I've had a pile of old stuff from 1993->1995 that escaped due to freak
chance and non reuse of an old disk. I've now rescued the data and finally
had time to strip the original Linux lists out of it. I dont have 1991/1992
alas but hopefully someone else does. Ted used to have them on tsx-11
I believe /
Anyway if you want to know what DaveM's first post looked like, read the
very first Linux code freeze announcement or just wondered what a 5 mail
a day kernel list was like..
ftp://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/kernel/alan/Old-Funet-Lists
Enjoy.
Alan
Alan Cox wrote:
> I've had a pile of old stuff from 1993->1995 that escaped due to freak
> chance and non reuse of an old disk. I've now rescued the data and finally
> had time to strip the original Linux lists out of it. I dont have 1991/1992
> alas but hopefully someone else does. Ted used to have them on tsx-11
> I believe /
> ftp://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/kernel/alan/Old-Funet-Lists
or rather
ftp://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/alan/Old-Funet-Lists/
--
Jeff Garzik | ILOVEYOU, Linux.
Building 1024 |
MandrakeSoft, Inc. |
From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:15:04 +0100
I've had a pile of old stuff from 1993->1995 that escaped due to freak
chance and non reuse of an old disk. I've now rescued the data and finally
had time to strip the original Linux lists out of it. I dont have 1991/1992
alas but hopefully someone else does. Ted used to have them on tsx-11
I believe /
I have archives from 1991-1994 at:
ftp://tsx-11.mit.edu/pub/linux/mail-archives
Any budding historian/archivist want to try to merge the two archives
together?:-)
Anyway if you want to know what DaveM's first post looked like, read the
very first Linux code freeze announcement or just wondered what a 5 mail
a day kernel list was like..
ftp://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/alan/Old-Funet-Lists
- Ted
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote:
>
> From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:15:04 +0100
>
> I've had a pile of old stuff from 1993->1995 that escaped due to freak
> chance and non reuse of an old disk. I've now rescued the data and finally
> had time to strip the original Linux lists out of it. I dont have 1991/1992
> alas but hopefully someone else does. Ted used to have them on tsx-11
> I believe /
>
> I have archives from 1991-1994 at:
>
> ftp://tsx-11.mit.edu/pub/linux/mail-archives
>
actually, it's ftp://tsx-11.mit.edu/pub/linux/mail-archive - no trailing
's'.
And I just found my oldest post to linux-kernel; it's close to 8 years
old, and I did the original 16550A code! Wow!
linux-0.96a-patch3 gained 16550A support. the memories.. :-)
--
------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
Thomas Davis | PDSF Project Leader
[email protected] |
(510) 486-4524 | "Only a petabyte of data this year?"
On Wed, May 10, 2000 at 11:10:49PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 01:15:04 +0100
>
> I've had a pile of old stuff from 1993->1995 that escaped due to
> freak chance and non reuse of an old disk. I've now rescued the data
> and finally had time to strip the original Linux lists out of it.
> I dont have 1991/1992 alas but hopefully someone else does.
> Ted used to have them on tsx-11 I believe /
>
> I have archives from 1991-1994 at:
>
> ftp://tsx-11.mit.edu/pub/linux/mail-archives
>
> Any budding historian/archivist want to try to merge the two archives
> together? :-)
I just had a look. Alan, maybe you can rename your files to
something like
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 3175484 May 11 13:19 kernel.1.oct93-jan94
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 4285186 May 11 13:19 kernel.2.jan94-apr94
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 4098851 May 11 13:19 kernel.3.apr94-jul94
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 1981388 May 11 13:19 kernel.4.jul94-oct94
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 2012272 May 11 13:19 kernel.5.oct94-dec94
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 981069 May 11 13:19 kernel.6.dec94-feb95
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 262913 May 11 13:19 kernel.7.feb95-apr95
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 152424 May 11 13:19 kernel.8.apr95-jul95
-rw-r--r-- 1 aeb users 2963 May 11 13:19 kernel.9.jul95-theend
so that they get the proper order and the contents is clear.
