Ask Slashdot: Finding Legacy UnixWare Installation Media?

First time accepted submitter lukpac writes "We have an old (ancient) Unisys server in production that hosts a legacy system and are attempting to virtualize it. Unfortunately we don't have a generic UnixWare (2.1.2) installation CD, just a Unisys-specific one, and given the recent unpleasantness (see Groklaw for details), SCO isn't much of an option. We're not looking at pirating it (as above, we do still have the Unisys-specific media), but do need a generic copy of UnixWare. What options, if any, are available?"

Comments

Virtualize as bare metal

[chaoskitty]

How about doing a dd of the entire drive from the current system to a virtual disk and trying to make that work? Is the Unisys hardware that special? If not, you might be able to get it working by manipulating the virtual hardware of your VM.

Re:Virtualize as bare metal

[Anonymous Coward]

How am I supposed to know how to use unix to copy unix? Are you a wizard?

For that you need UUCP, the Unix Unix Copying Program.

Re:Virtualize as bare metal

[shoor]

Actually dd is the unix utility that is un-unix like in its invocation (try 'man dd' on any unix/linux/OSX system from the command line). A lot of times plain old 'cat' will do the job, as in 'cat /dev/cdrom > cd.iso'

Re:Virtualize as bare metal

[Wolfrider]

--Catting an iso may have unexpected results, especially if it's bootable; I would definitely recommend using dd in all cases for that.

no p2v for unix?

[alen]

on windows vmware has a utility that copies your physical installation to a virtual one. even sets it as the same computer account so you don't need to drop and add it to the domain. don't need any install media.

nothing like that for unix

Re:no p2v for unix?

[MightyMartian]

Yes, it's called dd.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not nearly as elegant, and I seriously doubt it would even stand a chance of working. Seriously, systems this old need to be retired.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[MightyMartian]

Never used it with VMware but I've certainly moves physical machines over to KVM using dd images. If you want elegance, Clonezilla has a reasonably easy interface.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[wonkey_monkey]

Seriously, systems this old need to be retired.

Seriously, that isn't always an option.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[dreamchaser]

dd works just fine with VMWare in most cases. I've used it dozens of times.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't know if it's an option, but if you install vmware esxi on a machine,
it has a plugin that allows you to do a p2v of a UNIX machine. I've used it at work a few times. Can take a while since it runs over the network, but works pretty well.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[jedidiah]

It can certainly work in principle. Unixware might be just too darn old but I've used the dd approach on XP with VirtualBox on Linux.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, that isn't always an option.

Not when you're being cheap about it.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Nimey]

It isn't, but if something's so old it's completely unsupported then you're fucking stupid to bet your business on it not failing.

If the hardware's not virtualizable, the only responsible course IMO is to port the business-critical functionality to something new and standardized. Yes, bugs are expensive to fix, but so's bringing back ancient hardware.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

For some flavours, yes. UnixWare? Doubtful. That can be worked around though. The main problem is driver support in the guest OS for whatever virtual hardware the host is presenting.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, systems this old need to be retired.

1. That's exactly what OP is trying to do.

2. Seriously, have you ever worked on anything in the real world? like maybe, telephones? electrical systems? You'd be amazed how many systems are out there payin' the bills every day that are older than most slashdotters.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[jameshofo]

After you dd it off you just need to use qemu-img convert -f raw -O vmdk oldfilename.raw output.vmdk, This seems to only convert it to work with virtual IDE controllers in my experience. Virtualbox can do it too probably a little more effectively.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[jameshofo]

well since no one else mentioned it, you can copy the target machine without even rebooting it, ssh root@target dd if=/dev/drive | dd of=/local/image.raw

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

This This This This This! Wait until you run into the Vacuum tubes in telco comm gear!

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

A system doesn't need to be supported to be able to fully work. If an environment is completely stable why does it need support?

Back it up, make sure you can still buy hardware for it to run on, and you're set. There's no point in upgrading a system which simply works as designed and is never modified. And I say this as someone who has applied the paddles of life to a machine running DOS at my work this year to keep an old proprietary system up and running. It's due for an upgrade in 2015.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever I do this kind of thing and I am dealing with hosts on the same LAN and the images are multiple gigabytes, I use netcat rather than ssh--it's transfers much faster that way. (By the way, you need quotes around that "dd if=/dev/drive" part if you're using SSH.)

As far as that goes, do they even *have* SSH on that Unisys machine? I'll bet they'd have to compile it. The source tarball for netcat6 is about a fifth of the size of that of OpenSSH, and the ancient nc is about a third the size of netcat6. You might have better luck having netcat compile on that machine.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

dd if=/dev/drive of=/local/image.raw wouldn't do the same?

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Rob Riggs]

Seriously, systems this old need to be retired.

Seriously, that isn't always an option.

Seriously --it is *always* an option. Anyone who thinks otherwise isn't thinking. Look -- failure is always an option. Trust me -- failure is something that will get an executive's attention faster than anything. Failure is such an option that quitting your position -- or sticking around just to witness the beautiful consequences -- are sometime exquisitely worth the price. I would pay money to work anywhere that still depends on Unixware just to watch that fail unfold.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

And what happens when the people that work on those old systems retire? At some point it becomes rare enough that you have to pay through the nose for one of the few people that really know how to use it. Or train somebody new and hope that they don't need experience.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

With all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. I've seen several instances where a system, despite its legacy status, cannot be retired. The best you can possibly hope for is to reduce its influence slowly over time but even then they are sometimes still necessary for production, historical or legal reasons. And that is why I still support HP/UX 10.20, because we still use it in production. It is an ugly beast, and we are reducing its influence, but it will never truly go away until they stop shipping chips that are tested using chip testers driven by HP/UX 10.20

Re:no p2v for unix?

[demonlapin]

Is running DOS a big deal? I would assume not, but I suppose I could be wrong.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends. Is it freedos? And is it an in-house application or something distributed. If it is your own application the license does not matter. If it has been given to you and is non-free than there is an issue.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[promythyus]

That would create image.raw in /local/ on the remote machine. That command is piping the output of dd if=/dev/drive on the remote machine, over ssh, to the input of dd of=/local/image.raw on the local machine.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

stop speaking out of your arse you ignorant fool.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[TheLink]

If the virtualization stuff works then they can be cheap and save money for a decade or more, they might have problems around 2038 if they somehow keep using it.

The issue is if vmware etc stop providing legacy virtual hardware.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps they are simply trying to buy the time a "real" retirement? If the new solution takes a year to be built and another to be tested but the hardware seems to be failing "any time now" virtualisation can be the appropriate intermediate step.

Just make really sure you have the order to build a replacement signed by the CEO and two other high ranking managers before you do so or the replacement will never happen - "it works now virtualised so no need to hurry, right" (and the expense can be had when I'm retired/in another position)

Re:no p2v for unix?

[drinkypoo]

Seriously, that isn't always an option.

If that isn't an option, then you've set yourself up for failure.

That doesn't change the situation, but it's important to remember when choosing a solution to begin with.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[nurb432]

Not quite the same thing.

