Re: BACK TO BASICS

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Nick Holland
On 10/9/19 11:19 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> Here's what I think.
...[bla bla bla]...
> Amirite ? ;)

I don't know.  Let's see your work.

I don't care what your theoretical arguments are, I want to see
results.

Nick.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

openbsd.ssab
> "Nick Holland - [hidden email]"
> Envoyé: Jeudi 10 Octobre 2019 03:24AM
>
> On 10/9/19 11:19 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> > Here's what I think.
> ...[bla bla bla]...
> > Amirite ? ;)
>
> I don't know.  Let's see your work.
>
> I don't care what your theoretical arguments are, I want to see
> results.

Well then you'll only have the website provided...

But actually my question is more rethorical.
Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
*BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
Linux kernel...

That's all I was trying to say.

Sylvain S

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Theo de Raadt-2
[hidden email] wrote:

> > "Nick Holland - [hidden email]"
> > Envoyé: Jeudi 10 Octobre 2019 03:24AM
> >
> > On 10/9/19 11:19 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> > > Here's what I think.
> > ...[bla bla bla]...
> > > Amirite ? ;)
> >
> > I don't know.  Let's see your work.
> >
> > I don't care what your theoretical arguments are, I want to see
> > results.
>
> Well then you'll only have the website provided...
>
> But actually my question is more rethorical.
> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
> performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
> *BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
> Linux kernel...
>
> That's all I was trying to say.

That's right, because monopolies always serve the public better!

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

sylvain.saboua
Le 11 octobre 2019 18:08:22 GMT+02:00, "Theo de Raadt - [hidden email]" <openbsd.ssab.937be5fe2a.deraadt#[hidden email]> a écrit :

>[hidden email] wrote:
>
>> > "Nick Holland - [hidden email]"
>> > Envoyé: Jeudi 10 Octobre 2019 03:24AM
>> >
>> > On 10/9/19 11:19 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> > > Here's what I think.
>> > ...[bla bla bla]...
>> > > Amirite ? ;)
>> >
>> > I don't know.  Let's see your work.
>> >
>> > I don't care what your theoretical arguments are, I want to see
>> > results.
>>
>> Well then you'll only have the website provided...
>>
>> But actually my question is more rethorical.
>> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
>> performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
>> *BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
>> Linux kernel...
>>
>> That's all I was trying to say.
>
>That's right, because monopolies always serve the public better!

Rhetorically this answer sounds actually right...
Sylvain Saboua
K9 Mail sur Android

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Tomasz Rola
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 06:34:10PM +0200, Sylvain wrote:
> Le 11 octobre 2019 18:08:22 GMT+02:00, "Theo de Raadt - [hidden email]" <openbsd.ssab.937be5fe2a.deraadt#[hidden email]> a écrit :

Holy fork, now this is a long email address...

> >[hidden email] wrote:
[...]
> >
> >That's right, because monopolies always serve the public better!
>
> Rhetorically this answer sounds actually right...

But I suspect it is given with a really long tongue in a cheek. Or
maybe not?

--
Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home    **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **
**                                                                 **
** Tomasz Rola          mailto:[hidden email]             **

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Ingo Schwarze
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt-2
Theo de Raadt wrote on Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:08:22AM -0600:
> [hidden email] wrote:

[...]
>> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
>> performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
>> *BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
>> Linux kernel...
>>
>> That's all I was trying to say.

> That's right, because monopolies always serve the public better!

And besides, the original Version 7 AT&T UNIX has been more or less
free for several years now, so if you don't like the forks, you are
welcome to run the real thing.

For your convenience, the OpenBSD project is even providing the
Version 7 manuals online:

  https://man.openbsd.org/UNIX-7/boot.8
  https://man.openbsd.org/?query=.&apropos=1&manpath=UNIX-7

In the unlikely case that you lack a PDP-11, i'm sure it will be
easy for you to port it to amd64.  After all, most of the system
was written in K&R C, so it should still compile, with some minor
adjustments.

Yours,
  Ingo

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Theo de Raadt-2
Ingo Schwarze <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Theo de Raadt wrote on Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:08:22AM -0600:
> > [hidden email] wrote:
>
> [...]
> >> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
> >> performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
> >> *BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
> >> Linux kernel...
> >>
> >> That's all I was trying to say.
>
> > That's right, because monopolies always serve the public better!
>
> And besides, the original Version 7 AT&T UNIX has been more or less
> free for several years now, so if you don't like the forks, you are
> welcome to run the real thing.
>
> For your convenience, the OpenBSD project is even providing the
> Version 7 manuals online:
>
>   https://man.openbsd.org/UNIX-7/boot.8
>   https://man.openbsd.org/?query=.&apropos=1&manpath=UNIX-7
>
> In the unlikely case that you lack a PDP-11, i'm sure it will be
> easy for you to port it to amd64.  After all, most of the system
> was written in K&R C, so it should still compile, with some minor
> adjustments.

Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
performing, PDP-11 has become so divided first splitting into three
incompatible DEC productlines, and then further diluted efforts with
Intel and MIPS, and then all the other companies...

That's all I was trying to say.


Yes, I'm mocking the OP's severe lack of education.  Lack of
variation and competition always sucks more.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

andrew fabbro
In reply to this post by openbsd.ssab
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:09 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
> performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
> *BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
> Linux kernel...
>

The Unix landscape was fragmented long, long before Linux or the three
modern BSDs even existed.

--
andrew fabbro
[hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Stuart Longland
In reply to this post by Theo de Raadt-2
On 12/10/19 7:55 am, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
> performing, PDP-11 has become so divided first splitting into three
> incompatible DEC productlines, and then further diluted efforts with
> Intel and MIPS, and then all the other companies...

It goes back further than that… Babbage engines, Turing machines,
Collossus, ENIAC, the Von Neumann computer…

… they weren't exactly "compatible".
--
Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL)

I haven't lost my mind...
  ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS

Ingo Schwarze
In reply to this post by andrew fabbro
Hi Andrew,

andrew fabbro wrote on Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 05:17:28PM -0700:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:09 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:
 
>> Deep down, I'm actually so saddened to see the original, and still
>> performing, UNIX has become so divided first splitting into three
>> *BSD communities, and then further diluted efforts with GNU and the
>> Linux kernel...

> The Unix landscape was fragmented long, long before Linux or the three
> modern BSDs even existed.

Correct.  From my release list:

Jun     1980  System III AT&T UNIX (32v)
Jul 10, 1981* 4.1BSD [or June?]
Jan     1983  System V Release 1 AT&T UNIX (4.1)
        1983  SunOS 1.0 (4.1)
Jun     1984  Ultrix-32 (4.2)
Feb     1985  Version 8 AT&T UNIX (4.1c + System V Release 2)
        1986  AIX 1 (System V Release 2 + 4.3)
        1987  MINIX 1.0
        1988  IRIX 3.0  (System V Release 3 + 4.3)
Oct  5, 1991  Linux
Jan     1992  DEC OSF/1 V1.0 (4.3-Reno)
Mar     1992* 386BSD 0.0 (BSD Net/2)
Apr     1992   === USL vs. BSDi lawsuit filed ===
Jun     1992  Solaris 2.0 (System V Release 4)
Apr 20, 1993* NetBSD 0.8 (386BSD 0.1)
Nov  1, 1993  FreeBSD 1.0 (386BSD 0.1)
Feb  4, 1994   === USL vs. BSDi lawsuit settlement ===
Jun 23, 1995* 4.4BSD-Lite2
Jul     1996* OpenBSD 1.2 (NetBSD 1.0)
Jul 12, 2004  DragonFly BSD 1.0 (FreeBSD 4.8)

So your "long, long" can be quantified as almost exactly 10 years,
and besides, Linux preceded NetBSD and FreeBSD by two years, so
the OPs "and then further diluted efforts" is factually incorrect.
(GNU development even started in 1984, but it can hardly be called
a complete operating system until the Linux kernel was released.)

Yours,
  Ingo


*  indicates direct ancestors of OpenBSD
() means "based on"

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS (wikipedia's unix family tree)

Marc Chantreux
hello,

> > The Unix landscape was fragmented long, long before Linux or the three
> > modern BSDs even existed.

according to

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Unix_history-simple.svg

it started almost just after unix was born.

regards.
marc

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BACK TO BASICS (wikipedia's unix family tree)

Dmitry O
Not strictly related to the topic, but Bell Labs is planning a big party
related to the 50th anniversary for UNIX
50 years, half of century, amazing age

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/10/12/1625237/bell-labs-plans-big-50th-anniversary-event-for-unix


On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 4:33 PM Marc Chantreux <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> hello,
>
> > > The Unix landscape was fragmented long, long before Linux or the three
> > > modern BSDs even existed.
>
> according to
>
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Unix_history-simple.svg
>
> it started almost just after unix was born.
>
> regards.
> marc
>
>