6 Mar
2017
6 Mar
'17
4:50 a.m.
It's not really Unix history, but Dartmouth's "communication files"
have so often been cited as pipes before Unix, that you may like
to know what this fascinating facility actually was. See
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/DTSS/commfiles.pdf
6 Mar
6 Mar
9:05 a.m.
Doug McIlroy <doug(a)cs.dartmouth.edu> wrote:
It's not really Unix history, but
Dartmouth's "communication files"
have so often been cited as pipes before Unix, that you may like
to know what this fascinating facility actually was. See
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/DTSS/commfiles.pdf
Thanks! That was a very interesting read.
As a general remark, the historical discussions here of late have been
very interesting (if voluminous :-). I think it's increasingly important
to preserve as much of this history as possible. I've enjoyed reading
about some of the systems I never worked on, such as ITS.
Arnold
4:34 p.m.
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 10:50:22PM -0500, Doug McIlroy wrote:
It's not really Unix history, but
Dartmouth's "communication files"
have so often been cited as pipes before Unix, that you may like
to know what this fascinating facility actually was. See
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~doug/DTSS/commfiles.pdf
If I'm understanding correctly, an I/O on the slave side would cause
an event on the master side. So the master was almost like a debugger
with break points at open/read/write/lseek/close?
That would explain a lot of the complexity. And if the slave does a
read(comm, buf, 1<<20) I suspect that the master does multiple writes?
As in is there a PIPEBUF analogy?
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm
2813
days inactive
2813
days old
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
arnold＠skeeve.com -
Doug McIlroy -
Larry McVoy