From clemc at ccc.com Fri Feb 1 00:42:43 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 09:42:43 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm not sure if the old DEC CRL tech reports are still around. At one time before the Compaq-tion, some folks at CRL and the folks at Boston Public Library and WGBH were working with video and trying to extract all sorts of text from it. I do not remember how successful they were, but there might be some hints in their tech reports. I'll ask around and see if I can turn anything up. Part of the problem I have is I that don't remember who was doing that work, but some of my friends might. Clem ᐧ On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:16 AM Alec Muffett wrote: > Has anyone ever attempted to OCR a video, perhaps by breaking into frames > and then aggregating the results, using multiple frames to correct each > other? > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, 19:51 Richard Salz >> Some folks are trying to figure out how to get AberMud source online and >> working; see https://twitter.com/larsbrinkhoff/status/1056823314272960512 >> >> Sample code at >> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/larsbrinkhoff/abermud/master/abermud1/text/timelock.b >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stewart at serissa.com Fri Feb 1 05:34:57 2019 From: stewart at serissa.com (Lawrence Stewart) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 14:34:57 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7C327ED7-E712-475A-8F7D-EDEBCD529255@serissa.com> I was at CRL from 1989 to 1994. I sent an inquiry to our informal mailing list. We had written an audio server along the lines of the X server (http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/CRL-93-8.pdf) and Tom Levergood wrote an application called Store24 to keep a rolling 24 history of WBUR (local NPR station). We thought about using speech recognition to build a searchable index for it. The next idea was to do the same thing for Video, perhaps using the closed captioning feed to develop the index. Dave Wecker (now at Microsoft Research) reports working on extracting data from NPR news streams and it would find the appropriate audio or video clip. He’s not sure he published that. Jim Gettys cites http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/CRL-99-2.pdf (Indexing Multimedia for the Internet) and notes that all the DEC techreports are hidden away at http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/ . Choose “Browse by year” and select Compaq/DEC -Larry > On 2019, Jan 31, at 9:42 AM, Clem Cole wrote: > > I'm not sure if the old DEC CRL tech reports are still around. At one time before the Compaq-tion, some folks at CRL and the folks at Boston Public Library and WGBH were working with video and trying to extract all sorts of text from it. I do not remember how successful they were, but there might be some hints in their tech reports. I'll ask around and see if I can turn anything up. Part of the problem I have is I that don't remember who was doing that work, but some of my friends might. > > Clem > ᐧ > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:16 AM Alec Muffett > wrote: > Has anyone ever attempted to OCR a video, perhaps by breaking into frames and then aggregating the results, using multiple frames to correct each other? > > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, 19:51 Richard Salz wrote: > Some folks are trying to figure out how to get AberMud source online and working; see https://twitter.com/larsbrinkhoff/status/1056823314272960512 > > Sample code at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/larsbrinkhoff/abermud/master/abermud1/text/timelock.b > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stewart at serissa.com Fri Feb 1 05:45:10 2019 From: stewart at serissa.com (Lawrence Stewart) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 14:45:10 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. In-Reply-To: <7C327ED7-E712-475A-8F7D-EDEBCD529255@serissa.com> References: <7C327ED7-E712-475A-8F7D-EDEBCD529255@serissa.com> Message-ID: A followup from TV Raman, now at Google: > We also did an intern project -- Tom's intern who became my intern after > Tom left (Arjen De Vries) where we did: > > 1. Converted the caption stream into an sgml document indexed by time -- > so the caption stream came down in dribs and drabs of the form "turn > background yellow, foreground white, place this text"... that turned > into the SGML document, with each element tagged with time. > > 2. We then indexed that collection of SGML documents -- the content > stream was Tom's ring-buffer of the CNN live feed (6 hours was what we > stored from memory) > 3. We then built a simple-minded search engine over the SGML documents, > used the CRL reco engine for getting user queries -- you could also just > type the query at a search box; did the search over the > caption-doc-index, found the time-stamp and played the video. > > Arjen may have published some of this as his final year Masters project > out of the University Of Twente -- likely summer 1995. > -- > Id: kg:/m/0285kf1 I searched for Arjen De Vries and found https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fb10/b792fb209e0d347cd14430fbb446c1b178f3.pdf “Radio and Television Information Filtering through Speech Recognition” which in turn cites his Master’s thesis from 1995. > On 2019, Jan 31, at 2:34 PM, Lawrence Stewart wrote: > > I was at CRL from 1989 to 1994. I sent an inquiry to our informal mailing list. > > We had written an audio server along the lines of the X server (http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/CRL-93-8.pdf ) and Tom Levergood wrote an application called Store24 to keep a rolling 24 history of WBUR (local NPR station). We thought about using speech recognition to build a searchable index for it. > > The next idea was to do the same thing for Video, perhaps using the closed captioning feed to develop the index. Dave Wecker (now at Microsoft Research) reports working on extracting data from NPR news streams and it would find the appropriate audio or video clip. He’s not sure he published that. > > Jim Gettys cites http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/Compaq-DEC/CRL-99-2.pdf (Indexing Multimedia for the Internet) and notes that all the