Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #235018 > unrolled thread

Old commercial UNIX in '26

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Contents

  Old commercial UNIX in '26 Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me> - 2026-06-15 08:27 +0200
    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 mechanicjay@sol.smbfc.net (Mechanicjay) - 2026-06-15 06:57 +0000
      Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-15 09:25 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-06-15 10:01 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2026-06-15 13:39 +0000
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-15 14:06 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-15 14:36 +0000
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-06-15 11:14 -0400
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-15 15:29 +0000
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-15 16:23 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-15 16:43 +0000
                  Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-15 19:06 +0000
                    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Pluted Pup <plutedpup@outlook.com> - 2026-06-16 20:07 -0700
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 drb@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) - 2026-06-15 15:16 +0000
      Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Daniel <me@sc1f1dan.com> - 2026-06-15 07:13 -0700
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 mechanicjay@sol.smbfc.net (Mechanicjay) - 2026-06-18 15:47 +0000
    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-06-15 11:34 -0400
      Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-15 23:55 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me> - 2026-06-16 04:50 +0200
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-16 03:34 +0000
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-16 12:49 +0000
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-16 14:40 +0000
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-17 11:49 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-17 13:55 +0000
                  Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-18 09:52 +0000
                    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-18 14:45 +0000
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me> - 2026-06-16 21:59 +0200
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-16 13:53 -0700
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-17 12:00 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-17 13:21 +0000
    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-15 19:35 +0000
      Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-15 20:01 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-16 12:50 +0000
      Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-15 22:40 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-16 09:19 +0000
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-16 13:00 +0000
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-16 13:44 +0000
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-16 14:47 +0000
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-16 14:59 +0000
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-16 16:24 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-16 20:19 +0000
                  Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-16 21:27 +0000
                    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-17 08:44 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-16 21:39 +0100
                  Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-16 21:19 +0000
                  Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-16 21:29 +0000
        Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-16 12:59 +0000
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-06-16 07:30 -0700
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 "Phigan" <phigan@mutinybbs.com.remove-54f-this> - 2026-06-18 16:28 -0400
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 "Kurt Weiske" <kurt.weiske@realitycheckbbs.org.remove-83z-this> - 2026-06-20 08:22 -0700
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-20 18:59 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 "Kurt Weiske" <kurt.weiske@realitycheckbbs.org.remove-jv-this> - 2026-06-28 14:16 -0700
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2026-07-04 14:19 -0400
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2026-07-04 14:08 -0400
          Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-16 14:51 +0000
            Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-06-16 21:32 +0000
              Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-06-17 13:54 +0000
                Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> - 2026-06-17 14:21 +0000
                  Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-17 19:35 +0000
                    [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery (was: Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-18 08:56 +0100
                      Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-06-18 06:37 -0700
                        Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-06-18 07:57 -0700
                        Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-18 22:51 +0000
                          Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-06-19 07:37 -0700
                            Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me> - 2026-06-19 18:46 +0200
                              Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-20 09:28 +0100
                          Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-06-19 19:57 -0700
                      Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Daniel Cerqueira <dan.list@lispclub.com> - 2026-06-18 15:27 +0100
                        Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-21 09:15 +0100
                      Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-06-18 07:52 -0700
                        Re: [OT] Shifts in type of computing machinery Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-18 22:52 +0000
    Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Anthk GM <anthk@disroot.org> - 2026-06-22 19:14 +0000
      Re: Old commercial UNIX in '26 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-22 22:29 +0000

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#235018 — Old commercial UNIX in '26

I've always been quite curious about commercial Unices, but when I was born
Linux had already put the writing on the wall for them. I think it would be
quite fun to set up a UNIX server in my homelab and have it host some services
(WWW, Gopher, Gemini, etc), but I've heard plenty of horror stories about
actually operating these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from
the '90s-early '00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to
administer? (especially coming from a Linux background)

I'm thinking of going with Solaris, if only because I have some hardware (a
Sun Fire system in unknown condition) that I could try to restore. But I know
the installation process will definitely be a pain in the ass. The system
doesn't have an optical drive, so I'll need to install Solaris over the
network. No clue how to set up the server necessary for that - hopefully I can
do it on OpenIndiana!

