Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #213902 > unrolled thread
| Started by | gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-09-08 12:08 +0100 |
| Last post | 2020-09-08 21:02 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 87 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 12:08 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-08 11:13 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-09-08 07:57 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-08 13:27 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Douglas Miller <durgadas311@gmail.com> - 2020-09-08 06:40 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-09-08 16:21 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Douglas Miller <durgadas311@gmail.com> - 2020-09-08 09:27 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-08 14:31 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-08 14:34 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 16:14 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-09-10 11:20 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 11:57 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 08:23 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-10 17:37 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 17:37 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 08:19 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> - 2020-09-10 14:32 +0200
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 09:15 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-10 13:30 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 09:34 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-10 13:35 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 10:00 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Douglas Miller <durgadas311@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 07:15 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-10 14:22 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-09-10 16:01 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2020-09-10 17:18 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2020-09-10 11:59 -0500
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2020-09-10 18:20 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-09-10 23:12 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-11 06:35 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 23:23 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2020-09-11 01:11 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> - 2020-09-11 09:11 -0500
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-09-10 16:24 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-10 17:03 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-09-10 17:55 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2020-09-11 02:12 -0300
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-09-11 20:41 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-11 21:11 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2020-09-12 15:06 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-12 16:03 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2020-09-26 16:05 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-09-25 23:15 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-09-10 23:55 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> - 2020-09-11 08:09 +0200
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-09-10 23:54 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> - 2020-09-10 15:54 +0200
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 10:14 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2020-09-10 23:57 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-09-10 15:56 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-10 09:53 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-09-25 23:03 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-26 08:35 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-09-26 18:37 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> - 2020-09-26 17:41 +0200
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2020-09-10 16:09 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-09-10 12:17 -0400
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-10 09:53 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-09-11 13:22 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2020-09-11 13:39 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-11 14:11 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2020-09-11 20:24 -0300
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-09-10 17:21 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 17:36 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 17:34 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-09-10 17:14 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-10 09:53 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-09-10 17:05 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> - 2020-09-10 19:13 +0200
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2020-09-10 19:19 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 17:39 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-09-10 20:25 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-10 20:23 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-09-26 05:48 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-26 11:24 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-09-26 16:14 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-26 20:53 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! maus <maus@dmaus.org> - 2020-09-26 12:44 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-26 13:03 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Douglas Miller <durgadas311@gmail.com> - 2020-09-08 06:04 -0700
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 16:16 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 16:22 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-08 15:40 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 19:42 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 19:52 +0100
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> - 2020-09-08 19:38 +0000
Re: SYSTEMD? EGAD! gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-08 21:02 +0100
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-11 14:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hs1eseFrpevU8@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214143 |