True P2V also handles the hardware differences for supported systems for you, lets you re size drives, even do it on the fly if you use the right vendor. Just a simple DD to a different piece of hardware that is perhaps a decade or more newer is questionable at best, a disaster at worst.

You also might run into license problems if you have dongles or codes keyed to your ( old ) hardware and if you cant get support for new codes, you end up having to go back until you can replace the application. ( i have been in that boat, even with a good p2v of the system, as an application just would not move due to a keycode tied to the harddrive serial number )

Re:no p2v for unix?

[magic maverick]

Do you know about FreeDOS? If you don't check it out, it's a great MS DOS or other similar vintage DOS replacement. It is stable, updated and has heaps of features that you won't have if you are running an ancient DOS.

Also, it runs perfectly happily in a VM such as DOSEmu. Check it out.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Nimey]

The point is that you probably /can't/ buy the hardware this stuff runs on anymore and quite possibly it's exotic enough that you can't easily virtualize on modern hardware.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[rtfa-troll]

Imagine a "widget producing machine" with an MSDOS based control system. A new machine costs a million USD. You can still buy a new one, but the old one works. The producer has gone bust or, more likely, would love to force you to upgrade and refuses to produce a backwards compatible control system. Would you buy a new machine? If you know that the same story is likely to repeat in a few years anyway?

What you do is simple. You work out how long an outage you will have if the machine breaks completely, what you have to do to mitigate that (spare stock? another partner you can buy from?) and how much it will cost. Most likely you end up running the old machine and repairing it until it becomes so unreliable it ceases to be worth it. In that, the control system is normally the least of your problems.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was going to say that someone would exploit a known hole before then, but this shit is so old that none of the major script kiddie tools probably would even recognize the system and have exploits for it. In that regards it's probably pretty secure.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Reschekle]

Who made you the gatekeeper for defining what P2V is defined as?

If I have a physical machine and I virtualize the OS on it, as far as I'm concerned it has been P2V'd.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Reschekle]

VMWare's P2V tool will not P2V a UNIXware machine. It can't even P2V a machine running a 2.4.x Linux kernel without some additional hacking.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[nurb432]

As far as im concerned you are clueless.

Yes, i get to define it.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

These sort of systems are unlikely to be exposed to the Internet.If hackers already have access to the machines they'd also have access to the other machines.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

Can, and did just last year. You'd be surprised what you find if you went looking. Right now you can even buy boards compatible with Intel i7 processors which feature ISA slots. Mind you, while the motherboard replacement went well I wonder how much luck we'll have finding a 10base2 network card.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

Actually non-issue when I think back to it. We had another Windows 2k system where the 10base2 network card recently died. We replaced it with an ethernet card and a media converter box to interface it back to a 10base2 network.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

Yes, proprietary software which only runs on DOS which can't be upgraded until the hardware it is connected to is upgraded makes it a big deal. Anyway in 2 years it can be upgraded to a windows 7 machine.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

Yes I know about it, but I wonder what benefit it would bring to a system which just works? The system needs to run one application and aside from the occasional hardware failure it has been rock solid, stable and working since it's installation. The system itself needs to be capable of running 1 application and a network driver for a thinnet network card. That's it.

Where's the incentive to upgrade?

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Nimey]

I'm not talking about /you/, I'm talking about the /submitter/ and his ancient Unisys crap that might not even be x86.

I've looked at those specialty computers with modern processors and ISA slots for some scientists that I used to support. They seem like a pretty good idea when you've got scientific equipment costing five or six figures, and even if they're still supported by the vendor it might cost four or five to get a PCI board and drivers & software compatible with a Windows sold in the past ten years.

As ever, YMMV.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pioneer and Voyager space probes aside, the environment is never completely stable.

You are correct in that it doesn't need to be fully supported in order for it to work, but if it needs to keep working then it needs support.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Anonymous Coward]

The bean counters and executives I know are adamant that any system, no matter how critical it is to production operations, can indeed be retired.

I tend to agree, however where we differ is that the bean counters and executives don't seem to consider the entirely possible outcome that the business will not survive the retirement.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[tqk]

I was going to say that someone would exploit a known hole before then, but this shit is so old that none of the major script kiddie tools probably would even recognize the system and have exploits for it.

If it's that old, the Morris worm would be all they need.

I'm with the guy above. I've no sympathy for people who do this !@#$ to themselves. Wake up and smell the coffee and bite the damned bullet already. No sympathy.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[tqk]

A system doesn't need to be supported to be able to fully work.

What?!?

If an environment is completely stable why does it need support?

What environment is completely stable? Even rocks weather away. Even Black Holes evaporate (in theory). What kind of idiot hires people who believe in such things?

Re:no p2v for unix?

[tqk]

Yes, proprietary software which only runs on DOS which can't be upgraded until the hardware it is connected to is upgraded makes it a big deal. Anyway in 2 years it can be upgraded to a windows 7 machine.

Popcorn anyone? This's either the funniest, or most tragic, story I've heard of in at least a decade. Now I understand why all that critical infrastructure that Panetta's mumbling about is web accessible. Idiots.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

This is operandi modus for any system designed for control or configuration of hardware, whether it be industrial SCADA, PLC programming, robotic arm control, configuration of specialised equipment etc. All proprietary and often software tied to the hardware version.

The software is upgraded when the hardware is replaced.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

In a system that doesn't change short of hardware failure what sources of instability do you get? Dos certainly doesn't suffer from incompatibilities introduced with windows updates.

The only thing likely to bring down an unchanging machine where the software was ever so bloody simple is random errors like ECC which can be either corrected for in mission critical systems or often simply solved with a simple reboot as a brute force. Certainly nothing to go calling the vendor's support hotline over.

If you think otherwise then I'd like to sell you a support contract for my hello world program. I will happily offer a lifetime of free bug fixes.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[magic maverick]

Well, if you are running a very stable system and there are no problems, then don't. But if you want to upgrade to a virtual machine in the future, why not? When you do upgrade, old DOS may not run on the new hardware. FreeDOS will.

My opinion would be that if things are fine now, then don't worry at the moment. But when it comes time to upgrade, running with a Free, modern and supported DOS is more sense than continuing with an ancient one.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[magic maverick]

If it works, don't upgrade now. When the hardware fails, or you want to upgrade the system, or vitalize it, go with the Free, modern and supported DOS.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[RockDoctor]

I've no sympathy for people who do this !@#$ to themselves. Wake up and smell the coffee and bite the damned bullet already. No sympathy.

I rather get the feeling that, if you were to turn up at this workplace with a roll of duct tape, an apple (fruit or computer ; doesn't really matter as long as it will fit into the target's mouth well enough to muffle the screams), a selection of home-made stun guns, barbed-wire whips and chilli-powder-coated butt plugs, and set about "persuading" the PHB responsible for this situation to think more rightly, then many of the people massaging these ancient machines will be ecstatic to see you.

But pending such a re-education campaign, less drastic methods would be needed, and there's your problem. PHBs who see the annual maintenance cost as more desirable than submitting a CapEx line for a system that is working.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[tqk]

I've no sympathy for people who do this !@#$ to themselves.

I rather get the feeling that, if you were to turn up at this workplace with a roll of duct tape, an apple (fruit or computer ; doesn't really matter as long as it will fit into the target's mouth well enough to muffle the screams), a selection of home-made stun guns ...

Er, hey thanks.

PHBs who see the annual maintenance cost as more desirable than submitting a CapEx line for a system that is working.

That's where their argument falls down. It's not working. Their plan failed. You can't just ignore this stuff and expect to get away with it. Entropy exists. It's always there trying to rust you out. "You can't beat the Reaper."

Everyone involved in this cockup has been ignoring reality for years. A critical system running on proprietary closed software which runs on freakin' DOS, something no fool's bothered with in close to two decades, and they wonder what they need do to get back to zero. Idiots.

Their parents should have tossed 'em off the cliff at birth.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[Blaskowicz]

If old DOS doesn't run, then FreeDOS doesn't run either. They both target the very same hardware, a 8086 CPU with 80x25 text mode and IBM compatible BIOS that does the I/O (also hardwired into a very old interrupt controller and maybe some minimal other crap). This makes them compatible with PC hardware that doesn't exist yet. Switching to 386 mode, adding disk caching etc. are done by programs you run.

You will find there are many various emulations done by the BIOS, or UEFI emulating itself the BIOS, or the network card's BIOS or the bootloader. So you can use USB keyb/mouse, USB storage (if it was already present before boot), networking using either a hardware specific or universal packet driver (if you booted from PXE), and even iSCSI. DOS does this, still thinking it is in the early 80s.

I'd run FreeDOS by the way but I find it weird (running an installer from a CD, huge "helpful" config.sys/autoexec.bat out of the box?) and am too lazy to learn the differences so when I "need" (rather, want) to run DOS I run Windows 98's DOS (MS-DOS 7.10), which is largely the same as MS-DOS 5.0 or 6.x but with fat32 support.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[RockDoctor]

I think you'll find that the machine is ageing, but hasn't died yet. Which is why the OP is looking at virtualising it, taking an image from the working system and such solutions.

But it hasn't died. Yet.

So, the PHB is taking a gamble on getting promoted out of the firing line for this problem before the problem is realised. That is weighed up against the (presumably well-constructed) CapEx proposals from the nerd farm to actually fix the problem. When you look at it in that light, it may be a fucking stupid decision (to not fix the problem), but it's not an irrational decision.

Possibly the PHB doesn't actually understand the problem. That's an educational issue for the denizens of the nerd farm ; they may or may not have succeeded in that. It may be a lost cause. They may not actually have the authority to tell the PHB that black is black and that white isn't black. But that's not a technical problem.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[adolf]

I had some 10base2 network cards. I threw them away a few years ago.

Please tell me that you don't also need a CGA card with a composite NTSC output, or a Hercules adapter, because I tossed those at the same time.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[thegarbz]

What! You think I'm dealing with ancient hardware or something :-P

Re:no p2v for unix?

[lukpac]

OP here.

There are already projects underway to roll the functionality of this system into other, newer systems. However, those likely won't be complete for a year or more. In the mean time, the idea is to virtualize to avoid a critical hardware failure.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[lukpac]

OP here.

The business functionality is already being ported to new systems. But that isn't a trivial undertaking, and the projects involved probably won't be complete for a year or more. The point of virtualizing is to avoid a critical hardware failure in the mean time. It isn't meant to be a permanent solution.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[lukpac]

OP here.

The system *is* being retired. But it will likely take a year or more to move its functionality to newer systems. The point of virtualizing is to avoid a hardware failure during that time.

We can't simply flip a switch and go live with a new system.

Re:no p2v for unix?

[lukpac]

OP here.

Mod parent up. Development is already in progress for the replacement systems, but that likely won't be complete for a year or more. This is a stopgap measure.

oh god

[Anonymous Coward]

unisys server in production that hosts a legacy system and are attempting to virtualize it

a true beowulf cluster

Re:oh god

[dunng808]

How long has it been since that meme appeared here? Nice flash-back, nice end to the week. Thanks!

UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 8 !!

[Anonymous Coward]

You will be glad you followed this advice !! Think of it, No More CLI !! Now, everything you do, everything you COULD EVER DO, is done simply, and easily, with finger gestures !! You are welcome !! Now go shave that beard, and run home !! Run as fast as you can !!

Re:UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 8 !!

[Anonymous Coward]

But it's no shave November....

Re:UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 8 !!

[Anonymous Coward]

But my balls are getting itchy!

Re:UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 8 !!

[damn_registrars]

I've got a finger gesture for that.

Re:UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 8 !!

[jameshofo]

thank god, that's just what we needed to update or Twatter, that's what all the kids use now a' days right?

Re:UPGRADE TO WINDOWS 8 !!

[rHBa]

It's Movember

dd

[Billly Gates]

With dd you can create an exact image. Unfortunately you need to figure out if your hard drive can be read in a modern system. Xenix aka OpenServer was far more popular than Unixware in the x86 arena so I wonder what kind of architecture it is?

Here are the steps
1. Create a Linux system
2. Hook up the hard drive to it and mount it (Can Linux read Unixware formatted volumes?) and then run dd off the old hard drive and output it as a binary to the new hard drive.
3. Find a Virtualization solution that is compatilbe to load the image in

I doubt VMWare supports Unixware but it might. This is going to be a challenge and I know you may hate me for saying it but keep the server. Unless there is a new version of the software that is Linux compatible why fix what isn't broken? Keep in mind old SCO is Tarantula and owns Unixware. New SCO aka SCO Group does not own Unixware but is a just a licensing troll.

Re:dd

[allaunjsilverfox2]

With dd you can create an exact image. Unfortunately you need to figure out if your hard drive can be read in a modern system. Xenix aka OpenServer was far more popular than Unixware in the x86 arena so I wonder what kind of architecture it is?

Here are the steps 1. Create a Linux system 2. Hook up the hard drive to it and mount it (Can Linux read Unixware formatted volumes?) and then run dd off the old hard drive and output it as a binary to the new hard drive. 3. Find a Virtualization solution that is compatilbe to load the image in

I doubt VMWare supports Unixware but it might. This is going to be a challenge and I know you may hate me for saying it but keep the server. Unless there is a new version of the software that is Linux compatible why fix what isn't broken? Keep in mind old SCO is Tarantula and owns Unixware. New SCO aka SCO Group does not own Unixware but is a just a licensing troll.

http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Filesystems-HOWTO-9.html Quote from page: The support for BFS is included in the Linux kernel since version 2.3.25. If you are using an earlier kernel, check if BFS homepage contains a patch which adds support for this filesystem. The homepage also contains bugfixes/enhancement which are not yet merged into the official kernel.

Re:dd

[YukariHirai]

2. Hook up the hard drive to it and mount it (Can Linux read Unixware formatted volumes?)

It doesn't matter, if all you're doing is using dd to dump the raw contents of the hard drive to a file.

Re:dd

[Billly Gates]

Update

You need Unixware 7.1 to run. DD wont work as it is not a VMWare image disk file.

I know the cost of a new license is $699 per CPU plus $1999 for a TCP/IP, but I would upgrade. The business reason is your ancient 15 year old server is going to die. All it takes is a single prolonged power outage like the one in New York City that your APC can keep on forever and your ancient PSU is TOAST! Systems that old do not reboot reliable.

So your business case it to virtualize it so it can run on newer hardware forever and you wont be caught with your pants down if something happens and it will on such an ancient beast. So buy a new shiny Linux box, install VMWorkstation (VSX or VSPhere is waaaay too expensive unless you run a server farm/data center) and install a fresh copy of Unixware 7.x on a virtual machine and over the network copy the program, config files, and database files. With virtualization you can consolidate and you can put more things on the same box to save power like your DNS Server or a Windows file share too on a different vms to cut down on the amount of servers.

Good luck.

Re:dd

[Billly Gates]

... and dump them exactly where?

Re:dd

[MightyMartian]

Qemu comes with tools to change the formats of disk images. Use dd to create a raw file, then convert to whatever format required. I've used Qemu to convert VMware images for use in KVM.

Re:dd

[Billly Gates]

Newer Update

The poster is screwed. If it is u6000 Unisys model it uses a iAPX-86 family cpu. No it is not x86 compatible. So if something does happen your employer goes out of business! Find out asap what kind of Unisys system it is!!

Newer business plan ...
My recommendation is to migrate to another platform and start over. Your boss will hate that! Your workers will hate that! Your accountants will hate that! But you need to be able to migrate to a platform that can at least run on a virtual machine forever and ever and not be caught with your pants down again. I do not know how important this server is or what it does or hopefully does not have ancient database records needed for daily operation GOD FORBID.

Make a business case with the owners or IT department depending on size and say we have A LIABILITY. Liability gets there attention fast and explain you are one outage or parts failure from disaster that you can't recover from. It will cost money and workers who resist change will hate you and complain how great the other product is, but ask them how much it will cost when it dies?

Believe it or not there are workers who hate leaving IE 6 and 7 behind too. Just because it was what htey used for 10 years even though they used Firefox from home. Your intentions of just replacing SCO in a VM are a good one but from how I see it you just discovered a big problem that a good IT employer would recommend to fix.

Again Good Luck

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

VSphere is way too expensise at 5k for 3 physical host (6 cpu) ? Must be hard to work for a third world company.

Re:dd

[caseih]

To a file. Did this the other day with an old FreeBSD box. dd'd the drive to a file, called freebsd.raw. Then I used qemu-img to convert it to vmware or virtualbox, or whatever format you need. Then copy the result to your VM host.

With Unix and Linux it really is that easy. With Windows, not so much.

Re:dd

[caseih]

Your posts indicate to me that you have no experience doing this sort of thing.

I have experience, and DD will work, followed by a pass by qemu-img to convert the image. But in fact a raw image *does* work with vmware. I've done that before too, though now that qemu-img works so well, converting to a native image is no problem.

Re:dd

[petermgreen]

To a file that will then be used as the virtual disk for your new vm (or if your vm software doesn't support raw disk images converted into a disk image format it does support, qemu comes with a tool that can convert raw images to vmware images iirc). You don't strictly need to understand the contents of the disk to read it to an image hook the image up to a vm.

The problem comes if you need to make any tweaks before the system will boot in the vm. Then you do need something that can read/write the filesystem :(

Re:dd

[postbigbang]

There is an app, data, settings, permissions, and code. Examining each of these items can help move it onto a new target system, but it should be done by someone familiar with real Unix and the target system's needs.

If it's x86 code, maybe it can become a virtual machine, using some of the methods described upthread, but it means that filesystem must be supported, and you can get to it via tty devices, if there are terminals rather than host sessions. SSH2 wasn't around back then, so some kind of terminal emulation is likely to be needed, and there are any number of vt100 emulators that might be constructed to vector the terminals/tty1-N.

Printers are something else again. Modem links, or other items might also need re/indirection to other outputs.

It takes examination, and reworking the functionality if virtualized or ported to a new host. I don't know that there's an easy fix here.

Re:dd

[Eravnrekaree]

Why not just set up a new system on Linux. Then find some way to get PostGres, mysql or modern database client/library of your choice running on the old Unixware server. Then write a script to run on the old Unixware server that accesses the old data on whatever database is being used on the old Unix server using the database driver/client for that old database, grabs that data off the old database, and then using the newly installed *sql client, sends the data to the new Linux server. On the new linux server new software can be written to use the data or you can try to port over the code if you have the sources for the old information system.

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

My point was if you dd the whole hard drive where are you going to output? Thats why you need to put it in another machine so the image can be copied to a file

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

The iAPX-86 (http://www.datasheetarchive.com/dataframe.php?file=DSA-276782.pdf&dir=Datasheets-14&part=IAPX86#) *is* an 8086 processor combined with an 80139 peripheral/ROM chip, which contained OS support code.

The application binary should use the UNIX API, and may be transportable to any x86 UNIX system with a compatible ABI (Application Binary Interface).

Booting the dd image on any other hardware is a lost cause, since the OS is certain to rely on the ROM code or the peripherals in the 80130 chip. Unless, of course, you are able to find an 80130 emulator (which a search failed to reveal).

So, grab the dd image, mount it using a compatible UNIX (virtually or physically), and see if your app will start. My Magic-8 Ball (tm) says "Signs point to YES"!

Re:dd

[Billly Gates]

Why not just set up a new system on Linux. Then find some way to get PostGres, mysql or modern database client/library of your choice running on the old Unixware server. Then write a script to run on the old Unixware server that accesses the old data on whatever database is being used on the old Unix server using the database driver/client for that old database, grabs that data off the old database, and then using the newly installed *sql client, sends the data to the new Linux server. On the new linux server new software can be written to use the data or you can try to port over the code if you have the sources for the old information system.

It is not that simple. What if it uses PIC and not SQL. PIC is what really old databases use before relational math came into the picture and I have seen it used with HP-UX.

Also it probably does something with many use cases too like monitors equipment, uses custom math formulas people forgotten about for cost analysis, or who knows what. Maybe there is another program maybe not. This is not a simple index like your MySQL class was in college. Data is just part of it. Doing more investigative work in this as I found out most Unisys systems not even being x86 compatible really is aching.

Reading these threads give slashdotters an insight why corps do strange things like keep IE 6 as dumbfounded as it sounds. It is nightmares like what I described to upgrade that no one really wants to do. SCO is hated too but running something godawful proprietary are a bitch to change and then the middle aged workers who go on and on how great XP is hate change and will fight you tooth and nail to change to any newer better solution.

The operating system does not really matter as it is the program and its hardware compatibility. That program wont run on Linux more than it will run on Windows. Anything x86 is good as it is well supported and will be for a long time and can live on a virtual machine when the operating system becomes obsolete. An old Unisys u6000 is so out of date and proprietary as an example. Unisys also makes some 68000 servers too. This means you can not VM it as x86 is not compatible.

If the poster is really lucky and it is a 386 or 186 then it might run on Unixware 7.1 for VMWare. .... this assumes his boss is understanding and so is he paying SCO. It is an expensive and colossal waste of time

Re:dd

[wierd_w]

if we assume that the unixware system does not use IDE or some similarly popular interface type, and thus cannot be hooked to a modern system for dd, then you can always mount a network share from the production server itself, and dd from there.