-- 
Piper McCorkle (she/her)
contact@piperswe.me
https://www.piperswe.me/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#235019

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 08:27:34 +0200, Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me> wrote:

>... but I've heard plenty of horror stories about
>actually operating these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from
>the '90s-early '00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to
>administer? (especially coming from a Linux background)

If you're fluent on the Linux Command Line, sometimes it feels like you're
having a stroke when working on an old Unix.  Things are just different enough,
or the command line switch you need for whatever util hadn't been invented yet, 
or whatever.

That said, Ultrix 4.5 on this Mips DecStation hasn't been too bad, a little bit
of a learning curve, but not too terrible.  I've been able to get some GNU tools
on here, gcc 3, bash 2, etc.  That's allowed me to build all sort of stuff, like
slrn, pine, lynx, ircii, trek, adventure.  It's been pretty rewarding and it's
turned into a machine I use all the time for the fun of it.

I've had a much harder time trying to figure out Solaris 5.x for my
SparcStation...to the point that it just sits on a shelf and doesn't get used.

Xenix on the TRS-80 Model 16 is actually very easy to use, but that's a little
earlier and was geared as a office document system...and no ethernet, so I'm not
sure it really counts.

Anyway, give it a try, and welcome to the Old Unix Club!


--
Sent from my Personal DECstation 5000/25

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235021

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 06:57:44 +0000, Mechanicjay wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 08:27:34 +0200, Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me>
> wrote:
> 
>>... but I've heard plenty of horror stories about actually operating
>>these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from the '90s-early
>>'00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to administer?
>>(especially coming from a Linux background)
> 
> If you're fluent on the Linux Command Line, sometimes it feels like
> you're having a stroke when working on an old Unix.  Things are just
> different enough,
> or the command line switch you need for whatever util hadn't been
> invented yet,
> or whatever.

I remember the days when the command to change directory was chdir (it 
still is, but cd works too). Awakward to type. And there was no alias 
facility either.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235022

Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> wrote or quoted:
>I remember the days when the command to change directory was chdir (it 
>still is, but cd works too). Awakward to type. And there was no alias 
>facility either.

  In the 80s, I wanted to get that early UNIX feeling, 
  and one of the things I did was,

stty erase '#'
stty kill '@'

  or maybe

stty intr \^?
stty erase \#
stty kill @

  . What actually was common where I was in the 80s was

stty line 2 erase '^H' kill '^U' intr '^C' echoe ctlecho

  . I think that was on SUN workstations.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235024

In article <n99uoqFkpanU2@mid.individual.net>,
Bob Eager  <throwaway0008@eager.cx> wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 06:57:44 +0000, Mechanicjay wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 08:27:34 +0200, Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>... but I've heard plenty of horror stories about actually operating
>>>these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from the '90s-early
>>>'00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to administer?
>>>(especially coming from a Linux background)
>> 
>> If you're fluent on the Linux Command Line, sometimes it feels like
>> you're having a stroke when working on an old Unix.  Things are just
>> different enough,
>> or the command line switch you need for whatever util hadn't been
>> invented yet,
>> or whatever.
>
>I remember the days when the command to change directory was chdir (it 
>still is, but cd works too). Awakward to type. And there was no alias 
>facility either.

The nice thing about "chdir" is you can do:

	mkdir foo
	^mk^ch
-- 
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235025

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 13:39:15 +0000, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:

> In article <n99uoqFkpanU2@mid.individual.net>,
> Bob Eager  <throwaway0008@eager.cx> wrote:
>>On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 06:57:44 +0000, Mechanicjay wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 08:27:34 +0200, Piper McCorkle
>>> <contact@piperswe.me>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>... but I've heard plenty of horror stories about actually operating
>>>>these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from the
>>>>'90s-early '00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to
>>>>administer? (especially coming from a Linux background)
>>> 
>>> If you're fluent on the Linux Command Line, sometimes it feels like
>>> you're having a stroke when working on an old Unix.  Things are just
>>> different enough,
>>> or the command line switch you need for whatever util hadn't been
>>> invented yet,
>>> or whatever.
>>
>>I remember the days when the command to change directory was chdir (it
>>still is, but cd works too). Awakward to type. And there was no alias
>>facility either.
> 
> The nice thing about "chdir" is you can do:
> 
> 	mkdir foo ^mk^ch

As soon as I could, I aliased mkdir to md, to match.