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:39:13 +0000, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote: > In article <rjftmu$2ng$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de>, > Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote: >>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb: >>> I think by the time Linux became popular most machines were Pentium or >>> better, with a lot more RAM and disk. >> >>I fist ran Linux on a 486 (I think) from the first version of Slackware >>ever, downloaded via the the only PC in the computer center that could >>connect to the mainframe, which was the only way into the Internet. > > Of course the epochal V7 ran in 64K.. Strictly speaking, it ran in 56kB. The top 8kB was memory mapped registers for CPU and I/O control. I am currently resurrecting an operating system that ran on the PDP-11. It's a tight squeeze for any meaningful multitasking system. > Interestingly IBM had a commercial System-III based Unix called, I > think, PC-IX that ran on the 8088 IBM-PC. You did have to have a hard > drive. A colleague and me were jointly approached by Addison-Wesley to write PC books based on IBM software. He got the PC/IX book, and I got PC-DOS. I did quite well with royalties. He didn't. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-11 20:24 -0300 |
| Message-ID | <87imcjsxqp.fsf@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> |
| In reply to | #214142 |
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> writes: > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb: > >> I think by the time Linux became popular most machines were Pentium >> or better, with a lot more RAM and disk. > > I fist ran Linux on a 486 (I think) from the first version of > Slackware ever, downloaded via the the only PC in the computer > center that could connect to the mainframe, which was the only > way into the Internet. I bought a 2nd hand Pentium for my launch into Linux in '99. Later, I put it on a 486 for a demo for a group of enthusiasts keen on this new internet thing. Poor demo because X was too sluggish to be convincing. (Was fine on my home Pentium.) -- Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 17:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Sgt6H.456321$AN2.405491@fx46.iad> |
| In reply to | #214076 |
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: >On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 16:09:13 +0000 (UTC), antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl >wrote: > >>> Linux started out as a rewrite of Minix to address its shortcomings. >> >>This is rather inprecise. Minix had its shortcomings. I am not >>aware of serious use of Minix, but my lack of info does not >>prove that there were none. Certainly was not replacement for >>UNIX(TM) but was solid enough to usable in _some_ serious setups. > >In what way is it imprecise? Linus Torvalds had Minix. He wasn't >happy with it, he set out to redo the kernel, he did, what he came up >with was a significant improvent, and so we have Linux. Minix was a teaching tool. It was never a production OS or widely used.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 17:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hrv6gdFrpevU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214076 |
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:17:28 -0400, J. Clarke wrote: > In what way is it imprecise? Linus Torvalds had Minix. He wasn't happy > with it, he set out to redo the kernel, he did, what he came up with was > a significant improvent, and so we have Linux. Of course. Minix was a teaching tool. It didn't even have memory management or protection. I ran it on an 8088 (actually, no - it was a V20). -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 17:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hrv6duFrpevU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214075 |
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 16:09:13 +0000, antispam wrote: >> Linux started out as a rewrite of Minix to address its shortcomings. > > This is rather inprecise. Minix had its shortcomings. I am not aware > of serious use of Minix, but my lack of info does not prove that there > were none. Tanenbaum only intended its as a teaching tool, but it got away from him! > Certainly was not replacement for UNIX(TM) but was solid > enough to usable in _some_ serious setups. Intel CPUs... -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 17:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20200910171438.c2bb335e8a7ac9b7450ea30e@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #214051 |
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 11:20:04 +0000 (UTC) antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote: > The difference was that Linux and 386BSD had free licence and > consequently potential to grow. One can speculate why Linux > developed faster than 386BSD (and successors like Free BSD): > - creator of 386BSD after free realease wanted to switch > to proprietary licence > - famus ATT versus Berkely process That lawsuit was a big issue and a serious worry to BSD users at the time. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 09:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <601781106.621448858.695527.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #214051 |
<antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote: > J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 8 Sep 2020 11:13:43 GMT, Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote: >> >>> On 2020-09-08, gareth evans <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> My impression, clearly quite wrong, was that LINUX >>>> was little more than a vehicle for launching programs, >>>> ie, an uppity MSDOS, but with provision for multi-tasking >>>> (multi-programming?) >>> >>> Not to mention vastly better memory management. >> >> Calling LINUX "an uppity MSDOS", is kind of like calling MSDOS a >> "crippled Unix". >> >> LINUX provided pretty much the full functionality of the UNIX kernel, >> which had up until that time been the missing piece for an open source >> UNIX clone. Prior to that time, any UNIX implementation that was full >> enough to be useful for anything beyond recreational and student use >> used AT&T licensed code and the license could be quite costly. > > Before Linux were Minix, Coherent and 386BSD. Your claim > probably is about Minux, but even in this case you exagerate. > I used 386BSD and it was quite buggy, but had all what is > needed to run wide variety of useful programs. I never used > Coherent, but given descriptions it is pretty clear that > that Coherent had much more functionality than Linux-0.01. I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I tried it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and it did that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful with it. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 17:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hrv4msFten6U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214085 |
On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I tried
> it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and it did
> that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful with it.
I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did
not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS.
Niklas
--
So basically you're not really choosing based on level of sanity as you
originally claimed, you just happen to like one sort of insanity more
than the other. Fair enough, we all have our insanity preferences.