DEC techreports are hidden away at http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/ . Choose “Browse by year” and select Compaq/DEC > > -Larry > >> On 2019, Jan 31, at 9:42 AM, Clem Cole > wrote: >> >> I'm not sure if the old DEC CRL tech reports are still around. At one time before the Compaq-tion, some folks at CRL and the folks at Boston Public Library and WGBH were working with video and trying to extract all sorts of text from it. I do not remember how successful they were, but there might be some hints in their tech reports. I'll ask around and see if I can turn anything up. Part of the problem I have is I that don't remember who was doing that work, but some of my friends might. >> >> Clem >> ᐧ >> >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:16 AM Alec Muffett > wrote: >> Has anyone ever attempted to OCR a video, perhaps by breaking into frames and then aggregating the results, using multiple frames to correct each other? >> >> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, 19:51 Richard Salz wrote: >> Some folks are trying to figure out how to get AberMud source online and working; see https://twitter.com/larsbrinkhoff/status/1056823314272960512 >> >> Sample code at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/larsbrinkhoff/abermud/master/abermud1/text/timelock.b >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Fri Feb 1 14:47:09 2019 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 23:47:09 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. Message-ID: <201902010447.x114l9kX046939@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > I have tried to OCR program listings before, with rather > poor results. I OCR'd a sizable manuscript written on a pretty shabby portable typewriter. I scanned each page twice, making sure to move the paper between scans. Then I ran both diff (by words, not lines) and spell to smoke out trouble. The word list for a program listing is quite short and easy to generate. (Print a list of all the apparent words and visually eliminate the nonsense.) And a spell check is an easy pipeline of standard utilities. doug From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Fri Feb 1 15:08:06 2019 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 05:08:06 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ffmpeg can extract images from a video file.  I used imagemagik to do a CGA palettized version of a video and ffmpeg to stitch it all back together. I can get the flags.. Get Outlook for Android On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:16 PM +0800, "Alec Muffett" wrote: Has anyone ever attempted to OCR a video, perhaps by breaking into frames and then aggregating the results, using multiple frames to correct each other? On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, 19:51 Richard Salz From usotsuki at buric.co Fri Feb 1 18:09:08 2019 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 03:09:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 1 Feb 2019, Jason Stevens wrote: > Ffmpeg can extract images from a video file.  I used imagemagik to do a CGA palettized version of a video and ffmpeg to stitch it all back together. > > I can get the flags.. I can't remember it all, but I want to say you start with "ffmpeg -i filename.mp4 flnm%04d.png" I usually use Avisynth on Windows together with ffmpeg to do the opposite, because it has ImageSource(), but I suppose ffmpeg can do it by itself too. -uso. From cym224 at gmail.com Sat Feb 2 00:41:46 2019 From: cym224 at gmail.com (Nemo) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 09:41:46 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Archeology: AberMUD, BCPL, ec. In-Reply-To: <201902010447.x114l9kX046939@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201902010447.x114l9kX046939@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: On 31/01/2019, Doug McIlroy wrote: > I OCR'd a sizable manuscript written on a pretty shabby portable > typewriter. > > I scanned each page twice, making sure to move the paper between scans. > Then I ran both diff (by words, not lines) and spell to smoke out trouble. > The word list for a program listing is quite short and easy to generate. > (Print a list of all the apparent words and visually eliminate the > nonsense.) > And a spell check is an easy pipeline of standard utilities. > > doug Very nice! (I shall remember this technique.) N. From aek at bitsavers.org Sat Feb 2 03:10:27 2019 From: aek at bitsavers.org (Al Kossow) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 09:10:27 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Wanted: AT&T System V Release 3.2.{1,2,3} Source Code In-Reply-To: References: <87lg3iey47.fsf@loomcom.com> <87va2kdwc4.fsf@loomcom.com> Message-ID: <89b0ff51-70c9-1141-2174-bc1141ca08f8@bitsavers.org> I turned up some 3B2 3.2 binary floppies in the CHM collection. Will see if I can get those archived. I also just brought up V/386 3.2.3 on a 6386 WGS and am trying to find the C development floppies. On 1/20/19 1:01 AM, Kevin Bowling wrote: > As far as I could find, the binary distribution is not readily available (and maybe /was/ not readily available, this > seemed to be late enough to just be a code dump for source licensees). > > It would be fun to try and build this into a useable release, but I have not yet determined if everything is there as > well as if a 3.2 system can hoist the build. > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 5:15 PM Seth J. Morabito > wrote: > > > Kevin Bowling writes: > > > I believe there is a sysvr4 source dump floating around with the 3b2 > > base > > It turns out, you're quite right! > > I originally had an SVR4 dump from who knows where that did not contain > the /usr/src/uts/3b2 directory, but I recently was the benefactor of > *another* dump. This time, it looks like the real deal. /usr/src/uts/3b2 > is there in all its glory. > > This is probably all I need to get going. > > All the best, > > -Seth > -- >   Seth Morabito >   Poulsbo, WA, USA >   web at loomcom.com > From finnoleary at inventati.org Sun Feb 3 00:34:52 2019 From: finnoleary at inventati.org (Finn O'Leary) Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2019 14:34:52 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] DEC and Dave Cutler (was Re: The John Snow's of the UNIX family) In-Reply-To: <20190116182426.GQ7733@mcvoy.com> References: <20190116172950.GL7733@mcvoy.com> <20190116182426.GQ7733@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <8f974f05120b34b6af1ce954e5292a2e@inventati.org> On 2019-01-16 6:24 pm, Larry McVoy wrote: > Yeah, HPUX/IRIX/AIX/Solaris/etc are all dead so far as I know, but > the basic Unix model lives on in Linux. I wish one of the decent Unix > variants was still vibrant just so Linux doesn't get complacent. I have to ask -- which of the old Unix variants do you consider decent, and why? :) -- fao PGP fingerprint: 739B 6C5C 3DE1 33FA "Too enough is always not much!" From dave at horsfall.org Sun Feb 3 07:22:20 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 08:22:20 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] DEC and Dave Cutler (was Re: The John Snow's of the UNIX family) In-Reply-To: <8f974f05120b34b6af1ce954e5292a2e@inventati.org> References: <20190116172950.GL7733@mcvoy.com> <20190116182426.GQ7733@mcvoy.com> <8f974f05120b34b6af1ce954e5292a2e@inventati.org> Message-ID: On Sat, 2 Feb 2019, Finn O'Leary wrote: > I have to ask -- which of the old Unix variants do you consider decent, > and why? :) I quite liked BSD/OS (aka BSDi), until WinDriver bought them out and shut them down; most users then flocked towards FreeBSD, which I still use to this day. -- Dave From imp at bsdimp.com Sun Feb 3 11:35:36 2019 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 18:35:36 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Posters Message-ID: I found 3 tubes of posters I'd been hoarding since college (well, since my first job after college). There's the usual 18-year-old-boy stuff (Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, etc), but mixed in are a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't become standard, woof!), a couple movie posters, an 10th Anniversary poster for RT-11. The ones that will interest this group, maybe, are the Unix Feuds poster with the wizard among the waring armies, A 20th Anniversary of Unix poster by Tenon Intersystems which has a nice picture of Unix through 1990 or so (with Tenon's Mach^ten 1.0 for Macintosh derived from BSD 4.3 and Mach) on it. It's in decent share, but not in collector ready shape. Oh, and I have a Eunice poster that mixes the best of VMS and BSD 4.1 into a seamless environment. Is there any interest from this group in photos of any of these? Warner -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ggm at algebras.org Sun Feb 3 11:46:46 2019 From: ggm at algebras.org (George Michaelson) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 11:46:46 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes. even the Led Zep trash. Reddit will swallow this stuff if nobody else does. Does it have Jimmy Page and his awful three-headed-guitar and the violin bow? -G On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 11:36 AM Warner Losh wrote: > > I found 3 tubes of posters I'd been hoarding since college (well, since my first job after college). > > There's the usual 18-year-old-boy stuff (Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, etc), but mixed in are a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't become standard, woof!), a couple movie posters, an 10th Anniversary poster for RT-11. > > The ones that will interest this group, maybe, are the Unix Feuds poster with the wizard among the waring armies, A 20th Anniversary of Unix poster by Tenon Intersystems which has a nice picture of Unix through 1990 or so (with Tenon's Mach^ten 1.0 for Macintosh derived from BSD 4.3 and Mach) on it. It's in decent share, but not in collector ready shape. > > Oh, and I have a Eunice poster that mixes the best of VMS and BSD 4.1 into a seamless environment. > > Is there any interest from this group in photos of any of these? > > Warner > From dave at horsfall.org Sun Feb 3 12:02:49 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:02:49 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 2 Feb 2019, Warner Losh wrote: > I found 3 tubes of posters I'd been hoarding since college (well, since > my first job after college). There's the usual 18-year-old-boy stuff > (Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, etc), but mixed in are a bunch  of OSI/ISO > network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't become standard, > woof!), a couple movie posters, an 10th Anniversary poster for RT-11. Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin etc certainly :-) -- Dave. the hippie pensioner From jon at fourwinds.com Sun Feb 3 12:04:31 2019 From: jon at fourwinds.com (Jon Steinhart) Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2019 18:04:31 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <201902030204.x1324VWN025377@darkstar.fourwinds.com> You might want to check with the Internet Archive to see if they'd be interested in scanning them. Jon From dave at horsfall.org Sun Feb 3 12:07:03 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:07:03 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, George Michaelson wrote: > Yes. even the Led Zep trash. Reddit will swallow this stuff if nobody > else does. Does it have Jimmy Page and his awful three-headed-guitar and > the violin bow? Getting OT, but I thought he played a twin-head, not a three-headed axe? -- Dave From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Sun Feb 3 12:27:05 2019 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 19:27:05 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5df9fcac-f035-20e8-afc9-095aae42ba5e@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> On 2/2/19 6:35 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > Is there any interest from this group in photos of any of these? I would be interested in pictures of the computer related pictures to see if I'd be interested enough to pay for and / or for shipping on any of them. -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4008 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From usotsuki at buric.co Sun Feb 3 13:23:01 2019 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 22:23:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, George Michaelson wrote: > >> Yes. even the Led Zep trash. Reddit will swallow this stuff if nobody else >> does. Does it have Jimmy Page and his awful three-headed-guitar and the >> violin