[24798] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 6951 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Fri Sep 3 00:11:02 2004
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 21:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Thu, 2 Sep 2004 Volume: 10 Number: 6951
Today's topics:
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <john.thingstad@chello.no>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <me@privacy.net>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <albalmer@att.net>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <albalmer@att.net>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <kkt@drizzle.com>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <john.thingstad@chello.no>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <no.spam@here.dude>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <dwall@fastmail.fm>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <kkt@drizzle.com>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <wyrmwif@tango-sierra-oscar-foxtrot-tango.fake.org>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <wyrmwif@tango-sierra-oscar-foxtrot-tango.fake.org>
Re: Xah Lee's Unixism <my.spamtrap@verizon.net>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:40:14 +0200
From: "John Thingstad" <john.thingstad@chello.no>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <opsdp09czgpqzri1@mjolner.upc.no>
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 21:44:46 +0000 (UTC), Andre Majorel
<amajorel@teezer.fr> wrote:
> On 2004-09-02, John Thingstad <john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 18:19:43 +0000 (UTC), Andre Majorel
>> <amajorel@teezer.fr> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2004-09-02, John Thingstad <john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The fact that the NT kernel is not entirely stable yet really
>>>> shouldn't supprise anyone. Afterall Unix has messed with it's
>>>> kernel for 30 years.
>>>
>>> I feel compelled to point out that Linux achieved considerably
>>> better stability after just a few years.
>>>
>>
>> I feel compelled to replay that Linux is based on the Posix standard
>> which is basically a recipie for writing unix. They did not write a
>> new operating system. They implemented a tested and proven one.
>
> Are you arguing that the stability comes from the API, not from
> the implementation ? If so, why has NT become more stable over
> the years, since its API has not changed ?
>
No but the algorithms for memory management, disk mangement and FTP in
unix were
well documented at the time. Linux Pauling started out with minix and then
went on to make a (mostly) posix compliant unix.
Seem to remeber this from my student days.
Operating Systems (design and implication) Andrew S. Tanenbaum
Intrucudes minix, a mini unix compatible with version 7 of unix.
(Not to be confused with system V.. the roman numerals were introdused by
AT&T)
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
------------------------------
Date: 2 Sep 2004 22:50:00 GMT
From: James Keasley <me@privacy.net>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <slrncjf8so.aqk.me@athena.homeric.co.uk>
-----BEGIN xxx SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.perl.misc.]
On 2004-09-02, John Thingstad <john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 21:44:46 +0000 (UTC), Andre Majorel
><amajorel@teezer.fr> wrote:
>
>> On 2004-09-02, John Thingstad <john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
> No but the algorithms for memory management, disk mangement and FTP in
> unix were
> well documented at the time. Linux Pauling started out with minix and then
> went on to make a (mostly) posix compliant unix.
IIRC, the only relation that Minix has with Linux is that Linus (Torvalds,
Pauling is a geneticist IIRC) was using it as an OS when he started
developing the terminal emulator that eventually became Linux, and indeed
the kernel architecture is pretty fundementally different.
> Seem to remeber this from my student days.
>
> Operating Systems (design and implication) Andrew S. Tanenbaum
>
> Intrucudes minix, a mini unix compatible with version 7 of unix.
> (Not to be confused with system V.. the roman numerals were introdused by
> AT&T)
Yeah, and apparently it is still the classic text on OS design.
- --
James jamesk[at]homeric[dot]co[dot]uk
'No, `Eureka' is Greek for `This bath is too hot.'' -- Dr. Who
-----BEGIN xxx SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBN6OYqfSmHkD6LvoRAi8FAJsHV2zx+TfKfwq7zkir91O4qvX7zwCdEeYn
HLHT0Bk2u7z/Y/zMTqFMuUc=
=vWN2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 16:13:20 -0700
From: Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <h0afj09mbdtleke0ughuntobho8f12o8ck@4ax.com>
On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:40:14 +0200, "John Thingstad"
<john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
>well documented at the time. Linux Pauling started out with minix and then
>went on to make a (mostly) posix compliant unix.
