Comments on: Unpublished Source Code http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/08/unpublished-source-code/ because I don't believe in life before coffee... Wed, 23 Nov 2011 03:01:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: stevel http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/08/unpublished-source-code/comment-page-1/#comment-375962 stevel Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:33:18 +0000 http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/07/unpublished-source-code/#comment-375962 (and for the record, we had to go through the entire history of Solaris in order to open source it as OpenSolaris) (and for the record, we had to go through the entire history of Solaris in order to open source it as OpenSolaris)

]]> By: stevel http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/08/unpublished-source-code/comment-page-1/#comment-375961 stevel Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:32:56 +0000 http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/07/unpublished-source-code/#comment-375961 i was one of the Solaris developers who had the unenviable task of tracking history and copyright of many of these old AT&T bits of code... in particular i tracked the history of this one. i too wondered "if this is version 1.6, what did versions 0.1 through 1.5 look like?????" turns out, SCCS (the file based SCM used), auto-incremented those versions #'s. so anytime things changed universally (e.g. copyright, code style, etc.), that # auto-incremented. i was one of the Solaris developers who had the unenviable task of tracking history and copyright of many of these old AT&T bits of code… in particular i tracked the history of this one. i too wondered “if this is version 1.6, what did versions 0.1 through 1.5 look like?????”

turns out, SCCS (the file based SCM used), auto-incremented those versions #’s. so anytime things changed universally (e.g. copyright, code style, etc.), that # auto-incremented.

]]> By: Proximo http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/08/unpublished-source-code/comment-page-1/#comment-237 Proximo Wed, 08 Mar 2006 22:25:18 +0000 http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/07/unpublished-source-code/#comment-237 IBM actually had to patch IEFBR14. The original didn't set the return value to 0 in register 15. IBM actually had to patch IEFBR14. The original didn’t set the return value to 0 in register 15.

]]> By: DaPi http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/08/unpublished-source-code/comment-page-1/#comment-235 DaPi Wed, 08 Mar 2006 15:05:29 +0000 http://www.lifeaftercoffee.com/2006/03/07/unpublished-source-code/#comment-235 Shades of the IBM/360 utility program IEFBR14. Consisted of just a return statement (BR 14). Should have been only 2 bytes long - can anyone out there check for the copyright notice? Shades of the IBM/360 utility program IEFBR14. Consisted of just a return statement (BR 14). Should have been only 2 bytes long – can anyone out there check for the copyright notice?

]]>