  $ md something
  $ cd !$

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235028

Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> writes:
>On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 06:57:44 +0000, Mechanicjay wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 08:27:34 +0200, Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>... but I've heard plenty of horror stories about actually operating
>>>these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from the '90s-early
>>>'00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to administer?
>>>(especially coming from a Linux background)
>> 
>> If you're fluent on the Linux Command Line, sometimes it feels like
>> you're having a stroke when working on an old Unix.  Things are just
>> different enough,
>> or the command line switch you need for whatever util hadn't been
>> invented yet,
>> or whatever.
>
>I remember the days when the command to change directory was chdir (it 
>still is, but cd works too).

Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.

It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235029

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:

> Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.
>
> It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.
Unix v6 on the PDP-11 has 'chdir' and 'cd' does not work. I have this
system under emulation.

http://squoze.net/UNIX/v6man/man1/chdir

Yes, it's doing chdir(2) but you type it at the command line like 'cd'
on a modern system. 

-- 
PGP Key ID: 781C A3E2 C6ED 70A6 B356  7AF5 B510 542E D460 5CAE
       "The Internet should always be the Wild West!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235032

jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> writes:
>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>
>> Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.
>>
>> It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.
>Unix v6 on the PDP-11 has 'chdir' and 'cd' does not work. I have this
>system under emulation.
>
>http://squoze.net/UNIX/v6man/man1/chdir

I sit corrected, however 'cd' was the standard command, 'chdir'
was supported as an alias by the bourne shell.

SYSTAB  commands {
                {"cd",          SYSCD},
                {"read",        SYSREAD},
/*
                {"[",           SYSTST},
*/
                {"set",         SYSSET},
                {":",           SYSNULL},
                {"trap",        SYSTRAP},
                {"login",       SYSLOGIN},
                {"wait",        SYSWAIT},
                {"eval",        SYSEVAL},
                {".",           SYSDOT},
                {"newgrp",      SYSLOGIN},
                {readonly,      SYSRDONLY},
                {export,        SYSXPORT},
                {"chdir",       SYSCD},
                {"break",       SYSBREAK},
                {"continue",    SYSCONT},
                {"shift",       SYSSHFT},
                {"exit",        SYSEXIT},
                {"exec",        SYSEXEC},
                {"times",       SYSTIMES},
                {"umask",       SYSUMASK},
                {0,     0},
};

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235034

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:29:42 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> writes:
>>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>
>>> Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.
>>>
>>> It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.
>>Unix v6 on the PDP-11 has 'chdir' and 'cd' does not work. I have this
>>system under emulation.
>>
>>http://squoze.net/UNIX/v6man/man1/chdir
> 
> I sit corrected, however 'cd' was the standard command, 'chdir'
> was supported as an alias by the bourne shell.

The Bourne shell did not exist at the 'classic' time I am talking about. 
It was 'sh' or nothing.

	switch(t[DTYP]) {

	case TCOM:
		cp1 = t[DCOM];
		if(equal(cp1, "chdir")) {
			if(t[DCOM+1] != 0) {
				if(chdir(t[DCOM+1]) < 0)
					err("chdir: bad directory");
			} else
				err("chdir: arg count");
			return;
		}
		if(equal(cp1, "shift")) {
			if(dolc < 1) {

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235035

Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> writes:
>On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:29:42 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> writes:
>>>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>>
>>>> Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.
>>>>
>>>> It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.
>>>Unix v6 on the PDP-11 has 'chdir' and 'cd' does not work. I have this
>>>system under emulation.
>>>
>>>http://squoze.net/UNIX/v6man/man1/chdir
>> 
>> I sit corrected, however 'cd' was the standard command, 'chdir'
>> was supported as an alias by the bourne shell.
>
>The Bourne shell did not exist at the 'classic' time I am talking about. 
>It was 'sh' or nothing.
>
>	switch(t[DTYP]) {
>
>	case TCOM:
>		cp1 = t[DCOM];
>		if(equal(cp1, "chdir")) {
>			if(t[DCOM+1] != 0) {
>				if(chdir(t[DCOM+1]) < 0)
>					err("chdir: bad directory");
>			} else
>				err("chdir: arg count");
>			return;
>		}
>		if(equal(cp1, "shift")) {
>			if(dolc < 1) {
>

The last time I used v6 was 1979.  Memory fail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235036