bow? > > Getting OT, but I thought he played a twin-head, not a three-headed axe? > > -- Dave > Never seen him play any three-headed guitar, but wasn't his big thing the Gibson EDS-1275 "Double Neck SG"? Don Felder used one of those to play his half of the guitar duet at the end of Hotel California. -uso. From randium at gmail.com Sun Feb 3 15:54:24 2019 From: randium at gmail.com (randium at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 06:54:24 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jimmy Page's big thing was *always* the Gibson Les Paul, but he did play a double-neck SG with 12-strings on the upper neck and 6-strings on the lower neck. On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 4:23 AM Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, Dave Horsfall wrote: > > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, George Michaelson wrote: > > > >> Yes. even the Led Zep trash. Reddit will swallow this stuff if nobody > else > >> does. Does it have Jimmy Page and his awful three-headed-guitar and the > >> violin bow? > > > > Getting OT, but I thought he played a twin-head, not a three-headed axe? > > > > -- Dave > > > > Never seen him play any three-headed guitar, but wasn't his big thing the > Gibson EDS-1275 "Double Neck SG"? Don Felder used one of those to play > his half of the guitar duet at the end of Hotel California. > > -uso. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ullbeking at andrewnesbit.org Sun Feb 3 23:20:19 2019 From: ullbeking at andrewnesbit.org (Andrew Luke Nesbit) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:20:19 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 03/02/2019 02:07, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, George Michaelson wrote: > >> Yes. even the Led Zep trash. Reddit will swallow this stuff if nobody >> else does. Does it have Jimmy Page and his awful three-headed-guitar >> and the violin bow? > > Getting OT, but I thought he played a twin-head, not a three-headed axe? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n1l-_UiWbs -- OpenPGP key: EB28 0338 28B7 19DA DAB0 B193 D21D 996E 883B E5B9 From spedraja at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 00:14:34 2019 From: spedraja at gmail.com (SPC) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 15:14:34 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Posters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *Everything* :-) Cheers Sergio El dom., 3 feb. 2019 14:21, Andrew Luke Nesbit escribió: > On 03/02/2019 02:07, Dave Horsfall wrote: > > On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, George Michaelson wrote: > > > >> Yes. even the Led Zep trash. Reddit will swallow this stuff if nobody > >> else does. Does it have Jimmy Page and his awful three-headed-guitar > >> and the violin bow? > > > > Getting OT, but I thought he played a twin-head, not a three-headed axe? > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n1l-_UiWbs > > -- > OpenPGP key: EB28 0338 28B7 19DA DAB0 B193 D21D 996E 883B E5B9 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike.ab3ap at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 00:43:10 2019 From: mike.ab3ap at gmail.com (Mike Markowski) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 09:43:10 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Posters - Led Zep amp In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <270d8e2d-e86e-79cb-1d18-29ceef28803c@gmail.com> On 2/3/19 12:54 AM, randium at gmail.com wrote: > Jimmy Page's big thing was /always/ the Gibson Les Paul, but he did play > a double-neck SG > with 12-strings on the upper neck and 6-strings on the lower neck. And this year, guitar players can sound like Jimmy https://www.premierguitar.com/articles/28465-sundragon-amps-announces-collaboration-with-jimmy-page thanks to what the manufacturer would call a botched repair. :-) (Sorry for lengthening this stray thread.) Mike Markowski From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Mon Feb 4 01:02:37 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 10:02:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Warner Losh > a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't > become standard, woof!) Why? The details have faded from my memory, but the lower 2 layers of the stack (CLNP and TP4) I don't recall as being too bad. (The real block to adoption was that people didn't want to get snarled up in the ISO standards process.) It at least managed (IIRC) to separate the concepts of, and naming for, 'node' and 'network interface' (which is more than IPv6 managed, apparently on the grounds that 'IPv4 did it that way', despite lengthy pleading that in light of increased understanding since IPv4 was done, they were separate concepts and deserved separate namespaces). Yes, the allocation of the names used by the path selection (I use that term because to too many people, 'routing' means 'packet forwarding') was a total dog's breakast (allocation by naming authority - the very definition of 'brain-damaged') but TCP/IP's was not any better, really. Yes, the whole session/presentation/application thing was ponderous and probably over-complicated, but that could have been ditched and simpler things run directly on TP4. {And apologies for the non-Unix content, but at least it's about computers, unlike all the postings about Jimmy Page's guitar; typical of the really poor S/N on this list.) Noel From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Mon Feb 4 02:51:04 2019 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 09:51:04 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 2/3/19 8:02 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > Why? The details have faded from my memory, but the lower 2 layers of > the stack (CLNP and TP4) I don't recall as being too bad. (The real > block to adoption was that people didn't want to get snarled up in the > ISO standards process.) I too am curious. I've got no first hand experience. (I'm not counting getting a couple of SimH VAXen talking to each other over DECnetIV.) > It at least managed (IIRC) to separate the concepts of, and naming > for, 'node' and 'network interface' (which is more than IPv6 managed, > apparently on the grounds that 'IPv4 did it that way', despite lengthy > pleading that in light of increased understanding since IPv4 was