Live data from Hacker News

So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

virtuallyfun.com

141–150 of 166 posts

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#141
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think GCC was available back then. Not sure about F77. What C compiler did BSD use?

Out of the box running strings on stuff shows the 1984-1985 AT&T-IS 1985-1987 UniSoft Corporation strings. So it's got to be PCC. The F77 credits Apple, Adobe, AT&T-IS, Motorola, SUN, CSRG, and Unisoft. In the A/UX 0.7 build there is a 'greenhills' marker in crt0.o and libc so it looks like they used greenhills before switching (self hosting?) to pcc?

+1 on pcc.

Greenhills was available as a third party compiler. Not sure why there would be markers in crt0 and libc, but perhaps someone at Apple rebuilt. Greenhills was better for most code that mattered.

Can't see crt0 mattering for performance, but maybe there was some interoperability glue to make both runtimes happy.

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#142
After doing A/UX work I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, I interviewed at Apple. They offered me a 5% pay cut for the chance to commute from Berkeley to Cupertino, which wasn't great but at least the stock was likely to be worthwhile. (UniSoft had a great team, but no business model).

After I got the Apple offer, I met with people up the management chain to the VP a step above the entire A/UX org (3 people up from my potential hiring manager). The VP had no problem admitting that he didn't really see a reason for Apple to be in the Unix business and that he had no criteria for measuring the success of the effort or justifying substantial additional investment.

Bonus points for honesty, but I decided at that point that the project was doomed.

I think in the long run it became a checkbox for Federal sales and it made inroads at some universities where Unix (for IT dept) + Mac S/W was a selling point.

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#143
post #69

Around 15 years ago I got my hands on a quadra 700 and managed to install A/UX on it. I don't remember the details but i really struggled to find an external SCSI CDROM drive compatible with the OS, if memory serves me well there were just like 2/3 specific drives supported by the installer. In the end I probably used a SUN one which looked like a mini pizza box sparcstation. Taking also in account that that version…

It's SYSVr2 so it's /etc/inittab to control what runs at what runlevel. then inetd reads /etc/servers to decided what to listen for at the network level.

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also worked on it at UniSoft, did maybe half the device drivers, plus the appletalk stack, autoconfig (loadable drivers), large screen support, console subsystem, kernel event manager for the mac world etc. The early 68k systems used in the early macs only brought out 24 address bits, Apple did indeed use that memory for metadata - memory was tight - the first Macs had 128k, we were shipping Unix systems at UniSoft…

PS: hi Carl :-)

:-) Close - I was the other cocky young kid from Berkeley.

Since there was only one Kiwi on the project, the other clue I'll give you is that I inherited your cubicle when you left.

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of the box running strings on stuff shows the 1984-1985 AT&T-IS 1985-1987 UniSoft Corporation strings. So it's got to be PCC. The F77 credits Apple, Adobe, AT&T-IS, Motorola, SUN, CSRG, and Unisoft. In the A/UX 0.7 build there is a 'greenhills' marker in crt0.o and libc so it looks like they used greenhills before switching (self hosting?) to pcc?

+1 on pcc. Greenhills was available as a third party compiler. Not sure why there would be markers in crt0 and libc, but perhaps someone at Apple rebuilt. Greenhills was better for most code that mattered. Can't see crt0 mattering for performance, but maybe there was some interoperability glue to make both runtimes happy.

without the full source it's impossible to say. That said there was a 'tar ball' of 0.7 floating around for well over a decade, but it's able to run under emulation now.

https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/aux-apple-unix-68k-version-...

there is a /usr/lib/greenhillls with a ccom68 fcom68 and pcom68 along with some libs and crt files. It's all binaries but I did a compare on crt0 and they match the system one. Maybe it's just a case of the crt0 being assembly and it being.. well the same assembler.

Maybe they were just investigating PCC vs Greenhills or it was a cross thing, or they built PCC with Greenhills. who knows?!

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#146
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually wrote a large chunk of the A/UX unix port (late 80s) - a decade before (mid 70s) I'd obtained an undergraduate degree in Comp Sci (in New Zealand) - undergraduate Comp Sci was very much a thing at the time

Have you ever played with this: https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/aux-apple-unix-68k-version-... I found it interesting that it mentions both ‘Milwaukee‘, and Cayman "brac" ... Here on the Jasmine 80. Seems like lots of weird codenames. It looks like UniSoft had done a lot of work on the code (you?) to make it super portable. Although everything not directly related to the Milwaukee was cut. It'd be interesting to see…

(here's probably too much information)

yup I wrote a lot of that, I did all the console stuff (font renderer, vt100, mouse, keyboard, fdb/adb, ui event queue etc).

