chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (09/24/89)
First things first: the name is `4.3BSD-tahoe'. In article <1989Sep21.130058.15909@rpi.edu> krf@mars.ral.rpi.edu (Keith R. Fieldhouse) asks: >... Just what is 4.3+tahoe? Is it the current version of 4.3? Does >it run NFS? How might I obtain it or more information about it? In article <1190@virtech.UUCP> cpcahil@virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill) answers: >4.3+tahoe is the lastest BSD release which is now being developed on a >CCI (now ICL North America) Power 6/32. CCI nicknamed the machines tahoe >during development. I think this should be rephrased a bit: the primary development machine at UCB CSRG is a CCI Power 6/32. They also have a Harris HCX (either -7 or -9; I cannot recall which) and a pile of VAXen, including everything from 730s to 86x0s, uVAX 2s, and 3x00s (but no 6x00s nor 8[23578]x0s). >Rumour has it that DEC was complaining that BSD development on VAXs was >somehow interfering with Ultrix. This is a rather silly rumour. >The 4.3 tahoe release, as far as I know, will still work with VAXs. It will, although it is not as simple as it was intended to be. There were a few glitches in the distribution, which was not tested on a VAX `soon enough' before being cut, so that a few of the VAX-specific Makefiles and the like were wrong. Since the tape comes with Power-6/32 binaries, rather than VAX binaries, getting it going is also a bit tricky (you have to install it in steps, now outlined). >As far as NFS is concerned, it is not part of the standard BSD release. It >is normally an add on package added by an os vendor. 4.4BSD (or whatever it may be called) will include Rick Macklem's NFS. In article <20936@adm.BRL.MIL> wrwalke@nswc-wo.arpa (Walker) replies: >4.3 tahoe WAS developed by CCI on the 6/32. False. 4.3BSD-tahoe was developed by Berkeley (with a few contributions to the VAX code by Yours Truly :-) ). They did have some help from CCI; CCI contributed various machine-dependent parts of the system (such as the tahoe math support) and were instrumental in Berkeley's acquisition of a Power-6/32 in the first place. >CCI supports *NO* bsd releases This is no doubt true, despite the fact that CCI used to have a `4.2BSD-based' system as well as a SysV-based system. (CCI's old 4.2ish system is *not* the same as 4.3BSD-tahoe.) After all, DEC do not support 4.3BSD on VAXen, nor 2.10BSD on PDP-11s. >CCI (ICL) does NOT market bsd releases, they will supply it if the customer >insists, but it will be relatively unsupported. (Chances are it will also be out of date. Probably they supply their old 4.2ish system, not 4.3BSD-tahoe from UCB. This is, however, mere speculation on my part. The question is largely academic since you can order a 4.3BSD-tahoe tape from UCB anyway.) >>[rumour about BSD interfering with Ultrix] >OF COURSE IT IS!!! that is called open marketing and non-proprietary >operating systems. if ultrix became available on a Sun i am sure that >sun would whine too! Sun might complain if DEC were to support Ultrix on Suns, but they could hardly do anything about it unless DEC had illegally obtained the software to be used. But `BSD' (as opposed to Ultrix, SunOS, SysV, etc.) is not a serious threat to any large company's proprietary version of Unix. DEC sell thousands of machines each month; UCB sent out perhaps 1500 4.3BSD tapes, all told. While one BSD tape tends to cover up to a few dozen machines, it should be clear that BSD VAXen are (or will soon be, if DEC have not pulled ahead already) outnumbered by Ultrix VAXen. People like to have support, even if they have to pay for it. Personally, I would argue the other way: an Ultrix for Sun machines would probably sell more Sun machines. Those who want Ultrix compatibility would buy Sun 4s instead of VAXstations, since Sun 4s are so much more cost effective. DEC get away with outrageous prices largely because VMS people are locked in, and because so many Ultrix people need VMS compatibility. This is a specific case, however: a SunOS for VAXen would not sell many more VAXen (probably just a few as file servers), again because of the (lack of) cost effectiveness. As to BSD itself, I believe that a BSD for any given machine will create an instant niche market for that machine, but probably only a niche market, if the vendor has a proprietary Unix. >i believe the tahoe upgrade of 4.3 is available from berkeley. Since they wrote it, naturally so. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris