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

Groups > comp.misc > #13239 > unrolled thread

the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-03-02 16:26 -0500
    Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2017-03-03 00:09 +0200
      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-03-03 00:04 +0000
        Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-03 00:25 +0000
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-03-03 11:02 +0000
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-03 11:05 +0000
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-03-03 11:06 +0000
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2017-03-03 15:40 +0200
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-03 23:01 +0100
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-03 22:13 +0000
        Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2017-03-03 14:07 +0200
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-03-03 12:12 +0000
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks "RS Wood" <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-03-03 08:47 -0500
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2017-03-03 16:37 +0200
    Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2017-03-03 02:37 +0000
    Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-03-03 11:01 +0000
    Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-03-03 12:12 +0000
      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-03 13:51 +0000
        Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-03-03 14:19 +0000
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2017-03-03 12:59 -0500
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2017-03-03 18:14 +0000
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2017-03-03 16:06 -0400
      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2017-03-03 16:02 +0000
        Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Eric Pozharski <whynot@pozharski.name> - 2017-03-04 15:44 +0200
    Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Caecilius <nospam@spamless.invalid> - 2017-03-03 18:29 +0000
      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-03 22:16 +0000
        Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2017-03-04 07:35 +0000
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-04 10:19 +0100
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2017-03-04 11:16 +0000
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-04 12:47 +0100
                Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-04 12:35 +0000
          Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-04 09:42 +0000
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2017-03-04 11:20 +0000
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-04 12:48 +0100
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-04 12:34 +0000
                Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2017-03-04 15:39 +0000
                  Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2017-03-18 13:06 +0000
                    Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2017-03-19 18:56 -0400
                      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-20 00:35 +0000
                      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2017-03-20 05:47 +0000
                      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2017-03-20 06:06 +0000
                      Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-21 19:01 +0100
            Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-04 12:41 +0100
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2017-03-04 12:58 +0100
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2017-03-04 12:34 +0000
              Re: the Unix philosophy and a collection of hacks Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2017-03-04 15:43 +0000

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#13259

On 2017-03-03, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>   This message is in MIME format. 

Oh, dear.

-- 
Today is Boomtime, the 62nd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3183
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

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

#13261

Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:

> On 2017-03-03, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>
>>   This message is in MIME format. 
> 
> Oh, dear.

If you stick to Usenet and avoid mailing lists [1] populated by
non-techies, You Have No Idea.  :-o

I'm on a mailing list where the most prolific poster uses an Mac.
Between his software and the list software [2] mssgs arrive with UTF-8
punctuation instead of ASCII, then quoted-printable encoded.  Decoding
yields paragraphs with no line breaks.  But then the mailer software
duplicates the posted text as a MIME multipart/alternative and then
appends a bunch of promo bumph of its own.  Gak!  A minor hack
involving manually inserting my own MIME headers and a <PRE> tag has
forced the server to skip some (but not all) of that with my own posts
but I still have to unmung others'.

I'm just barely able to put up with it because of  couple of
interesting people on the list.  

[1] Assuming, perhaps wrongly, that you're not deeply into the the
    "social media/disease" revolution.

[2] Yahoo list.  Gag.  Mea Culpa.  The non-techies seem to be *proud*
    of the fact that they have not a glimmer of understanding about
    the technical mare's nest that a Yahoo list implements.   Maybe
    I'll just crawl back int my hole until the Solstice.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

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

#13257

Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> * The SA_RESTART/EINTR thing is, again, just a matter of moving a
>  problem around between different layers.  In this case the initial
>  decision to solve it in one layer rather than another may have been
>  a pragmatic one, but as it turns out it also has some practical
>  advantages: sometimes you _want_ your long-running operation to
>  terminate when a signal arrives.

This also tends to highlight another difference between the "Unix"
style and the one remaining other style (Windows).

More often than not, the "Unix" style has been to leave policy
decisions up to the code making the request.  And in this situation,
this is somewhat of a 'policy' decision.  Do you want your long-running
operation to terminate or to restart?

Typically what ends up occurring on the Windows side is that Windows
dictates one way, and if you really want the other method you are left
with far more complexity than a simple flag to a system call or libc
request.

> * Author apparently does not understand what zombie processes are and
>  why they exist.

There were aspects of the article where it seemed like the author was
someone who has known only "the windows way" and is just now stepping
into the Unix side, and since Unix does things differently, and
"differences" must be bad, many of the items because "WTF..." items
because they differed from his/her preconcieved notions built up from
seeing only "windows" for a very long time.

> * The longer ?find? example deliberately and admittedly avoids using
>  the tools designed to solve the problem at hand.  Not exactly an
>  honest argument.

Makes one wonder of much of the article is simply manufactured hype
rather than honest observations.

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

#13280

with <o9c430$vr2$1@dont-email.me> Rich wrote:
> Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

*SKIP*
>> * Author apparently does not understand what zombie processes are and
>> why they exist.
> There were aspects of the article where it seemed like the author was
> someone who has known only "the windows way" and is just now stepping
> into the Unix side, and since Unix does things differently, and
> "differences" must be bad, many of the items because "WTF..." items
> because they differed from his/her preconcieved notions built up from
> seeing only "windows" for a very long time.

Or it's manifestation of paradigm shift.  I mean in 80s term 'hacker'
has had different meaning.  Now 'veteran programmer' has been...
Adopted (maybe?).

IOW declaring themself 'veteran programmer' is a way to declare
get-off-my-lawn.

*CUT*

-- 
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

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

#13260

On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 16:26:46 -0500, RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>
wrote:

>https://kukuruku.co/post/the-collapse-of-the-unix-philosophy/
>
>James Hague, a veteran of programming (has been in programming since
>the eighties), writes the following: “What I was trying to get across
>is that if you romanticize Unix, if you view it as a thing of
>perfection, then you lose your ability to imagine better alternatives
>and become blind to potentially dramatic shifts in thinking”.

I think part of the problem is that OS development seems to have
stalled.  In the 1980s, I remember using a few different operating
systems: Unix (mainly SunOS), VMS, IBM VM/CMS, and MS-DOS (which I
didn't really consider a proper OS at all).  I'm sure there were
others.

Since then, we've gained Windows NT, but that's about it isn't it?
Plan9 and hurd never went anywhere; and OS/2 and BeOS are dead.

It seems like everything is either Windows or some sort of Unix now. I
prefer Unix out of the two, but I miss the OS diversity of the 1980s.
I also feel that a lot of the Unix "standards" are just things that
were necessities or experiments during fast-moving times, and have now
become ingrained.

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

#13265

On Fri, 03 Mar 2017 18:29:05 +0000, Caecilius wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 16:26:46 -0500, RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> 
>>https://kukuruku.co/post/the-collapse-of-the-unix-philosophy/
>>
>>James Hague, a veteran of programming (has been in programming since the
>>eighties), writes the following: “What I was trying to get across is
>>that if you romanticize Unix, if you view it as a thing of perfection,
>>then you lose your ability to imagine better alternatives and become
>>blind to potentially dramatic shifts in thinking”.
> 
> I think part of the problem is that OS development seems to have
> stalled.  In the 1980s, I remember using a few different operating
> systems: Unix (mainly SunOS), VMS, IBM VM/CMS, and MS-DOS (which I
> didn't really consider a proper OS at all).  I'm sure there were others.

I agree. I worked on a system that had a VERY limited distribution (four 
sites), and did some development on it:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Multiple_Access_System

> Since then, we've gained Windows NT, but that's about it isn't it? Plan9
> and hurd never went anywhere; and OS/2 and BeOS are dead.

Windows NT retains a certain amount of VMS, of course.

I still run VMS for fun!

See the sig...
-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#13266

Bob Eager wrote:

> I still run VMS for fun!

I've got a VAXserver 3300 downstairs, unfortunately VMS-less, it boots 
fine and when sees the disc drive(s), starts booting OK from tape, but 
when installing VMS it complains it can't see any discs to install to. 
My experience of uVAX discs is limited to SCSI, not DSSI.

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

#13267

On 2017-03-04, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Bob Eager wrote:
>
>> I still run VMS for fun!
>
> I've got a VAXserver 3300 downstairs, unfortunately VMS-less, it boots 
> fine and when sees the disc drive(s), starts booting OK from tape, but 
> when installing VMS it complains it can't see any discs to install to. 
> My experience of uVAX discs is limited to SCSI, not DSSI.

What version of VMS is the tape?

Posting the problem on comp.os.vms will almost certainly guarantee
some useful pointers.

-- 
A supercomputer is a device for turning compute-bound problems into
I/O-bound problems.                                 ---Ken Batcher

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

#13269

Paul Sture wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> I've got a VAXserver 3300 downstairs, unfortunately VMS-less, it boots
>> fine and when sees the disc drive(s), starts booting OK from tape, but
>> when installing VMS it complains it can't see any discs
>
> What version of VMS is the tape?

I believe I tried 5.0, 5.5 and maybe 6.0, it must be a decade since I 
last tried, but (a) it must soon move from where it stands and (b) there 
will soon be a convenient place for it under my new desk.

> Posting the problem on comp.os.vms will almost certainly guarantee
> some useful pointers.

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

#13272

On 2017-03-04, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Paul Sture wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> I've got a VAXserver 3300 downstairs, unfortunately VMS-less, it boots
>>> fine and when sees the disc drive(s), starts booting OK from tape, but
>>> when installing VMS it complains it can't see any discs
>>
>> What version of VMS is the tape?
>
> I believe I tried 5.0, 5.5 and maybe 6.0, it must be a decade since I 
> last tried, but (a) it must soon move from where it stands and (b) there 
> will soon be a convenient place for it under my new desk.

5.5 included a lot of improvements and it became an LTS release. 
Whether 5.0 can cope with the specific disk types you have, I dunno. 
6.0 was, well, a point zero release, and I managed to skip that one.

>> Posting the problem on comp.os.vms will almost certainly guarantee
>> some useful pointers.

