Ultrix-32 for RISC (=MIPS) was developed based on the VAX version, which was also Ultrix-32. DEC dropped the ?-32? with Ultrix 4. The DECstation 3100 came out in 1989. I don?t have sources for Ultrix-32 version 3.X, but Ultrix versions 4.X just share sources. It is clear that Ultrix/RISC added a few bits and pieces from MIPS, but it?s nothing that would prevent a common source tree. As far as I remember, the name ?-32? came from the first Ultrix release, which was ?32m? version 1.0 or something like that. ?32? meaning 32bit VAX and ?m? meaning ?MicroVAX?. A bunch of RX50 floppy images from 1984 (or 85?) have been preserved, I think? AFAIR the first Ultrix-32 only ran on the MicroVAX I. Dennis

I thought V7M and Ultrix were entirely diferent and unrelated things. At least on the Pro, DEC released a betal version of the one (which I tried when it came out) and then canceled it and replaced it by a release of the other. I forgot which came first, other than that the beta was really clunky. As in, a "vi" that didn't do real screen updates... paul

On 8/17/2021 1:39 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: They are indeed different. V7m is based on 7th edition A&T UNIX, whereas Ultrix was based in BSD. JRJ

On Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 9:50 PM Jay Jaeger via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.orgwrote: Ultrix32 was based on 4BSD, but Ultrix-11 is very definitely v7m rebranded. Ultrix--11 2.0 did pull in some improvements from 2.9BSD, System III and System V, at least according to the SPD. Ultrix-11 3.0 pulled in networking inspection. Warner JRJ

On 8/22/2021 8:21 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: In the video on youtube and in my experience the screen formating codes seem to be incorrect.? You can see this in the video when a man page is brought up.? The bolding does not occur.? I get the same result after installing.? The same with vi, it doesn't work in the video and doesn't work after installation.? I've tried Teraterm, putty, xterm all with the same result.? Haven't tried an actual terminal yet.? What was your experience? Doug

I discovered working with Unix V6 on my '11/45 that its tty output driver is hard coded to always cook bit 8 as a parity bit, for any character where bit 8 is not already set (see Lions, line 8522). --FritzM.

On 8/25/21 12:04 PM, Douglas Taylor via cctalk wrote: Same thing at the moment. I really don't remember much from the past as I haven't used Ultrix-11 in several years. I suspect it has something to do with number of bits and parity. May be another thing that works once you have a non-generic kernel. I seem to remember RS232 character characteristics changing during the boot process. I think BSD211 has the same quirk. Of course, once you have a custom kernel you can use a better serial card and login to that. :-) I am hoping top get back to this soon, but at the moment I have a house full of sick people and I am pretty much the only one still able to moitivate. bill

On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:04:34PM -0400, Douglas Taylor via cctalk wrote: [...] Terminal styling control codes are hit-and-miss even when exclusively using modern tools. These days, I pretty much exclusively use iTerm2 as my terminal emulator, which has a bewildering array of compatibility-tweaking controls to fiddle with, because everything seems to interpret the alleged standards differently. When I was relatively new to Linux I just put teminal oddities down to me not knowing what I was doing and configuring it wrong, but then had the opportunity to connect a real VT100 to it. "export TERM=vt100" is all that's needed, right? There were *loads* of rendering errors, and I got my first lesson into how well-tested Linux's termcap/terminfo database was. Fast-forward a quarter-century and our terminal emulators are expected to handle Unicode, which brings variable-width characters to our fixed-grid terminal emulators, yet not break too badly if the endpoint is not Unicode-aware and sends something like Latin-1 instead. Bold and so on are set via SGR ("Select Graphic Rendition") sequences, and Wikipedia gives a summary at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI_escape_code#SGR_(Select_Graphic_Rendition)_parameters>. Here's a quick bash one-liner to display them on your terminal: for i in $(seq 1 127) ; do printf '\033[%dm SGR %d \033[0m\n' $i $i ; done (Progressively reduce that 127 if your terminal doesn't have scrollback and you can't see the earlier entries.) My *terminal* (i.e. iTerm2) supports 1-5, 7, 9, 30-39, 40-49, 90-97 and 100-107, i.e. bold, dim, italic, underline, blink, inverse, strikethrough, and all of the colours. However, a lot of useful software includes its own nested terminal emulator, and support is less good: connecting to a remote server using mosh(1) loses dim and strikethrough; tmux(1) turns italic into inverse, except on FreeBSD where it also loses dim, blink and strikethrough and mysteriously gives me another underline at 21 (probably due to it knowing about double-underline, but doing a substitution for the benefit of my terminal which doesn't). And if I use "watch -dc" to run a command repeatedly and highlight the changes, it only supports the 8 basic colours. If you test your own systems you may well come up with different results, because this nested emulation relies on termcap/terminfo databases knowing about the full capabilities of your terminal (MacOS doesn't include sitm/ritm for italic, for example) and TERM being set correctly at each level of nesting, so good luck with that.

On 8/17/21 11:40 AM, Warner Losh via cctalk wrote: As near as I can tell, it wasn't so much bug fixes (after all, Ultrix-11 is just V7M rebadged) as it was additional hardware support. I have looked on the web and many sites (not DEC) are calling the 4.x versions running on VAX and MIPS ULTRIX-11 instead of ULTRIX-32 which is what it actually was. And it works quite well within the confines of the limited PDP-11 hardware. :-) bill