6 Jun
2024
6 Jun
'24
12:02 a.m.
You could argue that the most direct descendant is the one in which all
resources are presented and accessed via open/read/write/close.
If your kernel has separate system calls for reading directories, or
setting up network connections, or debugging processes, then you may not
be a direct descendant, at least philosophically (and, yes, I know about
ptrace ...)
But your kernel might be Plan 9, which at least to me, is the direct
descendant. :-)
On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 10:51 AM Will Senn <will.senn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/5/24 12:34 PM, segaloco via TUHS wrote:
is largely
a philosophical matter of opinion...) is that the BSD line
captures the spirit of Research UNIX much more than System V does, while
System V retains much more of the source code lineage of what most folks
would consider a "pure" UNIX. Of course all of this too is predicated on
treating V7 (really 32V...) as that central point of divergence.
When I saw this thread appear, I was of two minds about it, but this
lines up with where my thoughts were headed. I've done a lot of delving
into the v6/v7 environments over the last 10 years or so and it feels
much closer in kinship to BSD derivatives than to SysV... source code
lineages aside. Also, I get more mileage out of my BSD books and docs
than those treating SysV. I'd vote for *BSD as sticking closest to the
unix way, if there is still such a thing... I say this as I just typed
'kldload linux64' into freebsd's terminal so I could run sublime
alongside nvi... sometimes I wish I was a purist, but I'm way too fond
of experimentation :).
Will
On Wednesday, June 5th, 2024 at 3:17 AM, Andrew
Lynch via TUHS <
tuhs(a)tuhs.org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Out of curiosity, what would be considered the most direct descendent
of Unix
available today?
...
Thanks, Andrew Lynch
snip
Given this, my humble opinion (which again this sort of thing I believe