Someone in that group will surely have better answers than I :-)

-- 
A supercomputer is a device for turning compute-bound problems into
I/O-bound problems.                                 ---Ken Batcher

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

#13277

On Sat, 04 Mar 2017 12:47:05 +0100, Paul Sture wrote:

> On 2017-03-04, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> Paul Sture wrote:
>>
>>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've got a VAXserver 3300 downstairs, unfortunately VMS-less, it
>>>> boots fine and when sees the disc drive(s), starts booting OK from
>>>> tape, but when installing VMS it complains it can't see any discs
>>>
>>> What version of VMS is the tape?
>>
>> I believe I tried 5.0, 5.5 and maybe 6.0, it must be a decade since I
>> last tried, but (a) it must soon move from where it stands and (b)
>> there will soon be a convenient place for it under my new desk.
> 
> 5.5 included a lot of improvements and it became an LTS release. Whether
> 5.0 can cope with the specific disk types you have, I dunno.
> 6.0 was, well, a point zero release, and I managed to skip that one.
> 
>>> Posting the problem on comp.os.vms will almost certainly guarantee
>>> some useful pointers.
> 
> Someone in that group will surely have better answers than I :-)

I just run the last version (7.3?). Free licence and I have the media if 
anyone wants it.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#13268

On Sat, 04 Mar 2017 07:35:21 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

> Bob Eager wrote:
> 
>> I still run VMS for fun!
> 
> I've got a VAXserver 3300 downstairs, unfortunately VMS-less, it boots
> fine and when sees the disc drive(s), starts booting OK from tape, but
> when installing VMS it complains it can't see any discs to install to.
> My experience of uVAX discs is limited to SCSI, not DSSI.

Are the disks too big? Or did they once work? I had to hack my disks to 
be 'small enough'.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#13270

Bob Eager wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>> starts booting OK from tape, but when installing VMS it complains
>> it can't see any discs to install to.
>
> Are the disks too big? Or did they once work? I had to hack my disks to
> be 'small enough'.

I assume they worked with it before it was wiped by the previous owner.

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

#13273

On 2017-03-04, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> Bob Eager wrote:
>
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> starts booting OK from tape, but when installing VMS it complains
>>> it can't see any discs to install to.
>>
>> Are the disks too big? Or did they once work? I had to hack my disks to
>> be 'small enough'.
>
> I assume they worked with it before it was wiped by the previous owner.

It is just possible it was network booted.  Unlikely, but...

-- 
A supercomputer is a device for turning compute-bound problems into
I/O-bound problems.                                 ---Ken Batcher

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

#13275

On Sat, 04 Mar 2017 11:20:06 +0000, Andy Burns wrote:

> Bob Eager wrote:
> 
>> Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>>> starts booting OK from tape, but when installing VMS it complains it
>>> can't see any discs to install to.
>>
>> Are the disks too big? Or did they once work? I had to hack my disks to
>> be 'small enough'.
> 
> I assume they worked with it before it was wiped by the previous owner.

Could just be a loose (or missing!) cable. First thing is to check if the 
boot ROM sees them (probably with  >>>SHOW DEVICES)



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#13278

Bob Eager wrote:

> Could just be a loose (or missing!) cable. First thing is to check if the
> boot ROM sees them (probably with  >>>SHOW DEVICES)

The tape and disc drives were all visible at the dead sergeant prompt.

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

#13332

En el artículo <ei05c5F76vuU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> escribió:

> dead sergeant prompt.

Heh.  First time I've seen it called that.

-- 
 (\_/)
(='.'=)  "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(")   the one I never tried before."  - Mae West

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

#13334

Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> writes:

> En el artículo <ei05c5F76vuU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
> <usenet@andyburns.uk> escribió:
>
>> dead sergeant prompt.
>
> Heh.  First time I've seen it called that.

For us non-VMSers, what is it: something like this?  Never seen one, and
Google is no help.

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

#13336

On Sun, 19 Mar 2017 18:56:35 -0400, RS Wood wrote:

> Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> writes:
> 
>> En el artículo <ei05c5F76vuU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
>> <usenet@andyburns.uk> escribió:
>>
>>> dead sergeant prompt.
>>
>> Heh.  First time I've seen it called that.
> 
> For us non-VMSers, what is it: something like this?  Never seen one, and
> Google is no help.

 >>>

It's the console prompt, issued by a variety of things depending on the 
model of VAX. It accepts a number of command such as examine, deposit, 
boot, reset, etc.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#13338

En el artículo <87lgs0510c.fsf@therandymon.com>, RS Wood
<rsw@therandymon.com> escribió:

>For us non-VMSers, what is it: something like this?  Never seen one, and
>Google is no help.

It's the firmware console prompt on DEC/Compaq/HP Alpha (and presumably
earlier) boxes, aka the SRM console prompt.  It's three chevrons, >>>
hence "dead sergeant" (picture him lying down)

It's basically a BIOS setup on steroids.

<https://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/doc/redhat/redhat7/rhl-aig-en-
7.0/s1-alpha-srm.html>

<http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/text/SRM-HOWTO>

-- 
 (\_/)
(='.'=)  "Between two evils, I always pick
(")_(")   the one I never tried before."  - Mae West

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web