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 16:43:18 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> writes:
>>On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:29:42 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> writes:
>>>>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.
>>>>>
>>>>> It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.
>>>>Unix v6 on the PDP-11 has 'chdir' and 'cd' does not work. I have this
>>>>system under emulation.
>>>>
>>>>http://squoze.net/UNIX/v6man/man1/chdir
>>> 
>>> I sit corrected, however 'cd' was the standard command, 'chdir'
>>> was supported as an alias by the bourne shell.
>>
>>The Bourne shell did not exist at the 'classic' time I am talking about.
>>It was 'sh' or nothing.
>>
>>	switch(t[DTYP]) {
>>
>>	case TCOM:
>>		cp1 = t[DCOM]; if(equal(cp1, "chdir")) {
>>			if(t[DCOM+1] != 0) {
>>				if(chdir(t[DCOM+1]) < 0)
>>					err("chdir: bad directory");
>>			} else
>>				err("chdir: arg count");
>>			return;
>>		}
>>		if(equal(cp1, "shift")) {
>>			if(dolc < 1) {
>>
>>
> The last time I used v6 was 1979.  Memory fail.

I think by that time most people had hacked it to have 'cd' as well. I 
started with v6 in 1975.

As an awakward typist, I found chdir hard to type! And I wasn't the only 
one.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235073

On 6/15/26 12:06 PM, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 16:43:18 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> 
>> Bob Eager <throwaway0008@eager.cx> writes:
>>> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 15:29:42 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>
>>>> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> writes:
>>>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Classic unix did not ever have a chdir command.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It did have a chdir(2) system call, however.
>>>>> Unix v6 on the PDP-11 has 'chdir' and 'cd' does not work. I have this
>>>>> system under emulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://squoze.net/UNIX/v6man/man1/chdir
>>>>
>>>> I sit corrected, however 'cd' was the standard command, 'chdir'
>>>> was supported as an alias by the bourne shell.
>>>
>>> The Bourne shell did not exist at the 'classic' time I am talking about.
>>> It was 'sh' or nothing.
>>>
>>> 	switch(t[DTYP]) {
>>>
>>> 	case TCOM:
>>> 		cp1 = t[DCOM]; if(equal(cp1, "chdir")) {
>>> 			if(t[DCOM+1] != 0) {
>>> 				if(chdir(t[DCOM+1]) < 0)
>>> 					err("chdir: bad directory");
>>> 			} else
>>> 				err("chdir: arg count");
>>> 			return;
>>> 		}
>>> 		if(equal(cp1, "shift")) {
>>> 			if(dolc < 1) {
>>>
>>>
>> The last time I used v6 was 1979.  Memory fail.
> 
> I think by that time most people had hacked it to have 'cd' as well. I
> started with v6 in 1975.
> 
> As an awakward typist, I found chdir hard to type! And I wasn't the only
> one.

chdir is fine on a Dvorak keyboard!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235030

 > I remember the days when the command to change directory was chdir (it 
 > still is, but cd works too). Awakward to type. And there was no alias 
 > facility either.

Frustratingly,

ozymandias:~$ chdir
bash: chdir: orden no encontrada

which means you can't edit dir or mkdir into chdir.

De

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235026

mechanicjay@sol.smbfc.net (Mechanicjay) writes:

> On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 08:27:34 +0200, Piper McCorkle <contact@piperswe.me> wrote:
>
>>... but I've heard plenty of horror stories about
>>actually operating these things. Are there any commercial UNIX variants from
>>the '90s-early '00s that aren't a complete and utter pain in the ass to
>>administer? (especially coming from a Linux background)
>
> If you're fluent on the Linux Command Line, sometimes it feels like you're
> having a stroke when working on an old Unix.  Things are just different enough,
> or the command line switch you need for whatever util hadn't been invented yet, 
> or whatever.
>
> That said, Ultrix 4.5 on this Mips DecStation hasn't been too bad, a little bit
> of a learning curve, but not too terrible.  I've been able to get some GNU tools
> on here, gcc 3, bash 2, etc.  That's allowed me to build all sort of stuff, like
> slrn, pine, lynx, ircii, trek, adventure.  It's been pretty rewarding and it's
> turned into a machine I use all the time for the fun of it.
>
> I've had a much harder time trying to figure out Solaris 5.x for my
> SparcStation...to the point that it just sits on a shelf and doesn't get used.
>
> Xenix on the TRS-80 Model 16 is actually very easy to use, but that's a little
> earlier and was geared as a office document system...and no ethernet, so I'm not
> sure it really counts.

I'm curious about the TRS-80 and the lack of ethernet (not
surprised). Isn't there a way to use modern serial wifi adapters to get
that sucker on a network?

