On 06/12/2013 02:50 PM, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
But it was far better than its predecessor (VAXwindows? I forgot
what it was called -- a VMS-specific windowing system developed at
DEC, and dumped after a year in favor of X.
DECwindows. I loved it, but then I loved X more. =) (and
Hmmm IIRC DECWindows IS Xwindows (just a commercial moniker for it). I think the name we are looking for is VWM.
Correcting myself: VWS
Yes that. :) Then there was, if memory serves (but these are VERY
dusty neurons!) UWS, for the Ultrix version, but it might've been
something different. (I know I've seen, have installed, and probably
still have TK50s that say "UWS" on them, or "Ultrix with UWS")
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 06/12/2013 02:46 PM, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
DECwindows. I loved it, but then I loved X more. =) (and
Hmmm IIRC DECWindows IS Xwindows (just a commercial moniker for it). I think the name we are looking for is VWM.
Oh crap, YES I had forgotten all about that one. We're both wrong;
it's "VWS", the VAX Workstation Software (or System, something)...Yes
that one was very short-lived.
DECwindows itself is built atop X, but it had its own X server with
(properly-done, registered) extensions.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 06/12/2013 02:44 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Unfortunately X on modern OSes is a little more of a kludge. ;)
On the contrary. The design of X is very clean. (yes, I've been "all
up in there".) There are some things about its innards that I do not
like, but overall, it's extremely well-done.
The fact that we're still using it three decades later on completely,
totally different hardware, in completely different ways, tells a lot.
Some parts of how we're using it now, though (like client-side font
rendering) are extremely kludgy. But that's not the fault of X.
I suppose if you tweak it enough and force it to bend over to serve you
it can be quite nice...but It's not my friend. Much like many other
UNIX/Linux apps...X DOES choose its friends very carefully. ;)
I cannot agree. It has always been a snap for me.
But then (until the past year or so) I've always run it on real
workstations, not PC garbage. (who the hell ever heard of multiple
resolutions and sync rates?! WTF?!!)
(It's one of the few UNIX-HATERS chapters I completely agree with...I
just think X has wasted potential and could've been better implemented.)
The UNIX-HATERS crowd needs to find a better hobby.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
Barcelona - Catalunya - Europa
El 12/06/2013, a les 20:46, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons <jg at jordi.guillaumes.name> va escriure:
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
Barcelona - Catalunya - Europa
El 12/06/2013, a les 20:40, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> va escriure:
But it was far better than its predecessor (VAXwindows? I forgot
what it was called -- a VMS-specific windowing system developed at
DEC, and dumped after a year in favor of X.
DECwindows. I loved it, but then I loved X more. =) (and
Hmmm IIRC DECWindows IS Xwindows (just a commercial moniker for it). I think the name we are looking for is VWM.
Correcting myself: VWS
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
Barcelona - Catalunya - Europa
El 12/06/2013, a les 20:40, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> va escriure:
But it was far better than its predecessor (VAXwindows? I forgot
what it was called -- a VMS-specific windowing system developed at
DEC, and dumped after a year in favor of X.
DECwindows. I loved it, but then I loved X more. =) (and
Hmmm IIRC DECWindows IS Xwindows (just a commercial moniker for it). I think the name we are looking for is VWM.
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
Just a very basic question: which kind of disk drive should I configure in simh to make the VAX Ultrix 4.5 happy? :)
Layered products aren't up on TUHS for 4.5. You'd be better off with 4.0 unless you have the full media.
I'd go with an ra82 or similar...I think that's what I configured but I could be mistaken.
http://gewt.net/ultrix2.dsk root p/w is "changeme".
After that I will probably bomb you with questions about configuration and layered installation :)
Read the documentation first. ;)
(and remember to install the man pages)
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
Barcelona - Catalunya - Europa
El 12/06/2013, a les 20:37, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> va escriure:
On 06/12/2013 02:30 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/12/2013 01:53 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
I would like to play with Ultrix too. I tried to install it some time
ago and didn't succeed (no docs, a probably corrupted media image...)..
Are there viable media available somewhere? Docs?
I have tape images for Ultrix/VAX v4.0. I have a physical CD for it
as well, but possibly a later release, as well as one for MIPS, but
I've
not yet imaged them. I don't recall their release numbers because I
haven't seen them in probably fifteen years, but I know what box
they're
in. I will try to dig them up soon.
Docs...It's BSD UNIX, man!
Yet the package management is partially SysV. ;)
Package management?!
By package management I mean: "using setld to install packages from tape"..
Oh wow, good old setld. Yes, I do remember that. It's so primitive
that I didn't even think of it as "package management" in today's terms.