Linux Pauling? I know about Linus Torvalds and Linus Pauling . I don't
think the latter had much to do with Linux.
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 16:15:46 -0700
From: Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <gbafj09nj01f5a0rk8gl8m2hjr1lmi965b@4ax.com>
On 2 Sep 2004 22:50:00 GMT, James Keasley <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>Pauling is a geneticist IIRC)
Was. Chemist. Nobel prize winner. Champion of vitamin C.
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net
------------------------------
Date: 02 Sep 2004 16:32:21 -0700
From: Patrick Scheible <kkt@drizzle.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <tqmzn48b62i.fsf@drizzle.com>
Rupert Pigott <roo@try-removing-this.darkboong.demon.co.uk> writes:
> John Thingstad wrote:
> > On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:35:30 GMT, Brian Inglis
> > <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSW.Invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:26:03 GMT in alt.folklore.computers, "John W.
> >> Kennedy" <jwkenne@attglobal.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Andre Majorel wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2004-08-31, Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSW.Invalid> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 01:12:55 +0000 (UTC) in alt.folklore.computers,
> >>>>> Andre Majorel <amajorel@teezer.fr> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2004-08-30, Antony Sequeira <usemyfullname@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Windows (MS) is not 'Unixism'?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If by unixism, you mean any operating system that has a
> >>>>>> hierarchical filesystem and byte stream files, yes. But that
> >>>>>> would include quite a few other non-Unix operating systems,
> >>>>>> including Mac OS 9, Prologue and probably everything else this
> >>>>>> side of CP/M (DOS 1.x shall be deemed to be CP/M).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> DOS 2.x+ shall be deemed to be CP/M+!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Wasn't it in version 2 that they added directories and
> >>>> Unix-style file handles ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yes, and also a single-process pipe emulator. Ever since 2.0, MS has
> >>> been trying to turn MS-DOS (later, Windows) into a Unix clone.
> >>
> >>
> >> MS has been borrowing code from Unix to create a real OS: TCP/IP;
> >> NTFS<-ffs; memory mapped files<-mmap.
> >> Shame they keep trying to add their own ideas in too: that must be
> >> what causes the crashes!
> >>
> > You seeem misinformed.
> > Microsoft swallowed up a team from DEC.
> > The were developing a operating system called PRISM.
> > When the project was cancelled they quit DEC in protest.
> > These peaple had more than a 100 years of experience in developing
> > muliuser /
> > mutitasking operating systems between them. The fact that the NT
> > kernel is not
> > entirely stable yet really shouldn't supprise anyone. Afterall Unix
> > has messed with
> > it's kernel for 30 years. But the modular arcitecture and the
> > microkernel are new ideas in
> > OS design and should in time lead to a more extensible OS than unix.
>
> uKernels are *NOT* a new idea at all. They weren't a new idea when
> NT was unleashed on the world. What people think of as "NT" is a big
> pile of shite that obscures the uKernel. Since the graphics stuff
> got put into ring 0 I think that you could legitimately claim that
> BSD Unix is more of a micro kernel than NT. :)
>
> > (Unix tradionally has a spagetti of intercalling function calls as a
> > kernel.)
>
> Remember NeXTStep ?
Yes. NeXTStep didn't have a microkernel. The Mach kernel didn't get
changed to a microkernel design until after NeXTStep split off from
it.
-- Patrick
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 01:46:57 +0200
From: "John Thingstad" <john.thingstad@chello.no>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <opsdp4cjnapqzri1@mjolner.upc.no>
On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 16:13:20 -0700, Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:40:14 +0200, "John Thingstad"
> <john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
>
>> well documented at the time. Linux Pauling started out with minix and
>> then
>> went on to make a (mostly) posix compliant unix.
>
> Linux Pauling? I know about Linus Torvalds and Linus Pauling . I don't
> think the latter had much to do with Linux.