Slow as hell, but if it gets the image....

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

My point was if you dd the whole hard drive where are you going to output?

Pipe it a network utility like nc or ssh and then redirect into file. Duh, winning.

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

ssh root@unixwarehost dd if=/dev/foo \|gzip | gunzip >unixware.img
or such...

Of course, dding a whole filesystem image from a long-lived machine means you'll use the whole space -- the unused space is no doubt full of file detritus, not zeroed, so the image won't be sparse. Probably not an issue in this day of cheap disks, but worth mention.

Re:dd

[bertok]

Linux box, install VMWorkstation (VSX or VSPhere is waaaay too expensive unless you run a server farm/data center)

Wrong solution. You don't use a workstation hypervisor for servers when there are free server hypervisors out there.

There's a free edition of ESXi, a free Citrix XenServer, and lots of places with Windows Server licenses are probably already licensed for Hyper-V, even if they don't realize it.

All of those are far superior to running a desktop program on top of a full install of Linux!

Re:dd

[cultiv8]

I feel like this should be modded funny.

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

Newer business plan ...
My recommendation is to migrate to another platform and start over. Your boss will hate that! Your workers will hate that! Your accountants will hate that! But you need to be able to migrate to a platform that can at least run on a virtual machine forever and ever and not be caught with your pants down again. I do not know how important this server is or what it does or hopefully does not have ancient database records needed for daily operation GOD FORBID.

Make a business case with the owners or IT department depending on size and say we have A LIABILITY. Liability gets there attention fast and explain you are one outage or parts failure from disaster that you can't recover from. It will cost money and workers who resist change will hate you and complain how great the other product is, but ask them how much it will cost when it dies?

Believe it or not there are workers who hate leaving IE 6 and 7 behind too. Just because it was what htey used for 10 years even though they used Firefox from home. Your intentions of just replacing SCO in a VM are a good one but from how I see it you just discovered a big problem that a good IT employer would recommend to fix.

Again Good Luck

If you are lucky, you'll get ignored and at least have a something to defend yourself with when they fire you 3 years down the line when the damn thing actually breaks. If not, they'll just fire you now for being the bearer of bad news, not having done something earlier etc. If you do nothing, you'll get fired later when it breaks, but at least you'll hopefully have a chance to look for new employment before that happens so it becomes a problem for your replacement. To me it's pretty obvious which option I would go for.

It's great when you realise you've chosen a career in a cost centre, isn't it? I was lucky enough to escape from that shit a while back. I do pity those without that option though.

Re:dd

[drinkypoo]

Qemu comes with tools to change the formats of disk images. Use dd to create a raw file, then convert to whatever format required. I've used Qemu to convert VMware images for use in KVM.

Or you could just run them in Qemu, of course, which supports raw images. But you're right, the qemu-img command is your good friend, especially if you use vmware player and don't have vdiskmanager.

Re:dd

[fsck1nhippies]

If it is running Pick, the process is super simple! Copy the data directory over to a machine running openQM, or ScarletDME and import it. There will be some small issues, but it should function.

Re:dd

[Anonymous Coward]

Your advice on VMWare is terrible! You can run ESXi for free, VMWares offered it as a basic standalone for years,

Also dd can be used to create disk images; you dont even need to use a disk image with VMWare, you can always just give it access to a physical LUN

Re:dd

[klode]

vSphere is not too expensive:
- Free licences for ESXi's basic functionality have been available for several years.
- vSphere 5.1 Essentials costs $500 and gives you licences for a basic vCenter and three hosts with two sockets each.

Private Message Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been ... oddly, collecting original installation CDs, and licenses (valid) for dozens and dozens of OSes for years. I have early versions and later ones, slackware, unixware, irix, and many others.

Send me a message ...

Re:Private Message Me?

[AdamHaun]

I've been ... oddly, collecting original installation CDs, and licenses (valid) for dozens and dozens of OSes for years. I have early versions and later ones, slackware, unixware, irix, and many others.

Send me a message ...

You know you posted as AC, right?

Re:Private Message Me?

[damn_registrars]

've been ... oddly, collecting original installation CDs, and licenses (valid) for dozens and dozens of OSes for years. I have early versions and later ones, slackware, unixware, irix, and many others.

Send me a message ...

You know you posted as AC, right?

You know there's no way to "private message" someone on slashdot, right?

Re:Private Message Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

whoosh

Re:Private Message Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

5 digit UID; think about it.

Re:Private Message Me?

[jones_supa]

I've been ... oddly, collecting original installation CDs, and licenses (valid) for dozens and dozens of OSes for years. I have early versions and later ones, slackware, unixware, irix, and many others.

Send me a message ...

You know you posted as AC, right?

He was so ashamed of his odd hobby.

Re:Private Message Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got the UnixWare install disks (yes, floppies). I also have disk images in case the media is bad.

I've also got some massive blue balls.

So, I'll trade: unixware for an orgasm.

Re:Private Message Me?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the message I knew I would see. Slashdot doesn't disappoint!

Re:Private Message Me?

[AdamHaun]

You know there's no way to "private message" someone on slashdot, right?

I did not. I've mostly ignored the new features that have been added over the years. Collecting old Unix installation kits seemed like a hobby someone on here might have, and posting without logging in is a mistake people sometimes make. Guess I missed out on a joke. Oops.

Thanks for the heads-up.

Re:Private Message Me?

[lukpac]

OP here.

Not sure how I would go about sending you a message, but you can e-mail me: lukpac (at) (gee-mail) (dot) com.

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[Anonymous Coward]

Can someone please kill this retard?

Is old Unisys server x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless you anciant Unisys server is x86 based you are probably going to have truble getting you legacy app to run, unless you have the code and can re-compile it. And if you can recompile it, it might be time to think about porting it to something like Linux/BSD/Solaris.

Re:Is old Unisys server x86?

[KiloByte]

If that server is truly ancient, qemu might handle it at speeds comparable to your old hardware -- or perhaps even faster.

Re:Is old Unisys server x86?

[Nutria]

Unisys did sell x86 systems.

Re:Is old Unisys server x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

+1 Hilarious. Just put qemu in a cron job, and swap the network cables when no one's looking. You can probably hard wire the blinken lights on the Unisys to look like it's still in operation. Tell them you optimized the qubits, but the new server next to it keeps them optimized, so it must never be turned off.
--END-BOFH-SIGNED-MESSAGE--

Re:Is old Unisys server x86?

[Billly Gates]

Can it emulate ancient iAPX-86 family processors? Can it emulate the firmware of these 30 year old Unisys servers? What about emulate the pre-ethernet cards of these 30 year old machines? Just because it can convert a motorolla 68602 from an Apple II into x86 code does not mean it can emulate everything about the other machine.

This argument was why people dumped Unix and VMS in the 1990s for crappy wintel servers. One standard helps when shit becomes obsolete. At least lintel is now in the picture but it does little help if it is a different version of Unixware compiled for non x86 CPUs. Infact it could even be an x86 CPU but the Unisys version of Unixware is so proprietary it wont run on any other piece of hardware. Ugh

Re:Is old Unisys server x86?

