Difference between revisions of "Talk:XENIX"

From Computer History Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(XENIX 386 ONLY =========)
m (UNIX (ODT) ONLY =========)
Line 130: Line 130:
 
SCO PHIGS 1.0.0
 
SCO PHIGS 1.0.0
  
==========  UNIX (ODT) ONLY ===================
+
== UNIX (ODT) ONLY ===================
 
SCO Unix 3.2v4.2 uname -X | grep -y "rel"
 
SCO Unix 3.2v4.2 uname -X | grep -y "rel"
 
TCP/IP 1.2.1
 
TCP/IP 1.2.1

Revision as of 06:23, 6 December 2020

Recent updates

Notes: I listed the languages in alphabetical order, except for 'C' as this is always a given for UNIX/xenix/linux/GNU systems.

I will research and add the release dates for as much as I can find.

I added links for references, I added architectures, and I will add a list of both distribution repositories, and running emulators and VMs. ( one click runs. )

How would Microsoft have gotten the first version of XENIX to run on a PDP-11, i.e. what was their development machine/OS? PDP-11/RSTS-e? I am wildly guessing, as besides the Zilog 8k, this architecture PDP-11, which seems to be a specialty around here, I have never used. ForOldHack‎ (talk) 22:02, 9 March 2019 (CET)

There's a lot of PDP-11 hardware stuff documented, because I have a particular interest in them - I used them extensively at the start of my career. DEC software is not covered much, as we didn't use it - just Unix, which I have been covering.
I have no idea what uSloth would have used for a PDP-11 port - did they really do one? They'd have needed a C compiler, and that would have been a lot of work (unless they used an existing one - maybe they brought up V7 on a PDP-11)? Jnc (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2019 (CET)
They used a PDP-11 for a vast amount of their development, because the POS known as DOS could not do it, and they had a cross compiler on the PDP-11 for x68.
"1981: MS's Bob Greenberg ports PDP-11 v7 (from HCR or AT&T?) to Codata Z8000" http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torvalds/Finland_period/xenix_microsoft_shortlived_love_affair_with_unix.shtml
The history was unconceiling itself rather slowly, in leaps and bounds
Apprently they used a PDP-11 to develop Xenix, and then soon switched to it, and used it for everything until they kluged together NT server, and even then ... I bet they still have a few things running in emulation... ForOldHack‎ (talk) 07:45, 11 March 2019‎

Here is a bunch of version information: "Having previously appointed myself SCO Director of Acronyms

http://www.cruzio.com/sco/ and keeper of the mysterious OSR5 BTLD naming conventions, I'll now declare myself MOSCOVA (Minister Of SCO Version Archaeology) and prepare a list of the last known versions of various dead SCO products, and the secret incantations necessary to determine if one really has that version. Please consider this a chain letter and forward it to any likely conspirators with useful information. The last person in the chain gets stuck with turning this into a TA.

Version info:

SCO has many ways of identifying products and displaying version information. Some of them actually agree. 1. Read the disk, tape or cd label. 2. tar tvf /dev/install | grep "#rel" 3. swconfig 4. grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/* 5. uname -a (old Xenix 286 only) 6. uname -X | grep -y "rel" (OS only)

I suggest: cd /etc/perms grep "^#rel=" * | tr ":" "\011" and: swconfig to get a shopping list.

If you have floppy images that are not easily identified, try:

strings image_file | grep "rel=" to extract the "custom" info line. If the image is compressed, run: zcat imagefile.Z | strings | grep "rel="

There are also various names for the same products. For example:

xnx296a, UFN and prd=xos are all the same. Obtaining serial number information, and identifying cd roms without proper labels, will be covered separately.

XENIX 286 ONLY

Name Last Version Incantation

SCO Xenix 286 2.3.2 uname -a DevSys 286 2.2.1 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/devsys CGI 286 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/cgi Text Processing System grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/text Eroff 2.0 VP/IX 286 MultiView 286 Man Pages Games 2.2.2 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/games Fox (dbase 2 clone)

MSBASIC 5.41 Appears on startup screen. MultiPlan 3.00N MS Word 3.0

XENIX 386 ONLY

SCO Xenix 386 2.3.4 uname -X | grep -y "rel" Tandy Xenix 386 Unisys Xenix 386 DevSys 386 2.3.0 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/devsys Text Processing Sys Man Pages 2.2.0 ???? grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/man Games TCP/IP 1.2.0 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/tcprt Streams runtime 1.0.0c grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/streamsrt Xenix-Net UniPATH SNA-3270 Xsight for Xenix 2.0.0 Xsight for DOS 2.0.0 Xsight 386 complete 5.0.0 SCO Office Portfolio 2.0.1 SCO Manager 2.1 Multiview Runtime 1.6 ???? SCO Professional 2.1 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/pro SCO Lyrix 6.1 Integra 1.1.1 Foxbase+ 2.1.2 Appears on startup screen. HCR/SCO C++ 3.0.0 SCO C++ 3.1.0 SCO Accell VP/IX 1.2.0 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/vpix MS Word 3.0 ImageBuilder MasterPlan Statistician Eroff 3.0 MS C 3.0 MS Basic Interpreter 5.41 Appears on startup. MS Basic Compiler MS Pascal Compiler MS Fortran Compiler 3.0 LPI-Fortran 3.20.00 LPI-Basic LPI-Cobol LPI-Pascal LPI-PL/I LPI-RPG II LPI-Debug SCO PHIGS 1.0.0

UNIX (ODT) ONLY =================

SCO Unix 3.2v4.2 uname -X | grep -y "rel" TCP/IP 1.2.1 LLI 3.4.0 DevSys 3.2.4.2 TCP/IP Dev Sys 1.2.1 Games 3.2.2 NFS Sys 1.1.1d NFS Dev Sys 1.1.1c Xsight 386 4.0.0 Xsight 386 Dev 4.0.0

==== Third Party =============

JTAPE for Xenix 386 2.55 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/jt JTAPE for Unix 3.2 2.6 grep "^#rel=" /etc/perms/jt (No JTAPE available for 286 or OSR5)."

Humor

"where it still languishes today." This will remain as homage to the spirit of this wiki. ForOldHack‎ (talk) 07:40, 11 March 2019‎