared with the perfect-binding scheme he
would eventually use for his 4.4BSD series.



> Seeing the comb-binding holes in the scan casts some doubt on this.
>
I suspect someone xeroxgraphicly copied the original and put the result
through a GBC punch