done, > they were separate concepts and deserved separate namespaces). I'm not quite sure what you mean by naming a node vs network interface. But I do know for a fact that in IPv4, IP addresses belonged to the system. Conversely, in IPv6, IP addresses belong to the interface. This has important security implications on multi-homed systems. > Yes, the allocation of the names used by the path selection (I use that > term because to too many people, 'routing' means 'packet forwarding') > was a total dog's breakast (allocation by naming authority - the very > definition of 'brain-damaged') but TCP/IP's was not any better, really. I don't understand what you mean by using "names" for "path selection". Or are you referring to named networks, and that traffic must pass through a (named) network? That's probably why I don't understand how routes are allocated by a naming authority. > Yes, the whole session/presentation/application thing was ponderous and > probably over-complicated, but that could have been ditched and simpler > things run directly on TP4. I've seen various parts of session and / or presentation applied to IPv4 (and presumably IPv6) applications. Some people like to say that session is one of those two (arguments ensue as to which) grafted on top of the application layer. So, even that's still there in the IP world, just in an arguably different order. -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4008 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From norman at oclsc.org Mon Feb 4 04:49:40 2019 From: norman at oclsc.org (Norman Wilson) Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 13:49:40 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <1549219784.27638.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> Noel Chiappa: {And apologies for the non-Unix content, but at least it's about computers, unlike all the postings about Jimmy Page's guitar; typical of the really poor S/N on this list.) ====== Didn't Jimmy Page's guitar use an LSI-11 running Lycklama's Mini-UNIX? And what was his page size? Norman Wilson Toronto ON From imp at bsdimp.com Mon Feb 4 05:10:02 2019 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 12:10:02 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Fwd: Posters In-Reply-To: References: <5df9fcac-f035-20e8-afc9-095aae42ba5e@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: Meant to reply all on this.... Warner ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Warner Losh Date: Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 11:37 PM Subject: Re: [TUHS] Posters To: Grant Taylor I'll take pictures tomorrow. No zeppelin though... I had hoped that I still had my ultrix version of Phil Figlio's original usenix artwork. I can find the Usenix one and the Unix one, but not that one online. Anybody have one they can share? Warner On Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 7:32 PM Grant Taylor via TUHS On 2/2/19 6:35 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > > Is there any interest from this group in photos of any of these? > > I would be interested in pictures of the computer related pictures to > see if I'd be interested enough to pay for and / or for shipping on any > of them. > > > > -- > Grant. . . . > unix || die > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ca6c at bitmessage.ch Mon Feb 4 05:57:52 2019 From: ca6c at bitmessage.ch (=?UTF-8?Q?C=C3=A1g?=) Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 13:57:52 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] DEC and Dave Cutler (was Re: The John Snow's of the UNIX family) In-Reply-To: <8f974f05120b34b6af1ce954e5292a2e@inventati.org> References: <20190116172950.GL7733@mcvoy.com> <20190116182426.GQ7733@mcvoy.com> <8f974f05120b34b6af1ce954e5292a2e@inventati.org> Message-ID: [replying to a wrong message, please excuse] Larry McVoy wrote: > Yeah, HPUX/IRIX/AIX/Solaris/etc are all dead so far as I know, but > the basic Unix model lives on in Linux. I wish one of the decent Unix > variants was still vibrant just so Linux doesn't get complacent. While Solaris development is apparently ceased, at least according to Mr. Simon Phipps, Hockey Pucks and AIX are alive, Wikipedia says. The problem could be that neither support amd64 and/or nobody cares about commercial Unix systems anymore. As far as commercial systems go, even CentOS has a far larger market share on the supercomputer territory than RHEL does, according to TOP500. Regarding Solaris, even new releases are getting out quite regularly, I don't think it has changed a bit since late 2000s-early 2010s. -- caóc From aek at bitsavers.org Mon Feb 4 06:18:09 2019 From: aek at bitsavers.org (Al Kossow) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 12:18:09 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Wanted: AT&T System V Release 3.2.{1,2,3} Source Code In-Reply-To: <89b0ff51-70c9-1141-2174-bc1141ca08f8@bitsavers.org> References: <87lg3iey47.fsf@loomcom.com> <87va2kdwc4.fsf@loomcom.com> <89b0ff51-70c9-1141-2174-bc1141ca08f8@bitsavers.org> Message-ID: <02c51f0b-fb5b-b850-41cc-271dc031c6d3@bitsavers.org> On 2/1/19 9:10 AM, Al Kossow wrote: > I turned up some 3B2 3.2 binary floppies in the CHM collection. > Will see if I can get those archived. Not much joy on that front. The utilities are there, but not the boot disk or core system We have the boot floppies for USL SVr4, but only one of the two cartridge tapes, and that had a dried up tape band which contaminated the front of the tape, so I haven't been able to read it. I did manage to read a Bell Technologies SysVr3 3.0 CPIO cart, but I can't find the install floppies which I put up on bitsavers /bits under BellTechnologies From dave at horsfall.org Mon Feb 4 06:23:35 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 07:23:35 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! Message-ID: Co-inventor of Unix, he was born on this day in 1943. Just think: without those two, we'd all be running M$ Windoze and thinking that it's wonderful (I know, it's an exaggeration, but think about it). -- Dave From clemc at ccc.com Mon Feb 4 06:58:39 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 2:59 PM Cág wrote: > [Hockey Pucks and AIX are alive, Wikipedia says. > The problem could be that neither support amd64 and/or Be careful. The history of proprietary commercial UNIX