--
Daniel
sysop  | air & wave bbs
finger | info@bbs.airandwave.net

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235101

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 07:13:14 -0700, Daniel <me@sc1f1dan.com> wrote:
>mechanicjay@sol.smbfc.net (Mechanicjay) writes:
>> Xenix on the TRS-80 Model 16 is actually very easy to use, but that's a little
>> earlier and was geared as a office document system...and no ethernet, so I'm not
>> sure it really counts.
>
>I'm curious about the TRS-80 and the lack of ethernet (not
>surprised). Isn't there a way to use modern serial wifi adapters to get
>that sucker on a network?
>

Well, the machine dates from the early 80's.  It was marketed as a business /
document all-in-one type solution.  It came standard with 2 serial ports, but
you could get a 6 line serial card as well, to hang up to SIX terminals off it
to support your office staff.

The software packages available for it are things like, word processing,
spreadsheets, accounting, etc.

So, yes, you can hang a modem or a serial wifi adapter for some network
connectivity, but you're really limited to the CU utility and some XMODEM for
file transfers. There's no tcp/ip stack to speak of.  


--
Sent from my Personal DECstation 5000/25

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235033

I have a Solaris 9 system and it's fun. You can get Sun Workshop
compilers (C) for it as well as Pascal. There's also a
companion-sparc-sol9.iso image with alot of the free software that you'd
find on a Linux system available. At 9, it was using the sysv init
(links into directories like rc.d) system instead of SMF that came
later. It can speak ip4 and ip6. I don't use it as much anymore because
I have both Omni OS and Openindiana as modern up-to-date systems.

There's some command difference: tar and Gnu tar are different, as well
as 'ps', 'mount', 'ls', and a bunch of others. If you install the
companion image, or use one of the illumos systems, you'll get the Gnu
stuff alongside the sysv stuff which is...odd. The PATH snakes all over
and files are hidden in places that make absolutely no sense. I think
someone was having fun hiding files.

Here's the / on Openindiana:


bin@   dev/      etc/     home/    lib/    mnt/  opt/       proc/
rpool/  system/  usr/
boot/  devices/  export/  kernel/  media/  net/  platform/  root/  sbin/
tmp/     var/

Notice there's a 'dev', a 'devices', and a 'platform'. Solaris 9 has UFS
as its filesystem, which is very fragil (in my experience). The illumos
systems have ZFS, which is awesome (but you have to learn a new system
which is basically a logical volumn manager plus a file system rolled
into one). 

Which 'ls' would you like?

/usr/xpg4/bin/ls
/usr/gnu/bin/ls
/usr/bin/gls -> ../gnu/bin/ls
'ps aux' will work on illumos, but not Solaris 9, which wants more 'ps
-elf'.

You should be fine setting one up as long as you come from a real Linux
like Slackware, LFS, or Gentoo. 

-- 
PGP Key ID: 781C A3E2 C6ED 70A6 B356  7AF5 B510 542E D460 5CAE
       "The Internet should always be the Wild West!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235042

On Mon, 15 Jun 2026 11:34:18 -0400, jayjwa wrote:

> Solaris 9 has UFS as its filesystem, which is very fragil (in my
> experience).

“UFS” is the name for a whole family of filesystems, found among
proprietary Unixes and also the BSDs (where it originated).

All related, and yet all subtly incompatible with one another.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235044

On Jun 15, 2026 at 18:55:25 CDT, "Lawrence D´Oliveiro" <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> “UFS” is the name for a whole family of filesystems, found among
> proprietary Unixes and also the BSDs (where it originated).
> 
> All related, and yet all subtly incompatible with one another.

My understanding is that UFS is a retroactive name for the File System
introduced by the original UNIX, and every UNIX derivative just tweaked it
without regard for compatibility. Essentially, UFS is just a generic term for
"this UNIX-like's native filesystem which is probably a descendant of the
original UNIX File System."

-- 
Piper McCorkle (she/her)
contact@piperswe.me
https://www.piperswe.me/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235045

On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 04:50:01 +0200, Piper McCorkle wrote:

> My understanding is that UFS is a retroactive name for the File
> System introduced by the original UNIX ...

It was originally called “FFS”, aka the “Fast File System”, and was
developed at Berkeley.

The original AT&T/Bell Labs filesystem from before that was crap.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers

csiph-web