-- Steve VanDevender, asr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 19:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <m2wo11mu5x.fsf@athena.moeding.net> |
| In reply to | #214092 |
Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> writes: > On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I tried >> it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and it did >> that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful with it. > I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did > not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS. Keep in mind that Minix was a University project: students should be able to study the source code and run it on cheap hardware at home. -- Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 19:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hrvcirFmi1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214093 |
In article <m2wo11mu5x.fsf@athena.moeding.net>, Stefan Möding <Sep2020.5.kill-9@spamgourmet.com> wrote: >Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> writes: > >> On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I tried >>> it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and it did >>> that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful with it. > >> I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did >> not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS. > >Keep in mind that Minix was a University project: students should be able to >study the source code and run it on cheap hardware at home. > >-- >Stefan There was Comer's XINU as well. Originally ran on LSI-11s I think but came out with a PC compatible version as well. It was the subject OS for his OS textbook which was very nice. (IIRC, XINU was more an embedded type OS than something trying to be a Unix clone though) -- columbiaclosings.com What's not in Columbia anymore..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 17:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hrv6lpFrpevU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214092 |
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:05:32 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote: > On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I >> tried it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and >> it did that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful >> with it. > > I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did > not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS. I have the forerunner of AmigaDOS (TRIPOS) running on the PDP-11 (well, emulator for now, until I fix the hardware). -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 20:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20200910202549.edd11ee1d0b42c84da449670@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #214099 |
On 10 Sep 2020 17:39:05 GMT Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> wrote: > I have the forerunner of AmigaDOS (TRIPOS) running on the PDP-11 (well, > emulator for now, until I fix the hardware). Now that's something I haven't seen in a very long time. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-10 20:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hrvgaaFrpevU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214109 |
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 20:25:49 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote: > On 10 Sep 2020 17:39:05 GMT Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> wrote: > >> I have the forerunner of AmigaDOS (TRIPOS) running on the PDP-11 (well, >> emulator for now, until I fix the hardware). > > Now that's something I haven't seen in a very long time. It's been hard work. Incomplete and incompatible sources. First build the compiler to build the tools to build the... and also tools to build disk images and the like. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-26 05:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrmtlhg.1hpq.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> |
| In reply to | #214099 |
On Thu, 2020-09-10, Bob Eager wrote: > On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:05:32 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote: > >> On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I >>> tried it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and >>> it did that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful >>> with it. >> >> I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did >> not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS. > > I have the forerunner of AmigaDOS (TRIPOS) running on the PDP-11 (well, > emulator for now, until I fix the hardware). As I understand it, only the disk I/O and filesystem were taken from TRIPOS: dos.library. And it was a way to cut corners; it was not something people /wanted/ to have. I vaguely remember it being hard to program against, because it used Pascal strings and pointers were to 32-bit words (?) (Now it sounds as if I'm badmouthing TRIPOS. I'm not; I know almost nothing about it. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-26 11:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ht8mntFrufkU19@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214572 |
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 05:48:32 +0000, Jorgen Grahn wrote: > As I understand it, only the disk I/O and filesystem were taken from > TRIPOS: dos.library. And it was a way to cut corners; it was not > something people /wanted/ to have. I vaguely remember it being hard to > program against, because it used Pascal strings and pointers were to > 32-bit words (?) You may well be right; I must find out more. The strings were stored as a count byte followed by that number of characters. That may well be a 'Pascal string' but TRIPOS was written in BCPL, and that certainly uses that as a string format. The file system is quite interesting, with some metadata within each file block (which was to increase resilience, but in some situations could be a pain). I know this because I have been digging deep into TRIPOS, and have recently written a program to create and populate a TRIPOS disk image. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-26 16:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrmuq7v.1hpq.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> |
| In reply to | #214574 |