Missing is all the auto config support (ability to add 3rd party drivers to the kernel in the field, something that at the time you usually couldn't do without source), fixes for large screen support, all my appletalk code is missing too. However I can see the latish floppy bug fix (there was a hardware bug found in the FDB/ADB chip where if we accessed the floppy on only some systems the keyboard froze, turned out we were spinning reading the timer while reading the disk, doing it so fast the clock to the FDB chip sped up) and the older pre-fix code in "sony.c.~8A" - that sort of places the release in time.

Given all that I'd guess that this is one of the early releases we gave to Apple that has somehow escaped - we used to fly to Oregon and copy disks to do releases to avoid California's sales taxes - UniSoft actually had an online modem based system where customers could log in and download the latest software - at the time CA tax law didn't explicitly cover electronic delivery of software, we were sued by the state and they lost setting a precedent

It's been a long time but "psn" probably stands for "Pigs in Space" - our internal code name for the project (Apple's code name "Eagle" leaked, but ours never did).

The "Cayman/brac" looks like what someone named their box, "Jasmine" was a type of hard drive, I've no idea about Milwaukee - I think Cayman used to be a company that made mac ethernet hardware, my guess would be that someone at Apple slipped them this pre-release, and then an update with some bug fixes, along with source (very naughty! AT&T would likely have sued us, ie UniSoft if they found out)

The assembly font renderer uses the 68020 only bfins bit field insert instructions, it can under certain circumstances generate a 24-bit bus write, nubus doesn't support such a thing, we got half of the first big run of mac 2 boards, they came with a schematic and PAL equations, I got to send fixed PAL equations back to Ron at Apple to make it work.

As far as "making it portable" a large part of that is just system 5 (SVR2 in this case) not so much us, though porting this code was our bread and butter - we supported a number of MMUs - 2 paging MMUs for 68020s, and a whole lot of swapping MMUs for 68010/68000s (plus 29k 88k etc) - it was never really designed to work without some form of MMU

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#147

A/UX only supported m68k macs, right? I wonder if you could patch the m68k emulator in the later nanokernel for PowerPC Macs to support it. Would it be legal? Gods no. Would it be a throwback to the kind of really dirty hacks I associate with the 90s? Absolutely. It looks like a decent amount of work reversing the Powermac nanokernel has been done: https://github.com/elliotnunn/NanoKernel

newer Qemu can emulate the 68040, and even a Quadra 800. that would be the much easier route...

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS: hi Carl :-)

:-) Close - I was the other cocky young kid from Berkeley. Since there was only one Kiwi on the project, the other clue I'll give you is that I inherited your cubicle when you left.

Ah - my original guess was one of the Chris

(how would I know who got my cubicle when I left? :-)

have a look upthread someone has discovered an early A/UX kernel source release that Apple must have slipped to someone (my guess is Cayman Systems)

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#149
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That and Object Pascal being replaced by C++.

C++ was not yet released when the Mac was released.

Indeed, and what I am talking about happened after the Mac being released.

> By this point, in the late 1980s, the market was moving towards C++, and the beta version of Apple C++ compiler appeared in 1989, around the MacApp 2.0 release.[5] At the same time, Apple was deep in the effort to release System 7, which had a number of major new features. The decision was made to transition to an entirely new version of MacApp, 3.0, which would use C++ in place of Object Pascal. This move was subject to a long and heated debate between proponents of Object Pascal and C++ in the Usenet and other forums. Nevertheless, 3.0 managed to garner a reasonable following after its release in 1991, even though the developer suite, MPW, was growing outdated. Apple then downsized the entire developer tools group, leaving both MacApp and MPW understaffed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacApp

And then most just moved into Codewarrior and PowerPlant anyway.

Re: So what is the deal with A/UX anyways?

#150

What is A/UX? I’m not seeing a definition.

Right-click, "Search Google for A/UX". Wikipedia article is the first link. Try harder.

Why would I try harder for something that _might_ be interesting? That's just bad writing.

If I can’t tell what something’s about from the first couple paragraphs or a quick skim, I’ll tune it out. I have plenty of other content to read.

Post reply on HN