Ted, your mail-archives are incomplete: in linux-activists/Volume6
you have digests 200-298 and 365-371, and there are no 299-364.
Digest 298 is about Fri, 8 Oct 93, while Alan's stuff starts
Wed, 13 Oct 1993. So, a few days are missing.
But then, your digests 365-371 should show overlap with Alan's stuff,
where you both have the period 10-12 Nov 93, and I find no such overlap.
So, Ted has old [email protected] stuff,
and Alan has owner-linux-activists%[email protected] stuff,
and at first sight these look disjoint.
Andries
PS - Alan, you didnt find by any chance some kernel sources?
I had a complete collection, but lost 0.99pl13* in a disk crash,
only linux13k.tgz survived by some coincidence.
> so that they get the proper order and the contents is clear.
Nod. Someone enterprising person fed them through the mhonarc mail
processing tool. So they should be web browsable
> So, Ted has old [email protected] stuff,
> and Alan has owner-linux-activists%[email protected] stuff,
> and at first sight these look disjoint.
I am under the impression those were gateways of the same list. Mine is the
digest format though.
> PS - Alan, you didnt find by any chance some kernel sources?
> I had a complete collection, but lost 0.99pl13* in a disk crash,
> only linux13k.tgz survived by some coincidence.
There are a couple of patches in the archive where Linus posted small diffs
to the kernel to he list as well. Dunno if 0.99.13* is there.
> There are a couple of patches in the archive where Linus posted small diffs
> to the kernel to he list as well. Dunno if 0.99.13* is there.
There is the 13n-13o.patch.
Hi,
>Ted, your mail-archives are incomplete: in linux-activists/Volume6
>you have digests 200-298 and 365-371, and there are no 299-364.
>
>Digest 298 is about Fri, 8 Oct 93, while Alan's stuff starts
>Wed, 13 Oct 1993. So, a few days are missing.
I probably have them all on some old CDs.
>PS - Alan, you didnt find by any chance some kernel sources?
>I had a complete collection, but lost 0.99pl13* in a disk crash,
>only linux13k.tgz survived by some coincidence.
I've browsed the old archives for patches but didn't find many.
In particular 0.0.2 und 0.0.3 seem to be gone forever :-(
Riley Williams has the most complete kernel archive at
http://www.MemAlpha.CX/Linux/Kernel/
hjb
--
http://www.pro-linux.de/ - Germany's largest volunteer Linux support site
Any budding historian/archivist want to try to merge the two
archives together? :-)
Since I have my own archives for the last few years (nowhere as
extensive as others out there) I have a script to do just such a
thing.
I'll snarf down all the archives next week I can get and run it -- it
should weed out any duplicates. I might make it a little smarter to
record things like origin (which archive source it came from) and
also to detect broken messages caused by the horrible unix mailbox
format getting truncated in the wrong places.
Something that has occurred to me, some of my archives I deleted the
spam from, so they are probably not what you would call 'pristine'
condition. I also have a couple of holes 30 messages or so wide form
the last couple of years because I've done dumb things like remove
and old libc without recompiling my local delivery agent. Doh.
--cw
On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 08:38:56AM +0200, Hans-Joachim Baader wrote:
> >Ted, your mail-archives are incomplete: in linux-activists/Volume6
> >you have digests 200-298 and 365-371, and there are no 299-364.
> >
> >Digest 298 is about Fri, 8 Oct 93, while Alan's stuff starts
> >Wed, 13 Oct 1993. So, a few days are missing.
>
> I probably have them all on some old CDs.
Please check! Are these your private backup files?
This gap in the tsx-11 archives is old.
> >PS - Alan, you didnt find by any chance some kernel sources?
> >I had a complete collection, but lost 0.99pl13* in a disk crash,
> >only linux13k.tgz survived by some coincidence.
>
> I've browsed the old archives for patches but didn't find many.