On Sat, 2020-09-26, Bob Eager wrote: > On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 05:48:32 +0000, Jorgen Grahn wrote: > >> As I understand it, only the disk I/O and filesystem were taken from >> TRIPOS: dos.library. And it was a way to cut corners; it was not >> something people /wanted/ to have. I vaguely remember it being hard to >> program against, because it used Pascal strings and pointers were to >> 32-bit words (?) > > You may well be right; I must find out more. There's some info in one of the references for the TRIPOS Wikipedia article. And probably a lot more if you dig around on Amiga-related sites. > The strings were stored as a count byte followed by that number of > characters. That may well be a 'Pascal string' but TRIPOS was written in > BCPL, and that certainly uses that as a string format. Yes; I used "Pascal strings" loosely. And I'm not even sure they were very visible in the dos.library APIs. > The file system is quite interesting, with some metadata within each file > block (which was to increase resilience, but in some situations could be > a pain). I know this because I have been digging deep into TRIPOS, and > have recently written a program to create and populate a TRIPOS disk > image. The Amiga had the OFS (original/old FS) and then FFS. OFS had some bookkeeping in each block, so you needed two blocks for a 512 byte file. Maybe that's the TRIPOS file system. I remember writing a simple 'ls' utility in assembly, to fit within a block. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-26 20:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ht9o21FrufkU23@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214583 |
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 16:14:55 +0000, Jorgen Grahn wrote: > The Amiga had the OFS (original/old FS) and then FFS. OFS had some > bookkeeping in each block, so you needed two blocks for a 512 byte file. > Maybe that's the TRIPOS file system. TRIPOS has one block for each directory, no matter how many files there are in it - because it's merely the head of hash chains. Each file has a header block and zero or more data blocks. Pointers in the header block describe the blocks in the file. If the file is small, or the residue in the last block fits in the header block - that's where it goes. So a file of up to 500 bytes would fit in the header block - just one block. 501 bytes would need two blocks. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | maus <maus@dmaus.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-26 12:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrmudsu.9ts.maus@dmaus.org> |
| In reply to | #214572 |
On 2020-09-26, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote: > On Thu, 2020-09-10, Bob Eager wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:05:32 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote: >> >>> On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I >>>> tried it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, and >>>> it did that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything useful >>>> with it. >>> >>> I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did >>> not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS. >> >> I have the forerunner of AmigaDOS (TRIPOS) running on the PDP-11 (well, >> emulator for now, until I fix the hardware). > > As I understand it, only the disk I/O and filesystem were taken from > TRIPOS: dos.library. And it was a way to cut corners; it was not > something people /wanted/ to have. I vaguely remember it being hard > to program against, because it used Pascal strings and pointers were > to 32-bit words (?) > > (Now it sounds as if I'm badmouthing TRIPOS. I'm not; I know almost > nothing about it. > from memory, Amigados was an emergency replacement for the original plan, implememnted by a professor from Cambridge > > > /Jorgen >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0073@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-26 13:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ht8sgbFrufkU22@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #214576 |
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 12:44:14 +0000, maus wrote: > On 2020-09-26, Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote: >> On Thu, 2020-09-10, Bob Eager wrote: >>> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:05:32 +0000, Niklas Karlsson wrote: >>> >>>> On 2020-09-10, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I played with Minix back in the day. It was very slow and limited. I >>>>> tried it only because I wanted to get some familiarity with unix, >>>>> and it did that, but I can’t imagine anyone trying to so anything >>>>> useful with it. >>>> >>>> I seem to recall firing it up on my Amiga 500 in the early 90s. I did >>>> not enjoy the experience much and soon went back to AmigaOS. >>> >>> I have the forerunner of AmigaDOS (TRIPOS) running on the PDP-11 >>> (well, >>> emulator for now, until I fix the hardware). >> >> As I understand it, only the disk I/O and filesystem were taken from >> TRIPOS: dos.library. And it was a way to cut corners; it was not >> something people /wanted/ to have. I vaguely remember it being hard to >> program against, because it used Pascal strings and pointers were to >> 32-bit words (?) >> >> (Now it sounds as if I'm badmouthing TRIPOS. I'm not; I know almost >> nothing about it. >> >> > from memory, Amigados was an emergency replacement for the original > plan, implememnted by a professor from Cambridge It was a student project to start with, although they'd left by that time. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Douglas Miller <durgadas311@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-09-08 06:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d53fa4a4-3542-4f7e-b61d-fc205586a4f3n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #213902 |
On Tuesday, September 8, 2020 at 6:08:26 AM UTC-5, gareth evans wrote: >... > > My impression, clearly quite wrong, was that LINUX > was little more than a vehicle for launching programs, > ie, an uppity MSDOS, but with provision for multi-tasking > (multi-programming?) > >... You couldn't be more wrong about Linux. It is more of an OS than Windows will ever be. Better go back and start reading again. And, while systemd might appear to a casual observer to be some MS monstrosity, if differs in pretty much all the important aspects: * It works. * It was designed. * It was implemented by competent engineers * It is customizable and extendable. * It uses text files for configuration (human readable). * The average sysadmin can actually understand how their system is configured.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web