TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

33 participants
6541 discussions

The nameless horror of dotfiles [was (no subject)]

by norman＠nose.cs.utoronto.ca

Dennis Ritchie, on ls discarding all names beginning with .: UCB or USL did this (I'm sure which first). Both tended to use more . files. Judging by the manuals, Research did it first. In every manual from 1/e to 6/e, the entry for ls(I) has this description for the -a option: list all entries; usually those beginning with "." are suppressed I always thought this was just a quick-and-dirty way to skip the . and .. entries; the sort of shortcut that was common in the good old days when everything was written in assembly language. That the USL system kept the old convention probably reflects its PWB heritage; both the latter system and that of Berkeley had already invented lots of configuration files clumsily hidden by putting . at the beginning-- more than ls had options at the time--and I guess they felt it was better to let sleeping dots lie. Incidentally, in 1/e ls(I) had a whopping five options: l, t, a, s, and d, each with the same meaning as now (except that -s is described simply as `give size in blocks for each entry' with nothing about accounting for indirect blocks or other overhead). Who says we haven't made decadence, er, progress over the years? Norman Wilson Toronto ON PS: I've lost track. Did the original Subject: line of this thread of conversation get lost because it began with a dot?

22 years, 1 month

question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c

by Aharon Robbins

Greetings all. The V7 ls(1) man page says that the -s option, which prints total blocks, includes any indirect blocks. However, the V7 struct stat didn't have the st_blocks member in the struct stat, and the code in ls.c uses long nblock(size) long size; { return((size+511)>>9); } So, is this just a case of the man page being mistaken? When did the struct stat acquire the st_blocks member? While I'm at it, the V7 ls -a option only adds . and .. to the list; apparently all other dot files were printed by default. When did ls change such that -a applied to all dot files? Thanks, Arnold Robbins

22 years, 1 month

Re: [TUHS] question about V7 ls(1) vs. sys/stat.h and ls.c

by msokolov＠ivan.Harhan.ORG

Chris Palmer <chris(a)nodewarrior.org> wrote: > What's with that "511" in there? To divide by N rounding up you first add N-1, then divide by N. MS

22 years, 1 month

Open Source Initiative response to SCO vs. IBM

by Aharon Robbins

A friend passed this URL on to me. I have not read it yet. Principal author is Eric Raymond. http://www.opensource.org/sco-vs-ibm.html Arnold

22 years, 1 month

sco v. ibm

by Phil Garcia

Hi, What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? Does it affect the archive in any way?

22 years, 1 month

RE: [TUHS] sco v. ibm

by Ian King

Reminds me of the old joke about the gnat buzzing around the elephant's nether end, with rape on its mind.... :-) ________________________________ From: tuhs-admin(a)minnie.tuhs.org on behalf of Phil Garcia Sent: Wed 5/21/2003 12:53 PM To: tuhs(a)tuhs.org Subject: [TUHS] sco v. ibm Hi, What do you make of the SCO (Caldera) lawsuit? Does it affect the archive in any way? _______________________________________________ TUHS mailing list TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

22 years, 1 month

[pups] Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al

by Al Kossow

I was given a disc image of the system for the PDP11 I'll try to dig it up for you.

22 years, 1 month

[pups] Fwd: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al

by Wesley Parish

I asked Per Brinch Hansen recently about Solo and Concurrent Pascal, for use on the PDP 11 simulators, et al, and I received a reply today. This is it. I am wondering, does anyone have any clue as to where these copies of the system might be squirrelled away? How many might've seen it at their Universities? Wesley Parish ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 00:17:33 -0400 From: Per Brinch Hansen <pbh(a)pothos.syr.edu> To: Wesley Parish <wes.parish(a)paradise.net.nz> Cc: Per Brinch Hansen <pbh(a)pothos.syr.edu> Date: 18 May 2003 To: Wesley Parish <wes.parish(a)paradise.net.nz> From: Per Brinch Hansen <pbh(a)pothos.syr.edu> Subject: Re: Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS, et al On May 4, you wrote: What I was wondering is, would it be worth asking you about the possibility of your releasing the Concurrent Pascal, Solo OS and several other such computer tools and programs, to PUPS (the PDP Unix Preservation Society)? At Caltech we prepared a distribution tape for the PDP 11/45 with the source text and portable code of the Solo system, including the Concurrent and Sequential Pascal compiler. The system reports were supplemented by implementation notes. By the spring of 1976 we had distributed the system to 75 companies and 100 universities in 21 countries. Later, other people moved the system to the Interdata 8/32, NCR 8250, Modular 1, LSI 11, IBM 370/145 and many other computers. Sad to say, I no longer have a copy of the system (and I don't know who does). Per Brinch Hansen ------------------------------------------------------- -- Mau e ki, "He aha te mea nui?" You ask, "What is the most important thing?" Maku e ki, "He tangata, he tangata, he tangata." I reply, "It is people, it is people, it is people."

22 years, 1 month

Looking for obscure unix information

by Apostolos Koutropoulos

Hi to all, I stumbled on your mailing list and I thought this would be a good place to pose my question. I was looking around for information about several little known (to me) unix derived Oses. AMIX (Amiga Unix) RISCiX ArchBSD Lynx Inferno Helios What I am looking for is basically what versions existed and when they were released, and also from where did they originate. For instance I know that RISCiX originated from BSD 4.4 but that is all I know. I also know that inferno grew out of the research for plan 9, but what version of plan 9 it evolved from I don¹t know. Anyone know the above info? If not any idea where I can look for further info? Thanks :)

22 years, 2 months

Re: [pups] Tektronix 8560 with PDP-11/23 CPU running TNIX (UINX)

by David W. Talmage

>I got a "Tektronix 8560 Multi-User Software Development Unit" together >with a Tektronix 8540 in system 68k CPU emulator. The 8560 is based on I found this by Googling for "tnix single-user": http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/pups/1998-March/000027.html

22 years, 2 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

TUHS