[Eunuchswear]

Unixware 2 only ran on x86.

The effort to port it to ia64 is part of what lead to the great SCO lawsuit.

Perhaps you don't realize

[Anonymous Coward]

Copying the software into a VM isn't really much different than downloading a "pirate" copy. You aren't authorized to copy it in either case, not by the copyright holder who often only authorizes installation on a single machine, and who provides no transfer of license when hardware changes hands. You certainly can't pretend that copying the CD onto virtual machines is legitimate or authorized simply due to the fact that you have original media. Further, if you're charging money for this service to an end user that isn't your employer, there may be other crimes you could be charged with.

Finally, when you do find it, try qemu.or bochs, emulating the oldest hardware it supports. You'll find something that works quite well with a later edition of i486 openserver or some such.

Re:Perhaps you don't realize

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, that depends on the license you have. Copyright law certainly allows using software you have legitimately bought and making the copies that are technically necessary to do so.

Re:Perhaps you don't realize

[Eunuchswear]

Unixware licenses let you run 1 copy on 1 machine.

It doesn't care which machine it is. Just don't run more than one copy per license and you're golden.

(One minor problem - neither Xen nor KVM can run Unixware 7.1.1, I'm not sure whether they can run 2.1.3, never tried).

Re:Perhaps you don't realize

[drinkypoo]

Neither Xen nor KVM can run very much, but Qemu and vmware both ought to do fine... if it's even x86

Re:Perhaps you don't realize

[Anonymous Coward]

My employer has an extensive (thousands of systems) installation of older OpenServer running under Vmware.

We've been suffering lately from extensive (virtual) drive corruption problems across the system but have not thus far been able to identify the problem.

Just a warning.

Re:Perhaps you don't realize

[drinkypoo]

My employer has an extensive (thousands of systems) installation of older OpenServer running under Vmware.

We've been suffering lately from extensive (virtual) drive corruption problems across the system but have not thus far been able to identify the problem.

That's a good heads-up. Are you using the IDE or SCSI interface for your storage volumes?

Re:Perhaps you don't realize

[Eunuchswear]

Neither Xen nor KVM can run very much, but Qemu and vmware both ought to do fine... if it's even x86

Unixware only ever ran on x86.

UW 7.1.1 runs ok under Qemu - very slowly though.

UnixWare v1.1 here, never used, if you want it.

[macraig]

Complete with all documentation, some of it still shrink-wrapped. The diskette and CD envelopes were also never opened, though the adhesive on the perforated flaps has dried up and left them unsealed even though they were.

Re:UnixWare v1.1 here, never used, if you want it.

[lukpac]

OP here. Thanks, but I believe (I'm a /. proxy in all of this) we need 2.1.2.

Also, in case you might be wondering, the goal *is* to completely retire this system (sooner than later), but it has basically been ignored for years. Moving the functionality to other systems will take a while (I'm working on one related project, and we're probably looking to at least the middle of next year), and we want to virtualize for now in case Something Bad Happens.

Re:UnixWare v1.1 here, never used, if you want it.

[macraig]

I didn't expect that it would be useful, but just in case there was enough flexibility that it might work I offered it anyway. Did you also try the ARSTechnica OpenForum?

Re:UnixWare v1.1 here, never used, if you want it.

[lukpac]

I haven't, but I'm not sure if somebody on the server team did or not. I'll see. Thanks.

Look into emulating the ABI

[Let's All Be Chinese]

FreeBSD and NetBSD have an ABI wrapper feature (aka "linuxulator" when wrapping linux) that let you translate syscalls for older versions of the same OS, or even different unixoid OSes. Add userland libraries from the original environment, and you can run the original app unchanged. As long as the application doesn't try and access hard-to-duplicate features, talk to hardware directly, that sort of thing. This gets you a modern and virtualisable OS that can run your old programs.

If there isn't a suitable ABI wrapper for your platform now, at least it could be added relatively easily. Possibly a long shot but at least it's an option to look into.

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

BSD is dying. Nuff said.

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll compare uptimes. Betcha Linux died first.

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll compare uptimes. Betcha Linux died first.

It doesn't count. Netcraft has to confirm it first.

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[interval1066]

some one's gonna create a great unixware simulation in netcraft, and WHERE WILL YOUR GOD BE THEN, VMWARE???

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

BSD is dying. Nuff said.

Has anyone confirmed this?

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

BSD is dead --Netcraft
Netcraft is dead --BSD

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm waiting for the Minecraft iAPX-86 emulator.

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[jkflying]

Bitch please. Somebody will create a unixware simulation in MineCraft!

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Eunuchswear]

Add userland libraries from the original environment,

Don't do that! (semi joke)

That was what the whole "SCO" lawsuit was about!

Re:Look into emulating the ABI

[Anonymous Coward]

BSD is NetCraft --Dead

linux-abi/ibcs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Support is probably pretty much abandoned now but back in the days of the 2.2/2.4 kernels, there was support available in the kernel for running UNIX binaries directly. Pretty sure this included Unixware. You may be able to virtualise an old Linux that will host your unixware stuff, rather than using a unixware kernel.

see: http://linux-abi.sourceforge.net for a starting point

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone forgot to take their meds.

Just clone the drive...

[Panaflex]

I've installed Unixware 2.1.2 a few times, the license was straightforward. You're license to operate one copy of the media on a single machine, generally limited to two CPU's (SMP style). Unisys as a reseller didn't retain any copyrights, IIRC.

So clone that drive and fire it up. The original media did have a BIOS check, but only at installation. I remember booting up Unixware on other motherboards without any issue, as long as the specs were pretty close.

Other than that, if you want to continue with the media option, post a wanted ad on ebay and perhaps you'll get lucky.

Other Options

[ultima]

Option 1. Re-implement your legacy application on a modern platform, from legacy source code, or from scratch/reverse-engineering.
- You'll pay down your technical debt and possibly have a supportable, and maybe even virtualized, production system going forward.
Option 2. Sustain legacy equipment knowing that no modern emulator handles all the details of your particular proprietary hardware.
- Double down on your investment and leave the problem for the next guy.
Option 3. Hire IBM. (Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM).
- Mostly this will end up just like (2).

Oh, you wanted virtualization...but I think that's a solution to a different problem than the one you are facing. Get that app working on something reasonably open and then we can talk about virtualization.

This story shows up in Google's top 10 search results for me for Unisys Unixware right now, which really should emphasize to you the magnitude of the pain you might be facing...

Find an old friend?

[Cramer]

You'll need an old friend indeed, to find media that old.

I'll go look through my boxes, but I wouldn't bet on a) having that version, or b) the floppies it came on being readable.

Old SCO

[iCEBaLM]

Slightly off topic but I'd like to share it:

Old SCO was pretty classy, they had their "Free license" Unixware 7 advertized on their site, but you had to pay for a "media kit" for about $100. Being a poor uppity teenager, I emailed them asking where I could download the media in order to take advantage of their free license. They asked for my address.

Three days later I had a DHL shipped media kit box with over 20 discs in total. I was sad to see them sell Unixware off.

