From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 005B81DE4E1 for ; Thu, 1 Jan 2026 13:17:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767273459; cv=none; b=nnhEZHLjAevyn0CgEzvxmTIR+cnBwABisF85a62ccPy6p5ZXYaRSBXGX60J/BxhvmTfUS9bJmmT2vh7laAmcdppqAVjm34GWlwidrL9hctoxiKoFuiyhMeLI3enOf6Ykr/bIOk+dVavN3qNi0XNanBLKFQBIIa9yHzh52jYMips= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767273459; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hV5CWc+T7JjW9MXyO1K1XLejkvraxW6HQPMgdGyX+Cc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=pZrWx7mpG1IXAJ1tR/Vf2t+KZi5FktpD9vNAycaAL5JOywSIkhw8n97iMaqzSlqX8nRMRz6QXQjdwLDst1LE6vfgVL3NBU1+yD+ezsuCuzsLFS9oMKwbMre8I3kXBpF7yjVj4vc/dREWyFrKTXmuoywj6PY8cZgOE0zCujvl8ag= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EO1aqx2l; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="EO1aqx2l" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE0EEC4CEF7; Thu, 1 Jan 2026 13:17:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1767273458; bh=hV5CWc+T7JjW9MXyO1K1XLejkvraxW6HQPMgdGyX+Cc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=EO1aqx2ln0z2C+z7Kwm0MCGeUfm8trjFVMU8xS5ZNx6ZWvCwmsfX3ztX7nwEMaNBe /fF2+NT28yRW/xEPM/hzZ1tKB1YMGSu0JUnltPcEsNpSZR9El1twxGIkYXqaVQtLud DCLf2402X7TwJa2tCTYZftFHdG20l2It7D/4tO/ryLZ9COpdwOOnE8Cn8d1SyA6ZSm FliaA36BpUmalXnhNlaEHDVzHEXyPkSIaa+Nfof/7M0+s4aI1RnYuEOWuUZO7Y+qnR i3oLjYbNlEPDT4APZt2XMauTWr8qylx8qZ6HxSGdCXcbOZJw3mz/3PVckcnAcM0t31 i2fRdwIvLQlww== Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2026 14:17:35 +0100 From: Alejandro Colomar To: "G. Branden Robinson" Cc: Seth McDonald , "linux-man@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Undocumented systems/standards PWB and 32V Message-ID: References: <20260101054632.pw4fyjijp2hmrerb@illithid> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gnp2dacj6qr74lpn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260101054632.pw4fyjijp2hmrerb@illithid> --gnp2dacj6qr74lpn Content-Type: text/plain; protected-headers=v1; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Alejandro Colomar To: "G. Branden Robinson" Cc: Seth McDonald , "linux-man@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Undocumented systems/standards PWB and 32V Message-ID: References: <20260101054632.pw4fyjijp2hmrerb@illithid> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20260101054632.pw4fyjijp2hmrerb@illithid> Hi Branden, Seth, On Wed, Dec 31, 2025 at 11:46:32PM -0600, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Hi Seth, >=20 > At 2026-01-01T04:45:28+0000, Seth McDonald wrote: > > Starting the year off strong, here's a classic bug report. The man > > page for alloca(3) lists two systems/standards in its HISTORY: PWB and > > 32V. > >=20 > > $ man ./man3/alloca.3 | sed -n '/HISTORY/,/^$/p' > > HISTORY > > PWB, 32V. > >=20 > > After some Googling, I assume these are referring to the PWB/UNIX and > > UNIX/32V operating systems, respectively. >=20 > Yes. Most likely. I have some remarks on nomenclature, orthography, > and history. >=20 > PWB stands for "Programmer's Workbench". It was a flavor of Unix > maintained and sustained outside of the Bell Labs Computing Science > Research Center (CSRC) in Murray Hill, New Jersey. The CSRC is where > Unix was born and where famous names like Ken Thompson, Dennis Ritchie, > and Brian Kernighan worked. Eventually, the flavor of Unix produced by > the CSRC came to be known as "Research Unix". In the late 1980s the > CSRC decided that the Unix system was an unrewarding vehicle for further > _research_, and shifted its emphasis to Plan 9. Over time, the Jack > Welch-ification of AT&T[1] meant that research at Bell Labs became less > ambitious and eventually halted. >=20 > PWB came in at least two revisions--the original, retro-branded PWB1, > and a second, sometimes called "PWB/UNIX 2.0". It would be good to check in which one alloca(3) was present. > Back then, AT&T corporate demanded that full capitals be used to spell > "Unix". This however was contrary to the preferences of the people who > actually invented and developed it.[2][3] >=20 > I'd say, if you want to side with the suits, say "UNIX". >=20 > If you want to side with the engineers, say "Unix". >=20 > Sources conflict on how to spell "32V". I've seen it thus but also as > "V32",[4] which may be an error by McIlroy in an otherwise authoritative > source. If it is an error, it's an understandable one arising from the > naming conventions applied to editions of CSRC Unix, starting with > (again, retrospectively) First Edition in 1971 up through Research Unix > Tenth Edition in 1989. These were, and still are, often keyed in as > "V1" through "V10" for short, and the "V" spoken as "version". >=20 > > However, they aren't listed in the standards(7) man page nor anywhere > > else in the docs. >=20 > The first few entries in this document aren't standards; they're more > like convenient _milestones_ from which we can infer a loose > specification. What is a standard? =46rom WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]: 3: established or well-known or widely recognized as a model of authority or excellence; "a standard reference work"; "the classical argument between free trade and protectionism" [ant: {nonstandard}] And : 1 something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model. I'd certainly consider K&R C as a standard under that definition. And probably V7 Unix too. None of them were developed as a standard, but they have become standards after-the-fact. > Plain "PWB" won't do as a standard because, as noted above, it saw at > least two different releases. PWB wouldn't be a standard, though. That one is just a milestone. However, I'd be willing to document it if it's useful, though. > Two more remarks on PWB Unix: the system with the best claim to being a > successor of PWB 2.0 is Unix System III (released internally within AT&T > in 1980, but not commercially until--so some sources say--1982.