Wait a minute. Was setld present in any SysV implementations?
(Seriously, I ran Ultrix on my desktop for years, didn't even know it
HAD package management...I built everything from source.)
Like a real UNIX user! :)
Well yes. ;) Thank you. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/12/2013 02:33 PM, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
ago. And that demo surfaced some time later. The big complaint
was that when too many windows were open the system started
dragging its feet.
I blame X for that. ;) I still have that happen...on modern
intel crap.
X never did that on far, far slower hardware.
X was pretty good even on very slow hardware, though the first
VAXstation with its one bit per pixel dumb bitmap display was iffy.
The VCB01. That was my first VAX framebuffer.
I'd agree with "iffy" until you compare it with its
contemporaries...i.e., CGA on a PeeCee.
PeeCee contemporaries left much to be desired. ;)
But it was far better than its predecessor (VAXwindows? I forgot
what it was called -- a VMS-specific windowing system developed at
DEC, and dumped after a year in favor of X.
DECwindows. I loved it, but then I loved X more. =) (and still do!)
-Dave
Unfortunately X on modern OSes is a little more of a kludge. ;)
I suppose if you tweak it enough and force it to bend over to serve you it can be quite nice...but It's not my friend. Much like many other UNIX/Linux apps...X DOES choose its friends very carefully. ;)
(It's one of the few UNIX-HATERS chapters I completely agree with...I just think X has wasted potential and could've been better implemented.)
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
Just a very basic question: which kind of disk drive should I configure in simh to make the VAX Ultrix 4.5 happy? :)
After that I will probably bomb you with questions about configuration and layered installation :)
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
Barcelona - Catalunya - Europa
El 12/06/2013, a les 20:37, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> va escriure:
On 06/12/2013 02:30 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/12/2013 01:53 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
I would like to play with Ultrix too. I tried to install it some time
ago and didn't succeed (no docs, a probably corrupted media image...).
Are there viable media available somewhere? Docs?
I have tape images for Ultrix/VAX v4.0. I have a physical CD for it
as well, but possibly a later release, as well as one for MIPS, but
I've
not yet imaged them. I don't recall their release numbers because I
haven't seen them in probably fifteen years, but I know what box
they're
in. I will try to dig them up soon.
Docs...It's BSD UNIX, man!
Yet the package management is partially SysV. ;)
Package management?!
By package management I mean: "using setld to install packages from tape".
Oh wow, good old setld. Yes, I do remember that. It's so primitive
that I didn't even think of it as "package management" in today's terms.
Wait a minute. Was setld present in any SysV implementations?
(Seriously, I ran Ultrix on my desktop for years, didn't even know it
HAD package management...I built everything from source.)
Like a real UNIX user! :)
Well yes. ;) Thank you. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/12/2013 02:30 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/12/2013 01:53 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
I would like to play with Ultrix too. I tried to install it some time
ago and didn't succeed (no docs, a probably corrupted media image...).
Are there viable media available somewhere? Docs?
I have tape images for Ultrix/VAX v4.0. I have a physical CD for it
as well, but possibly a later release, as well as one for MIPS, but
I've
not yet imaged them. I don't recall their release numbers because I
haven't seen them in probably fifteen years, but I know what box
they're
in. I will try to dig them up soon.
Docs...It's BSD UNIX, man!
Yet the package management is partially SysV. ;)
Package management?!
By package management I mean: "using setld to install packages from tape".
Oh wow, good old setld. Yes, I do remember that. It's so primitive
that I didn't even think of it as "package management" in today's terms.
I don't blame you. ;)
Wait a minute. Was setld present in any SysV implementations?
It was present in the x86 build of SVR4 iirc. I'd need to consult my disk image (http://gewt.net/sysv.img).
(Seriously, I ran Ultrix on my desktop for years, didn't even know it
HAD package management...I built everything from source.)
Like a real UNIX user! :)
Well yes. ;) Thank you. ;)
Welcome! ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
On 06/12/2013 02:33 PM, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
ago. And that demo surfaced some time later. The big complaint
was that when too many windows were open the system started
dragging its feet.
I blame X for that. ;) I still have that happen...on modern
intel crap.
X never did that on far, far slower hardware.
X was pretty good even on very slow hardware, though the first
VAXstation with its one bit per pixel dumb bitmap display was iffy.
The VCB01. That was my first VAX framebuffer.
I'd agree with "iffy" until you compare it with its
contemporaries...i.e., CGA on a PeeCee.
But it was far better than its predecessor (VAXwindows? I forgot
what it was called -- a VMS-specific windowing system developed at
DEC, and dumped after a year in favor of X.
DECwindows. I loved it, but then I loved X more. =) (and still do!)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA