Message-ID: <anews.Autzoo.1268> Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Path: utzoo!henry X-Path: utzoo!henry From: utzoo!henry Date: Sun Jan 10 00:40:31 1982 Subject: Unix 3.0 vs V7 There is a nontrivial amount of evidence that Unix 3.0 (I've never seen anything from Bell that calls it "III", although I may not be up to date) is not in fact a direct derivative of V7, but split off from the "Mother Unix"'s line of development somewhat earlier. I have no access to 3.0 sources, but I have seen and studied a copy of the manual (warning: there is no guarantee that the manual I saw exactly matches the system that will be released). There are a number of decidedly peculiar things, like: - There are no multiplexed files. At all. - Ditto no packet driver. - There are occasional archaic things that are gone from V7. - The function of V7 dup2() is accomplished in a completely different and much more cumbersome way. - There is internal evidence that ioctl arrived late (there is a separate system call to set things like the close-on- exec bits on file descriptors). A plausible hypothesis is that 3.0 is the descendant of a system that split off from the "main line" of development shortly after the 32-bit filesystem cutover but before a number of other changes that preceded the V7 release. What to do about it? Well, one can go with Berkeley. I don't plan to do that partly because I'm running 11s and not Vaxen, and partly because I'm not very happy about some of the things Berkeley has done to Unix. My own plan is to stick with V7 as the base system and to add in various useful things from 3.0 as the need and/or inclination arises, while avoiding some of the more awful things. (I haven't made up my mind about the horrid- but-versatile tty interface yet.)
Message-ID: <anews.Aunc.1683> Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Path: utzoo!decvax!duke!unc!smb X-Path: utzoo!decvax!duke!unc!smb From: unc!smb Date: Sun Jan 10 10:44:51 1982 Subject: UNIX 3.0 Whether we like it or not, UNIX 3.0 is likely to become the most common version of UNIX outside of academe. Very simply, Western's licensing arrangements and fees make it certain that all the UNIX OEM types will use 3.0 as the base for their products -- and these are the folks who will supply UNIX for micros.
Message-ID: <anews.Asri-unix.584> Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!menlo70!sri-unix!gwyn@UTEXAS-11 X-Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!menlo70!sri-unix!gwyn@UTEXAS-11 From: gwyn@UTEXAS-11 Date: Tue Jan 19 19:29:20 1982 Subject: Re: UNIX 3.0 The only reason that VAX UNIXes have been unanimously 4.1bsd is that 32V was little more than a proof that V7 could be ported to the VAX. I am glad Berkeley has undertaken to make 4.*bsd available, but now that System III is out I know of one site that is DEFINITELY going to run it on their VAX (I work there). Many of our reasons for doing so would not apply to university sites, especially since you guys can afford to "buy" UNIX licenses for everything (PWB, V7, 32V). Some of the rest of us, however, have to make careful tradeoffs and there are several valid reasons for going with System III for production use. -------
Message-ID: <anews.Acbosgd.1979> Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Path: utzoo!decvax!duke!chico!harpo!cbosg!cbosgd!mark X-Path: utzoo!decvax!duke!chico!harpo!cbosg!cbosgd!mark From: cbosgd!mark Date: Wed Jan 20 13:53:27 1982 Subject: Re: UNIX 3.0 Buying a 3.0 license automatically gets you permission to run all the earlier versions of UNIX (32V, V6, V7, PWB) on your machine, so the claim by gwyn@utexas is suspect. He gives no other reasons for preferring 3.0 over 4.1BSD, but claims there are several. I'd be very interested to hear what these reasons are. Mark Horton
Message-ID: <anews.Acbosgd.1989> Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!mhtsa!harpo!cbosg!cbosgd!mark X-Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!mhtsa!harpo!cbosg!cbosgd!mark From: cbosgd!mark Date: Thu Jan 21 10:03:04 1982 Subject: Re: UNIX 3.0 UNIX 3.0 and 4.0 indeed do not page. 5.0 probably won't either. They are looking into it but can't decide how to do it. Note also that 3.0 and 4.0 will not run on a VAX 11/750, they only work on a 780. 5.0 will work on the 750, I think. Anyone considering the change should carefully examine the blurb that Western puts out advertising System III (I have no idea why they decided to call it System III, since internally it's UNIX 3.0). There is a list of new features since V7/PWB. This list contains a whopping seven items - depressingly short. Three of these seven new features are new device drivers (KMC, synchronous terminals, and a parallel communications link driver). They also tout their new tty driver (better than V7, for the most part, but also totally incompatible, requiring lots of ifdefs). The other features they mention are named pipes (should take any good UNIX hacker half a day to put this into V7 without peeking at 3.0), a new accounting package, and generally newer versions of everything. Now compare this to what Berkeley has done since V7. There really are some good things in 3.0 that haven't been released before. Aside from the device drivers, they are mostly in user programs that can plug into V7 or nBSD very cleanly, such as SCCS and a much newer and better uucp, nroff, and make. Also, consider that what appears to be the same system runs on both the 11 and the VAX - something that can't be sneezed at. Finally, the licensing was done really attractively. There can be no doubt that everyone should get a System III license, since that lets you run whatever you want from PWB, V7, Berkeley, etc. I hear that an educational license is about to spring into existence, too. Mark
Message-ID: <bnews.cbosgd.2402> Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Path: utzoo!decvax!harpo!npois!cbosgd!mark X-Path: utzoo!decvax!harpo!npois!cbosgd!mark From: cbosgd!mark Date: Sun Jun 27 01:47:24 1982 Subject: Re: System III References: <bnews.sri-unix.1796> Posted: Tue Jun 22 09:35:51 1982 Received: Sun Jun 27 01:47:24 1982 Has anyone compiled a list of things that are in V7 but missing from system III? If not, allow me to start one - please feel free to mail me additions. mpx learn the ms macros refer In addition, the compatibility mode in the tty driver (which is upward compatible with 2.0, not V7) does not implement CBREAK, TIOCSETN, and every time stty is called, it clears the ECHOE bit. However, the functionality of CBREAK and TIOCSETN are in the 3.0 driver, just not in compatibility mode. Any others? By the way, it's been about 6 months since 3.0 was released - does anyone on this list use it or have tried it (not counting people inside the Bell System) and do you have anything good, bad, or otherwise to say about it? Mark