[4] >=20 > The reason for the delay would, one supposes, involve the divestiture > of AT&T, that is, its dissolution as a "legal" monopoly, a watershed > event in U.S. commerce.[5] It's one that was crucially important to > Unix history, because prior to divestiture, AT&T was legally prohibited > from operating commercially as a supplier of computer hardware or > software, per a 1956 consent decree it entered into with the U.S. > federal government.[6] In practice, AT&T violated the consent decree > with increasing overtness from the mid-1970s into the early 1980s, > marketing Unix System III and then System V as commercial products[7] > and charging ever higher license fees for Unix as software.[8] >=20 > "For example, John Lions, a faculty member in the Department of Computer > Science at the University of New South Wales, in Australia, reported > that his school was able to acquire a copy of research UNIX Edition 5 > for $150 ($110 Australian) in December, 1974, including tape and > manuals. (See "An Interview with John Lions," in Unix Review, October, > 1985, pg. 51)"[8] >=20 > (Aussies may be surprised to learn that that the AUD was once "stronger" > than the USD. As a former resident, I was!) >=20 > > As such, the two systems should likely either be added to standards(7) > > so they can be referenced, >=20 > Yes, maybe under a different heading. They weren't standards, but they > _are_ worthwhile benchmarks. In manual pages, I'd keep everything under STANDARDS. In standards(7), we could have subsections for Standard C, POSIX, and Unix systems. >=20 > > or be removed from the HISTORY of alloca(3) and replaced with another > > system/standard. >=20 > There was no _standard_ for anything to do with Unix until the > /usr/group user group (get it?) produced one in 1984.[10] >=20 > > I would think they should be added to standards(7), but perhaps > > they're too old be notable enough. Wikipedia says they were released > > in 1977 & 1979, while the oldest standards listed in standards(7) are > > K&R C (1978) and V7 (1979). >=20 > Again, K&R C wasn't standardized; it had a reference manual, which is > not the same thing. >=20 > Maybe we should term such things "milestones". >=20 > I don't think age alone is a sufficient criterion to reject them, but > when citing non-standards in "STANDARDS" sections of man pages, we might > want to use English to clarify the matter. I think formal standards don't deserve any special treating. I'm willing to keep both formal standards and de-facto standards documented in the same STANDARDS section. > To build on a point of Alex's, whether we can get at authoritative > documentation for citation purposes (and to settle or avoid arguments > over facts) is of more probative value than a standard or milestone's > novelty or lack thereof. Some things that are old are important, and > others aren't--just as with new things. And some formal standards are pure bullshit, such as the SVID specification of realloc(3), and later the ANSI C / ISO C one. :) See also . Have a lovely day! Alex >=20 > [1] https://www.nhbr.com/a-lesson-from-ge/ > [2] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2015-01/msg00026.html > [3] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2015-01/msg00029.html > [4] https://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/reader.pdf > [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System > [6] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/552/131/1= 525975/ > [7] https://www.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/2025-December/032907.html > [8] https://github.com/thaliaarchi/unix-history/tree/main/licenses > [9] https://www.tuhs.org/Mirror/Hauben/unix-Part_II.html > [10] https://wiki.tuhs.org/doku.php?id=3Dpublications:standards --=20 --gnp2dacj6qr74lpn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEES7Jt9u9GbmlWADAi64mZXMKQwqkFAmlWc+gACgkQ64mZXMKQ wqlmDRAAiMxgkFSNpvt0t78rNPa3gyBUAGHdA2rfyFiT4Cp1Fy5LYh15vBzk8Zkj B6lrebKoQv6dnW4CHIBP8LoydKZBWP5xY6OVns07DI16Mzm+NYuEw7A7E+eVi2Dj BGG+GholNtwaOwMFjdFNjozHr1A1mYOUPSRB5MDx0DxPTEHuV7XHPluPKzIIyvPb lE5jcSXCKCx0A2mxtw1taZKvG4LZ3Fh8mTzcJFBlKKHeTcfdmgCQc6NbwtW9axQS qN1hjlU9xmrZxcFBd2dgHS3q+HRWfxgAVoHDSa/Ix0GFmQ/I+batWNkZ1vwqqJt0 Vti1tI4AGNj7sptDGKdLpeX1QSv0h/cLfape6EfCLFX/rpfr/um3uGwFDSLatdG9 PLV8tW4sTTHE5XOmtEwZztkTB8RcTSDm/GXdK+c+El2wsmU67pQ5+3zdo8hxW56z E3g634R9Ntb24GeipcQDwmQTDeKwXS4XBeQs7s/1nHDPsT9zYtgV37Z03dC3l7ek JA+1xsm4hXkXwrsRN3+1zqxCXgtZ1TurqlAN4dF532XEQl8QVvqL3mPLQ38ojLMO 6Uw1bMNpO91RrMEFgdpRjo49w7q0gNuVCKLlRPXsOgyWFYFeNDRV9SyXVZcO2ly8 YHnNhvLF87Ll5jxVNVBWT1oT2CA5VAK/NLmDvx2tjKuLctQdtdk= =DLVC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gnp2dacj6qr74lpn--