Re:Old SCO

[drinkypoo]

I never worked there, but know tons of people who did, and old SCO was great in every way except for being competitive. Once the free *BSDs took off, and then double especially once Linux took off, there was no reason for it to exist any more. They completely failed to keep up with the world.

They played beer baseball in the parking lot, they had a variety show every year, they were a generally interesting bunch of people. But SCO UNIX sucked on toast, from a user's perspective. Too many differences, wacky daemons, slow, high requirements, more expensive than even the for-profit competition.

The last really impressive thing from SCO was Xenix 2.3.2 for i286, IMO. That was by far the best OS you could run on a 286 with a meg of RAM.

Re:Old SCO

[david.given]

I remember hearing from one of the last real engineers at SCO. He said that one day he arrived at work and realised that he was the only person in the entire building who wasn't wearing a suit. It was then, he said, that he knew that SCO was dead.

Re:Old SCO

[drinkypoo]

SCO had a lot of very smart and talented people and a really awesome culture. I can only imagine that the reason they failed is purely management. I've never tried to dishearten any of my ex-SCO pals with a post mortem, though.

Re:Old SCO

[Anonymous Coward]

A similar thing happened to me when I was interviewing to work at NCR back in 1998. On the tour, I saw 2 engineers per floor with their cubicles lit up. Take your pick of cubicle or floor they said. No overhead lights. Really eerie. Then they showed me the server I would be working on. An old wirewrap beast, the NCR 8250, still in service when I was interviewing. Some big money client still had their data on it and was actively using it on a daily basis. All I could do was say "Wow!" to myself. They asked for my required salary. I instantly tripled it. I figured if they were going to try to destroy my career it was going to cost them. I didn't take the job.

http://www.ricomputermuseum.org/Home/equipment/ncr-8250

I'll wager the server on the page was the one I was supposed to keep going. "donated by Ames Department Stores in November of 2002". The name sounds right, and it's the right time frame.

Re:Old SCO

[Arker]

I remember it much the same. Great company, but the product was always a bit of a beast, and when Slackware came out it was dead. We could migrate customers over to slackware for less than their licensing cost alone sticking with SCO, improve their stability and performance, and make a good profit on the deal. They never adjusted to the change in the market.

Re:Old SCO

[david.given]

After looking at those pictures, all I can say is: eeeeee. 128kB RAM maximum and a 16-bit processor? And they were trying to do real work on it? In 1998? What were they thinking? Even in those days, you trivially could do an indistinguishable emulation in software on a low-end PC...

Re:Old SCO

[Ritchie70]

It's NCR, and the page calls it a POS system, so that was the "brains" for a point of sale system. I have no idea if it was an enterprise-wide system or for a single store. My guess is this consolidated sales information enterprise-wise, probably over dedicated lines to their stores, but that's strictly a guess.

It would be far from trivial to emulate this on a PC. If you look through the linked page, you find that the computer has a number of I/O boards, which probably have no comparable equivalent in the PC world. You have to be able to talk to the (equally elderly) systems in the stores for this to do the job that I'm speculating it did.

Ames Department Stores was a discount chain, but had smaller stores than a KMart or Walmart.

According to Wikipedia, Ames announced the closing of their remaining stores in August 2002, so I would guess that they used this to the end, then once they shut their doors, donated it since it had negligible value.

Point of sale systems are tremendously expensive, and Ames was under a lot of pressure from Walmart as they expanded into the northeast. It's possible that to replace this they would have had to upgrade the point of sale systems in all of their locations.

Re:Old SCO

[drinkypoo]

They never adjusted to the change in the market.

SCO and all the other x86 UNIX companies (there used to be a handful!) continued to operate on the assumption that nobody would trust a free alternative long after it became obvious that everyone who mattered would. The rest is the history of SCO vs. Linux.

BSD

[Galactic Dominator]

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=svr4&sektion=4

Might work, experiment at your own risk. If it does work, your options have become much greater.

i might have the disks

[drwho]

I was using this stuff in 1995-96. I might still have the floppys (!) or CDs around for pentium architcture. I'll look around, it's probably in storage. But you know it's full of security holes, right?

Re:i might have the disks

[lukpac]

OP here.

Projects are already in the works to retire the system in question. But those likely won't be complete for at least a year. The goal is to virtualize for now to avoid a crippling hardware failure in that time.

My idea

[Eravnrekaree]

From what I understand is the server that you have is not x86 so trying to run the software off that is pretty much not possible, unless you can get new x86 copies or have the source and can recompile. Unless you can get sources for whatever information system you are using, it seems the dd option is out of the question, you cannot just copy the system binaries , you wont be able to just copy the binaries it would appear.

One solution i might suggest is first setting up a new Linux server, then porting over MySQL or other modern database client libraries/client over to the old Unix system. Then write a program on the old server that takes reads the data off the old database on that old Unix system, whatever it is, and sends the data to the Linux server on over the MySQL or other new database driver. Then Write new software on the Linux server that can use that data or if you have the source code for the old software you may try to port.

You could also decide to forget about porting MySQl or other modern database stuff to the old Unix server, just write a simple thing on the Unix end that generates XML data from the data and sends the XML data, or some other simple format you can come up with, over to Linux, you write a program on Linux then gets that data, and stores it into a new SQL database.

One option is to write a small server that runs on the Linux end, or to use an FTP, or an HTTP server, perhaps even with a CGI script, on server on the Linux end to get the data. Somewhere involved here will be code to take that data, read it and then store it into a database.

Nice try Titor

[Anonymous Coward]

We're not falling for it this time.

Sincerely,

The Time Lords

What does this server actually do?

[Zombie Ryushu]

What does this server actually do? Can you tell me? Is it a Sun Yellow Pages server?

Re:What does this server actually do?

[lukpac]

OP here.

It runs the middleware for a VB4 (I think) front end and Oracle 7.2 back end. Work is already underway to retire the system, but that probably won't happen for another year. The goal of virtualizing is avoiding a critical hardware failure during that time.

Re:What does this server actually do?

[Zombie Ryushu]

I've only ever dealt with Oracle once and never in a Mission Critical Capacity.

Just buy SCO

[marciot]

> SCO isn't much of an option.

Why not? Just buy them out. By now you can probably buy the company for a few hundred bucks...

Re:Just buy SCO

[RocketRabbit]

Oh sure, the stock is worthless on the market and to most investors, but to the patent trolls that own the majority of shares it's worth a lot of money. Their intellectual property will allow many more frivolous lawsuits to be filed.

Re:Just buy SCO

[unixisc]

I didn't get the exact reason. One can't approach UnXiS and ask to buy a copy, showing them the original Unisys license? Also, Unixware was an x86 only unix, right?

Re:dd (mod parent up

[Billly Gates]

The iAPX-86 (http://www.datasheetarchive.com/dataframe.php?file=DSA-276782.pdf&dir=Datasheets-14&part=IAPX86#) *is* an 8086 processor combined with an 80139 peripheral/ROM chip, which contained OS support code.

The application binary should use the UNIX API, and may be transportable to any x86 UNIX system with a compatible ABI (Application Binary Interface).