>
lol.. oops. No Pauling was a nobel prize winning chemist.
No idea why that came out. (assosiative memory can be a bich)
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:06:15 GMT
From: red floyd <no.spam@here.dude>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <XzOZc.14808$ao.8821@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>
Rupert Pigott wrote:
> It was specifically the 68000. Fixes were made that took effect in the
> 68010 and 68020. Dunno about 68008. IIRC the problem was that you could
> not restart some instructions properly. Some UNIX workstations did use
> 68Ks, there was an Apollo that had two of them running in lock-step,
> with one of them one instruction behind the other. When the leading CPU
> barfed, action would be taken and the other CPU would take over. Someone
> in comp.arch worked on the Fortune boxes and IIRC he claimed they had a
> more elegant single CPU solution.
68000 - original
68010 - 68000 + SR access is privileged, CCR is unpriviliated +
instruction restart for VM access
68008 -- 68000 with 8 bit external data bus, possibly restricted address
bus (can't remember)
68020 -- 68010 + full 32-bit
68030 -- 68020 + MMU
------------------------------
Date: 02 Sep 04 17:18:10 -0800
From: "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <989.741T521T10384218@kltpzyxm.invalid>
In article <opsdp4cjnapqzri1@mjolner.upc.no>, john.thingstad@chello.no
(John Thingstad) writes:
>On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 16:13:20 -0700, Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net>
>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:40:14 +0200, "John Thingstad"
>> <john.thingstad@chello.no> wrote:
>>
>>> well documented at the time. Linux Pauling started out with minix
>>> and then went on to make a (mostly) posix compliant unix.
>>
>> Linux Pauling? I know about Linus Torvalds and Linus Pauling .
>> I don't think the latter had much to do with Linux.
>
>lol.. oops. No Pauling was a nobel prize winning chemist.
>No idea why that came out. (assosiative memory can be a bich)
They were both heavily into C. For one, it was the language;
for the other, the vitamin.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 01:55:52 -0000
From: "David K. Wall" <dwall@fastmail.fm>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <Xns9558DF193FE9Bdkwwashere@216.168.3.30>
Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 20:58:34 -0000, "David K. Wall"
><dwall@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>Linus deliberately tried to pay attention to the POSIX standard
>>almost as soon as he realized that his terminal emulator project
>>was turning into an OS. 1991 isn't all that long ago, but I'm
>>not sure I would refer to it as "recent" in this context.
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1991Jul3.100050.9886%
40klaava.Helsinki.FI
>
> I don't know that the "interest" he expresses in this post proves the
> point ;-) However, Linux was based on Minix, and I think Minix was
> POSIX.2 compliant.
Well, I'm in no way a Linux or Minix expert, but I do have a copy of
Linus' book "Just for Fun", about the creation of Linux. Just by chance, I
happened to pick it up last night and read a chapter or two, and read that
same usenet post. So I'm pretty sure that the project was Linux. He didn't
actually get a copy at that time, because he found out it would cost money
he didn't have, so he used (IIRC) some Sun manuals for reference. Just
adding a data point....
I'll snip the stuff about POSIX.4, because I'm completely ignorant of what
is actually *contained* in the POSIX standards. :-)
------------------------------
Date: 02 Sep 2004 18:57:29 -0700
From: Patrick Scheible <kkt@drizzle.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <tqmy8js9ks6.fsf@drizzle.com>
Alan Balmer <albalmer@att.net> writes:
> The shuttle boosters are 3.7m diameter. Quite a bit larger than the
> gage of any railroad I've ever seen.
>
> More than you ever wanted to know:
> http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Space%20Shuttle%20Solid%20Rocket%20Booster
More than the track gauge, certainly, but the edges of the train cars
-- and the largest items that can be carried on the train -- hang out
significantly outside the track. Structure gauge is how much wide
and tall a load can be carried, or the size of the cars. Even if
there are no bridges or tunnels, you have to be careful of the trains
on the adjoining tracks if you're carrying something overwidth.