> In particular 0.0.2 und 0.0.3 seem to be gone forever :-(
>
> Riley Williams has the most complete kernel archive at
> http://www.MemAlpha.CX/Linux/Kernel/
Thanks for telling me. In fact, when he first asked,
I made my archive available, but he didnt notice right away
and after a few days he had collected almost all the kernels
that I had in my collection. Then I wrote him once more
and he added the last bit, making his collection equal to mine.
I am always looking for missing bits, but disks were small
in those days, and very little survives.
Probably old CDs (or floppies) are the best chance.
[In case anyone has these: I would be interested in old libc
sources as well, say libc-4.4 and earlier.]
Andries
Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 00:07:16 +0200
From: Andries Brouwer <[email protected]>
Ted, your mail-archives are incomplete: in linux-activists/Volume6
you have digests 200-298 and 365-371, and there are no 299-364.
Oops. I'm not sure what happened there. I must have forgotten to move
things off of the news server. I doubt anyone still has the old
digests, but if anyone does have Volume 6 nos. 299-364, please let me
know.
Digest 298 is about Fri, 8 Oct 93, while Alan's stuff starts
Wed, 13 Oct 1993. So, a few days are missing.
But then, your digests 365-371 should show overlap with Alan's stuff,
where you both have the period 10-12 Nov 93, and I find no such overlap.
So, Ted has old [email protected] stuff,
and Alan has owner-linux-activists%[email protected] stuff,
and at first sight these look disjoint.
Yes, they're different. My linux-activists archives start in Jan '92,
when the joker.cs.hut.fi list was starting to melt down, and so we moved
things to alt.os.linux, with a mail/news gateway which I ran on
bloom-beacon.mit.edu (and later on senator-bedfellow.mit.edu).
Sometime during '92, the joker.cs.hut.fi lists got redone so they could
support multiple "channels" (for kernel, net, scsi, et.al discussions)
and to support greater bandwidth, and so the hard-core kernel
discussions started migrating back to the mailing list. Of course,
still later the joker lists got moved to rutgers. Matti, want to
comment more about the history here?
Volume0 of my archives contain my 91-92 archives of the joker.cs.hut.fi
list. Volume1 begins the archive of the alt.os.linux archive, and after
comp.os.linux was created, everything was moved from alt.os.linux to
comp.os.linux. This happened starting at Volume 2 of the
linux-activists archives.
Here's the first message from Volume1 of my archives, which some folks
might find of historical interest.
- Ted
>Subject: Explanation of the new group... (and test of mail feed....)
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1992 00:43:38 GMT
>
> LINUX 0.12 is a freely distributable UNIX clone. It implements a
>subset of System V and POSIX functionality. LINUX has been written
>from scratch, and therefore does not contain any AT&T or MINIX
>code--not in the kernel, the compiler, the utilities, or the libraries.
>For this reason it can be made available with the complete source code
>via anonymous FTP. LINUX runs only on 386/486 AT-bus machines; porting
>to non-Intel architectures is likely to be difficult, as the kernel
>makes extensive use of 386 memory management and task primitives.
>
>Alt.os.linux is a newsgroup for discussing the development of Linux.
>The [email protected] mailing list currently contains over
>400 recipients, and it is melting down from overload. Thus, the
>creation of alt.os.linux is the result of an emergency situation. The
>expectation is that comp.os.linux will be proposed as a new newsgroup,
>and when it is created, alt.os.linux will become obsoleted by the new
>group.
>
>Like comp.lang.perl, there will be a news <-> mail digest gateway
>installed for people on the old mailing who cannot receive Usenet. It
>is expected, however, that the vast majority of the 400+ members of
>Linux activists will be reading things via this newsgroup.
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Theodore Ts'o bloom-beacon!mit-athena!tytso
>3 Ames St., Cambridge, MA 02139 [email protected]
> Everybody's playing the game, but nobody's rules are the same!
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 01:43:09AM +0200, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> I am always looking for missing bits, but disks were small
> in those days, and very little survives.