Booting the dd image on any other hardware is a lost cause, since the OS is certain to rely on the ROM code or the peripherals in the 80130 chip. Unless, of course, you are able to find an 80130 emulator (which a search failed to reveal).

So, grab the dd image, mount it using a compatible UNIX (virtually or physically), and see if your app will start. My Magic-8 Ball (tm) says "Signs point to YES"!

I stand corrected. I confused the iAPX-86 with the iAPX-4432 when googling this. Unisys made strange 6800 series systems too so who knows. the u6000 was the first hit that ran Unixware and is probably what he is running as the 6800 ran QNX.

I freely admit I was in 1st grade when these systems came out so maybe the grayhairs can assist better as I am not an expert. Just imagining the nightmare on what could go wrong.

If is binary compatible than get Unixware 7.1 for its VMWare support and retire that dinosaur server asap. If not then there is going to be pain and that ancient platform has got to go.

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[RKBA]

Better be careful. These days, words like those on the Internet can get you tossed into prison by DHS.

Go back to 1999 and www.freebird.org

[tlambert]

And then download the free version of UnixWare 2.1.2:

http://web.archive.org/web/19990117023208/http://www.freebird.org/freeUW.html

Otherwise, time to update your OS, and keep copies of the installation media this time.

Re:Go back to 1999 and www.freebird.org

[Anonymous Coward]

As stated in the original post, we have the installation media, but that is Unisys specific. I don't believe we ever had generic UnixWare media.

Because of the legacy software running on this machine, I don't believe updating the OS is an option.

Re:Go back to 1999 and www.freebird.org

[lukpac]

Sorry, that last post was me...wasn't logged in.

Re:dd WILL work

[Anonymous Coward]

If the machine is being nasty, what you do is:

1) Build a new (empty) VMware server with the necessary disk space.
2) Boot it of a Linux demo disk of your choice and configure nc (netcat) to listen on a nominated tcp port, and pipe it's output to a DD command to write the data to the newly (empty) virtual disk.
3) On the Unixware machine, use DD to read the physical disk but write the output to nc (netcat) and have it send the data to the newly built vmware server
4) come back in a couple of hours when it's completed copying.

Then reboot your newly created VM and see why it does. It will probably complain about device drivers not being able to find the relevant hardware, etc. but that's probably a lot easier to fix than having to rebuild your application stack form the ground up and reconfigure it. Remember that you don't want the source physical and destination virtual server(s) on the network at the same time.

Netcat is amazing for stuff like this. You can also use it (with tar) to move files across systems with minimal stuffing around. :-)

G18) Is there a UnixWare user's group?

[mattr]

G18) Is there a UnixWare user's group?

Dan Busarow writes: The SCO Users Group can be reached electronically
as scoug@xenitec.on.ca. Subscription requests to
scoug-request@xenitec.on.ca.

http://lib.ru/UNIXFAQ/faq-unixware-general.txt

once upon a time

[Anonymous Coward]

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/04/08/08/0258217/10-years-of-beowulf-clustering

Binary compatibility

[ulzeraj]

Linux got some binary compatibility tweaks on the kernel to run programs for other operating systems. I've worked on a similar issue in the past and the relevant services running on an OpenServer were just copied into the Linux system with a patched kernel with their dependences. Luckily the program was simple enough to make it without minor bugs like glitches with the linux terminal.

If dd -> image conversion with qemu-img -> virtualization is not an option you could research a bit about binary compatibility with your old server.

option:

[Tastecicles]

I think you can legitimately download installation media if you then obey the stipulations attached to the license you already have, that being that you can run the system on one machine at a time. Microsoft have done this for years, in that they allow you to make a backup copy of your installation media. I have it from a senior Microsoft liaison with the British Software Alliance that it is within the bounds of the license limitations to download installation media in order to reuse an OEM license on the same machine as long as it remains in the possession and control of the same Person (individual or company) who originally bought that license. Selling a machine on "legally" involves the purchase of another OEM license (yeah, talk about cashcowing! This violates the Doctrine of First Sale and I told him so - for which he didn't have an answer).

Here's a link to sco support on linux 2.2 to 2.4

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like good information here for you

http://aplawrence.com/Linux/linuxabi.html

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[jones_supa]

[x] Do not show this message again

I've probably got one.

[Eunuchswear]

But you provide no way to contact you.

Clever.

Re:I've probably got one.

[lukpac]

lukpac (at) (gee-mail) (dot) com

SCO FTP Server

[Anonymous Coward]

ftp://ftp.sco.com/ I believe has what you are looking for. They for sure have the ISO's for the Unixware 7 installation disks (including a June 2008 cd).

Re:SCO FTP Server

[lukpac]

Thanks. However, it *appears* to just be updates, not a full install.

ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/UW21/

"... SCO isn't much of an option."

[sk999]

SCO (or The TSG Group, as it is now called) is no option at all. The UnixWare/OpenServer business was sold to a new company called "UnXis Inc" over a year ago. (TSG retained the lawsuits.)
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/unxis-completes-purchase-of-sco-unix-assets-119609744.html
The new company does advertise migration consulting services for UnixWare 2.x.

How much is this old server worth to you?

Re:"... SCO isn't much of an option."

[unixisc]

You mean one can't buy a copy of Unixware from UnXiS? I thought they're the guys who now own the business - TSG just owns the lawsuits. The consulting UnXiS does is for what - migrating away from Unixware?

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[PopeRatzo]

Better be careful. These days, words like those on the Internet can get you tossed into prison by DHS.

Then can someone please waterboard him and then call out a drone strike on him?

wow...

[Anonymous Coward]

ebay has quite a few listings.

I guess basic, common sense, to search online for what the OP needed was too difficult.

Moron

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[Anonymous Coward]

> Better be careful. These days, words like those on the Internet can get you tossed into prison by DHS.

Oh, horseshit. At worst, Ann Coulter will stop by your house and dry hump you like a desiccated pray mantis in heat.

VMware and drivers

[Anonymous Coward]

There are significant problems with virtualization of old SCO products: basically the drivers of the guest are not necessarily compatible with the virtualized hardware VMWare managed successfully for OpenServer 5.0.7, and there are old notes out in the Google world about running VMware for old SCO OpenServer version 5.0.5 or later with a boot floppy boot image for 5.0.7 to get everythng to work for installation. But it's *nasty*.

Can you obtain newer release media or license, possibly for a chunk of money on Ebay, and mount the drive under the newer OS?

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Read carefully. This is a satirical post, that combines the last several years of forum trolling, rolled into one FUNNY rant!

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[tqk]

Oh, come on. Just stand back and look at it. It's almost art, in a Jackson Pollock sort of way. Who does !@#$ like that at 19:19 on a Friday?!? You can almost see his Mom and little brother standing behind him wailing on him with nerf bats and guilt trips.

If I ever decide to off myself, that's the way I want to go out, for sure.

Re:$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

[tqk]

Ann Coulter will stop by your house and dry hump you like a desiccated [praying] mantis in heat.

She will bite my head off when she's done, right? Then, I think I'm okay with that.

if you have the license

[Anonymous Coward]

ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/unixware7/714/iso/UnixWare-7.1.4-June2008/