implementations is that they were developed by HW manufacturers that had proprietary ISAs. So that fact that UX was Itanium and AIX was Power (or Tru64 in its day was Alpha) should not be surprising. It was the way the market developed. Each vendor sold a unique ecosystem and tried very hard to keep you in it. Portability was designed as an >>import<< idea, and they tried to keep you from exporting by getting you to use 'value add.' I remember during the reign of terror that Solaris created. Take as an example, the standard portable threading library was pThreads. But Solaris threads were faster and Sun did everything it could get the ISV's write using Solaris Threads. Guess what -- they did. So at DEC we found ourselves implementing a Solaris Threads package for Tru64, so the ISVs could run their code (I don't know if IBM or HP did it too, because at the time, our competition was Sun). BTW: this attitude was nothing new. I've said it before, the greatest piece of marketing DEC ever did was convince the world that VMS Fortran was Fortran-77. It was not close. And when you walked into most people writing real production code (in Fortran of course), you discovered they had used all of the VMS Fortran extensions. When the UNIX folks arrived on the scene the f77 in Seventh Edition was not good enough. You saw first Masscomp in '85, then a year later Apollo and 2 years after that, Sun develop really, really good Fortran's -- all that were VMS Fortran compatible. nobody cares about commercial Unix systems anymore. > This is a bit of blind and sweeping statement which again, I would take some care. There are very large commercial sites that continue to run proprietary UNIX on those same proprietary ISAs, often with ISV and in-home developed applications that are quite valuable. For instance, a lot of the financial and insurance industries live here. The question comes to how to value and count it. Just because the hackers don't work there, does not mean there are not a lots firms doing it. Those sites are extremely large and represent a lot of money. The number of them is unlikely to be growing last time I looked at the numbers. In fact, in some cases, they >>are<< being displaced by Intel*64 systems running a flavor of Linux. The key driver for this was the moving the commercial applications such as Oracle and SAP to Linux and in particular, Linux running on VMs. But a huge issue was code reuse. To reuse, Henry's great line about BSD, Linux is just like Unix; only different. Simply has the cost of maintaining your own ISA and complete SW ecosystem for it continues to rise and in fact is getting more and more expensive as the market shrinks. At this point, the only ones left are HP, IBM and the shadow of Sunoracle. They are servicing a market that is fixed. > > As far as commercial systems go, even CentOS has a far larger market > share on the supercomputer territory than RHEL does, according to > TOP500. > Again be careful. In fact this my world that I have lived for about 40+ years. The Top100 system folks really do not want any stinking OS between their application and the hardware. They never have. Don't kid yourself. This is why systems like mOS (Rolf Riesen's MultiOS slides and github sources ) are being developed. Simply put, the HPC folks have always wanted the OS out the way. Unix was a convenience for them and Linux just replaced UNIX. The RHEL licensing scheme is per CPU and on a Beowulf style cluster, it does not make a lot of sense. I know a lot of the Linux community likes to crow about the supers using Linux. They really don't Its what runs on the login node and the job scheduler. It could be anything as long as its cheap, fast and the physicists can hack on it. This is a behavior that goes back the Manhatten Project and its unchanged. The 'capability' systems are a high-end world that is tuned for a very specific job. You can learn a lot in that area, but because about making generalizations. As I like to say -- Fortran still pays my salary. These folks codes are unchanged since my father's time as a 'computer' at Rocket Dyne in the 1950s. What has changed is the size of the datasets. But open up those codes and you'll discover the same math. They tend to be equation solvers. We just have a lot more variables. Clem -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ca6c at bitmessage.ch Mon Feb 4 07:08:50 2019 From: ca6c at bitmessage.ch (=?UTF-8?Q?C=C3=A1g?=) Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 15:08:50 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for your insight, Mr. Cole. My statements were merely a deduction and speculation. > As I like to say -- Fortran still pays my salary. I wish I could say that. I feel like nobody needs Fortran anymore, and my skills are being wasted. -- caóc From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Feb 4 07:17:33 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:17:33 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190203211733.GO6420@mcvoy.com> On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 03:58:39PM -0500, Clem Cole wrote: > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 2:59 PM C??g wrote: > > > [Hockey Pucks and AIX are alive, Wikipedia says. > > The problem could be that neither support amd64 and/or > > Be careful. The history of proprietary commercial UNIX implementations is > that they were developed by HW manufacturers that had proprietary ISAs. So > that fact that UX was Itanium and AIX was Power (or Tru64 in its day was > Alpha) should not be surprising. It was the way the market developed. Each > vendor sold a unique ecosystem and tried very hard to keep you in it. > Portability was designed as an >>import<< idea, and they tried to keep you > from exporting by getting you to use 'value add.' Not on Sun's. I personally wrote lint libraries for other OS's, BSD, strict POSIX, System V, etc. Had a huge fight with Gingell to get them included in SunOS 4.something (he didn't want to give up 40KB of extra files in the install; I threatened to quit if they didn't go in - I won). My theory was Sun was the most liked development platform, I wanted to keep that going. The idea was make it so you could develop for any major target on Suns. Yeah, I wanted the devs to be on Suns but be able to deploy on whatever you had to. > Linux running on VMs. But a huge