3.7 meters is not impossibly large for carrying on a railroad car.
Specifics would depend on the particular route, though.
-- Patrick
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 02:17:36 GMT
From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <4137A7CD.8B9B0A1D@yahoo.com>
Alan Balmer wrote:
>
... snip ...
>
> The shuttle boosters are 3.7m diameter. Quite a bit larger than
> the gage of any railroad I've ever seen.
Clearance is more or less dependant on gauge. The story is that
Lincolns assasination made the Pullman Co., because before that
many clearances were too small for his sleepers. For the funeral
train they had to widen the clearances.
--
Some similarities between GWB and Mussolini:
a) The strut; b) Making war until brought up short:
Mussolini: Ethiopia, France, Greece.
GWB: Afghanistan, Iraq.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 02:49:43 -0000
From: SM Ryan <wyrmwif@tango-sierra-oscar-foxtrot-tango.fake.org>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <10jfmu7k2c7c18a@corp.supernews.com>
"Karl A. Krueger" <kkrueger@example.edu> wrote:
# In comp.lang.lisp Pascal Bourguignon <spam@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
# > "John Thingstad" <john.thingstad@chello.no> writes:
# >> Note the Mac OS 10 / Darwin uses a unix kernel because of all the
# >> problems with interoperabillity OS 9 had with talking to Windows and
# >> Unix boxes.
# >
# > No that's not the reason. The reason is ONLY because of the lack of
# > virtual memory management (with separation of addressing spaces for
# > processes) in MacOS.
#
# It was my impression that the Motorola 68000 CPU, upon which the
# original Macintosh was based, did not support memory management in
# hardware. At least, that's usually given as the reason that portable
# Unix systems such as NetBSD will "never" run on the earlier 68k (or,
# for that matter, 8086 or 80286) chips.
It needed an extra chip until about the 68020. Mac system 7 had a form of
virtual memory; there are Linux and BSD versions that are advertised to
run on the 68020 or later.
MacOSX still has cruft from 1984 system 1, but now it's the outer layers
on top of the Unix kernel calls instead of Posix functions layered on
top of cruft.
--
SM Ryan http://www.rawbw.com/~wyrmwif/
Raining down sulphur is like an endurance trial, man. Genocide is the
most exhausting activity one can engage in. Next to soccer.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 02:49:44 -0000
From: SM Ryan <wyrmwif@tango-sierra-oscar-foxtrot-tango.fake.org>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <10jfmu8d0bt4n8b@corp.supernews.com>
# That is not the problem; one can do memory management and multiple
# address spaces in external hardware as well. But the MacOS architecture
# obviously wanted to be all in one address space, as did the early
# windows versions. This makes GUI easier and networking and fault
# isolation harder, but it's a valid tradeoff. :-)
Not really. It was known to be a problem from the first Multi-Finder. The original
Macs only ran one application at a time, and had to halt and return to Finder to
run another. That continued till the Multi-Finder in system 6 (or 5?), and
officially enshrined in system 7. By that time Apple already knew it was dead
end operating system and started and aborted a number of successors, and continued
warnings that all the low level interfaces would disappear Real Soon Now. Even
implementing on the PPC caused all sorts of compatiability problems.
On the other hand I'm still running 68K programs on MacOSX.
--
SM Ryan http://www.rawbw.com/~wyrmwif/
I have no idea what you just said.
I get that alot.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 22:57:22 -0400
From: Roland Hutchinson <my.spamtrap@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee's Unixism
Message-Id: <2pq4sjFocngsU1@uni-berlin.de>
In article <opsdp4cjnapqzri1@mjolner.upc.no> on Thursday 02 September 2004
19:46, John Thingstad wrote:
> oops. No Pauling was a nobel prize winning chemist.
And a nobel prize winning peace activist.
--
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V10 Issue 6951
***************************************