> Probably old CDs (or floppies) are the best chance.
> [In case anyone has these: I would be interested in old libc
> sources as well, say libc-4.4 and earlier.]
I recently found various very old Linux/68k kernel sources, anybody
interested?
Ralf
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 01:43:09AM +0200, Andries Brouwer wrote:
> I am always looking for missing bits, but disks were small
> in those days, and very little survives.
> Probably old CDs (or floppies) are the best chance.
> [In case anyone has these: I would be interested in old libc
> sources as well, say libc-4.4 and earlier.]
I found two old CDs which contents is partially Linux. :-)
In particular they contain what seems like a complete archive of
linux-activists list starting from November 1991 up to digest 988,
Volume #4 from "Wed, 28 Apr 93". Here is an opening message earlier
from what Ted quoted himself. :-)
[0001] [email protected] Linux_Activists 11/07/91 13:08 (4 lines)
Subject: Reason for this meeting
Linux_activists is a discuss archive of the mailing list about Linux,
a free unix-like kernel for 386-AT computers, coming with full source
code. It is meant for hackers/computer science students to use, learn
and enjoy.
These disks also include SLS 99 p2 and SLS 1.01 distributions by Peter
MacDonald <[email protected]>. In particular the following
library sources are included:
47382 Feb 16 1993 libc-4.2-4.3.tar.z
707527 Feb 16 1993 libc-4.3.tar.z
9956 Feb 19 1993 libm-4.0.tar.z
219711 Mar 1 1993 libg++-2.3.tar.z
158383 Apr 4 1993 libc-4.3.2-4.3.3.tar.z
843872 Apr 4 1993 libc-4.3.3.tar.z
(no 4.4, I am afraid) and these Linux kernels:
850885 Dec 13 1992 linux-0.99.tar.Z
47199 Dec 22 1992 linux-0.99.patch1.Z
37226 Jan 2 1993 linux-0.99.patch2.Z
117007 Jan 13 1993 linux-0.99.patch3.Z
16845 Jan 22 1993 linux-0.99.patch4.Z
94209 Feb 9 1993 linux-0.99.patch5.Z
65359 Feb 23 1993 linux-0.99.patch6.Z
906678 Feb 23 1993 linux-0.99.6.tar.Z
114894 Mar 13 1993 linux-0.99.patch7.z
625942 Apr 9 1993 linux-0.99.8.tar.z
77658 Apr 9 1993 linux-0.99.patch8.z
70858 Apr 23 1993 linux-0.99.patch9.z
636243 Apr 23 1993 linux-0.99.9.tar.z
So what of this will be of interest and to whom?
Michal
[email protected]
On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 12:55:35PM -0600, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
> I found two old CDs which contents is partially Linux. :-)
> These disks also include SLS 99 p2 and SLS 1.01 distributions by Peter
> MacDonald <[email protected]>. In particular the following
> library sources are included:
>
> 47382 Feb 16 1993 libc-4.2-4.3.tar.z
> 707527 Feb 16 1993 libc-4.3.tar.z
...
Very good!
Could you temporarily make this stuff available for ftp somewhere?
["This stuff" being the Linux subtrees of these two CDs.]
Andries
Hi Alan, Andries.
>> PS - Alan, you didnt find by any chance some kernel sources?
>> I had a complete collection, but lost 0.99pl13* in a disk crash,
>> only linux13k.tgz survived by some coincidence.
> There are a couple of patches in the archive where Linus posted
> small diffs to the kernel to he list as well. Dunno if 0.99.13* is
> there.
You probably know that I run the Linux Kernel Version History website
and produce CD's with collections of kernels on them. The kernels from
0.99.14 to date are complete thereon, but like you, I'm missing the
0.99.13* series except for 0.99.13 and 0.99.13k and I'm also missing the
original patch for 0.99.10 although I have the actual kernel tarball.
If you do find any of the missing kernels, either in patch or tarball
form, I would be very interested in obtaining a copy thereof.
Best wishes from Riley.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+