issue was code reuse. To reuse, Henry's > great line about BSD, Linux is just like Unix; only different. That's because people are sloppy and don't code to a standard. If you look through the BitKeeper code you'll find our own libc that is portable across pretty much every major commercial Unix, Linux (at one point on Alpha, PPC, MIPS, SPARC, x86, x86-64, even whatever the IBM mainframe Unix), BSD, MacOS and Windows. The hardest part was fork(2), we didn't figure out a way to emulate that so we redid windows spawn() style on Unix. I have typed out switch (pid = fork()) { ... } in decades. Yeah, we have a few #ifdefs but the libc interface our code uses is quite clean and portable. So it is possible to have code that runs everywhere but you have to get disciplined about it. Other than those quibbles, I agree with Clem. From grog at lemis.com Mon Feb 4 07:39:08 2019 From: grog at lemis.com (Greg 'groggy' Lehey) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 08:39:08 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> On Monday, 4 February 2019 at 7:23:35 +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: > Co-inventor of Unix, he was born on this day in 1943. Just think: without > those two, we'd all be running M$ Windoze and thinking that it's wonderful (I > know, it's an exaggeration, but think about it). Without Unix, Microsoft would not have created Microsoft "Windows". Even it has roots in Unix. Greg -- Sent from my desktop computer. Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key. See complete headers for address and phone numbers. This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft mail program reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 163 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dave at horsfall.org Mon Feb 4 08:07:52 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:07:52 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > Without Unix, Microsoft would not have created Microsoft "Windows". I'd like to see some evidence for that; without Unix, what would we be running now? I doubt whether it would've been Linux, there being no inspiration for it... My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. > Even it has roots in Unix. Only inasmuch as it has directories, users, and permissions (which any semi-decent OS would have anyway)... Admittedly I have never compromised my integrity by using/programming it, so I am willing to be corrected. And yes, I know about POSIX compatibility, but so is Linux, and it's different enough from Unix to be damned annoying. -- Dave From henry.r.bent at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 08:14:05 2019 From: henry.r.bent at gmail.com (Henry Bent) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:14:05 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 16:00, Clem Cole wrote: > BTW: this attitude was nothing new. I've said it before, the greatest > piece of marketing DEC ever did was convince the world that VMS Fortran was > Fortran-77. It was not close. And when you walked into most people > writing real production code (in Fortran of course), you discovered they > had used all of the VMS Fortran extensions. When the UNIX folks arrived > on the scene the f77 in Seventh Edition was not good enough. You saw first > Masscomp in '85, then a year later Apollo and 2 years after that, Sun > develop really, really good Fortran's -- all that were VMS Fortran > compatible. > This code was apparently so pervasive and long-lived that the GNU Fortran compiler added compatibility for DEC extensions less than two years ago, in version 7. There must be enough demand for DEC's additions to have made it worthwhile. -Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Mon Feb 4 08:20:59 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:20:59 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 4:10 PM Cág wrote: > I wish I could say that. I feel like nobody needs Fortran anymore, and > my skills are being wasted. > FYI - the last time I saw the numbers, about 75-85% of the production at CERN was Fortran. This is very similar to the USA's high energy labs. I have not seen the numbers of the Darmstadt European space folks, but I would not be surprised if they are much different than NASA's. That was a little lower, but the heavy supercomputer codes NASA uses are still very much Fortran dominate. Finding good Fortran programmers can be difficult. Most today are from the natural sciences (like was true in the 50s before we created 'Computer Science'), but there are still lots of jobs if you know it. But I suspect that those jobs are going to be near campuses that support heavy science types. ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Mon Feb 4 08:23:48 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:23:48 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:14 PM Henry Bent wrote: > This code was apparently so pervasive and long-lived that the GNU Fortran > compiler added compatibility for DEC extensions less than two years ago, in > version 7. There must be enough demand for DEC's additions to have made it > worthwhile. > Truth is most of the important ones went into Fortran-90 if I understand it correctly (I'd trust Paul W.s comments if he knows). Again, I'm not a compiler guy, but I've been known to eat lunch with a few of them :-) Clem ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Mon Feb 4 08:33:03 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:33:03 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dave Horsfall wrote: > > My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. > "Windows" == Win95 -- which was a user Interface spec the kernel died IBM CP-DOS -> OS/2 --\ \ ---> NT OS-2 -> NT/WIN ....... Today's Windows CMU Mach --\ / ---> Mica -/ DEC VMS --/ When Cutler did Mica and then NT OS-2 he did not care what the user interface was. Mica was a pure uk and NT OS-2 was also, but by the time of the product it became a hybrid. Putting a different user interface, be it DOS, OS/2, Unix, VMS or Windows was in the kernel design. Clem ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael at kjorling.se Mon Feb 4 08:39:26 2019 From: michael at kjorling.se (Michael =?utf-8?B?S2rDtnJsaW5n?=) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 22:39:26 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20190203223924.4i735ix4z3a7mi24@h-174-65.A328.priv.bahnhof.se> On 4 Feb 2019 09:07 +1100, from dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall): > My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. CP/M is (was?) to MS-DOS roughly as UNIX is to Linux (the overall system, not referring to just the kernel); a source of inspiration, but not a direct ancestor. Then let's not get into the Windows / OS/2 / Windows NT confusion, product line splits/merges and rebranding. IIRC, at least until Windows 3.0 (1990), and possibly until Windows 95 when Microsoft did their best to hide the troubled history, Windows applications were _expected_ to ultimately rely on the old-style MS-DOS API for basic operating system services like file management, and could choose to (or were expected to) call those APIs directly instead of going through the Windows API. For a long time, Windows was just a fancy (some would almost certainly say overrated) graphical shell. I, too, would like to see some reference or at least justification for the claim that Microsoft would not have created Windows had it not been for Unix. As I recall, Visi On did use some Unix as its development platform; and Microsoft Windows was created in response to Visi On; but that's the only obvious causal connection between Unix and Windows that I can see, and it's a tenuous one at best. -- Michael Kjörling • https://michael.kjorling.se • michael at kjorling.se “The most dangerous thought that you can have as a creative person is to think you know what you’re doing.” (Bret Victor) From usotsuki at buric.co Mon Feb 4 08:55:37 2019 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:55:37 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > >> Without Unix, Microsoft would not have created Microsoft "Windows". > > I'd like to see some evidence for that; without Unix, what would we be > running now? I doubt whether it would've been Linux, there being no > inspiration for it... > > My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. > >> Even it has roots in Unix. > > Only inasmuch as it has directories, users, and permissions (which any > semi-decent OS would have anyway)... Admittedly I have never compromised my > integrity by using/programming it, so I am willing to be corrected. > > And yes, I know about POSIX compatibility, but so is Linux, and it's > different enough from Unix to be damned annoying. > > -- Dave > Keep in mind that the MS-DOS 2 "handles" API for file access is based *directly* on Xenix, and replaced the MS-DOS 1 "FCB" API borrowed from CP/M. -uso. From grawity at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 09:33:43 2019 From: grawity at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Mantas_Mikul=C4=97nas?=) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 01:33:43 +0200 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise (Was: OSI stack (Was: Posters)) In-Reply-To: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:03 PM Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > From: Warner Losh > > > a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't > > become standard, woof!) > > Why? The details have faded from my memory, but the lower 2 layers of the > stack (CLNP and TP4) I don't recall as being too bad. (The real block to > adoption was that people didn't want to get snarled up in the ISO standards > process.) > > It at least managed (IIRC) to separate the concepts of, and naming for, 'node' > and 'network interface' (which is more than IPv6 managed, apparently on the > grounds that 'IPv4 did it that way', despite lengthy pleading that in light of > increased understanding since IPv4 was done, they were separate concepts and > deserved separate namespaces). Yes, the allocation of the names used by the > path selection (I use that term because to too many people, 'routing' means > 'packet forwarding') was a total dog's breakast (allocation by naming > authority - the very definition of 'brain-damaged') but TCP/IP's was not any > better, really. > > Yes, the whole session/presentation/application thing was ponderous and probably > over-complicated, but that could have been ditched and simpler things run > directly on TP4. > > {And apologies for the non-Unix content, but at least it's about computers, > unlike all the postings about Jimmy Page's guitar; typical of the really poor > S/N on this list.) > With apologies for the outburst: When I first subscribed to tuhs several years ago (even though I don't really belong in here; I'm younger than even Linux, much less any of the Unixen), I *very much* enjoyed reading the various stories about UUCP, about Sun, about X11, VMS, ARPAnet – often first-hand tales, no less. So I don't know what counts as 'signal' on this list versus 'noise', but I'd much rather read a million posts about OSI, CLNP and other networks – a history lesson and information that's been getting scarce in general – than kill/mute yet another thread full of generic "boo M$ Windoze" drivel that I can already find on Reddit. Thanks, -- Mantas Mikulėnas From akosela at andykosela.com Mon Feb 4 09:37:13 2019 From: akosela at andykosela.com (Andy Kosela) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:37:13 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: On Sunday, February 3, 2019, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Dave Horsfall wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >> >> Without Unix, Microsoft would not have created Microsoft "Windows". >>> >> >> I'd like to see some evidence for that; without Unix, what would we be >> running now? I doubt whether it would've been Linux, there being no >> inspiration for it... >> >> My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. >> >> Even it has roots in Unix. >>> >> >> Only inasmuch as it has directories, users, and permissions (which any >> semi-decent OS would have anyway)... Admittedly I have never compromised >> my integrity by using/programming it, so I am willing to be corrected. >> >> And yes, I know about POSIX compatibility, but so is Linux, and it's >> different enough from Unix to be damned annoying. >> >> -- Dave >> >> > Keep in mind that the MS-DOS 2 "handles" API for file access is based > *directly* on Xenix, and replaced the MS-DOS 1 "FCB" API borrowed from CP/M. > > And also don't forget that Xenix had the largest UNIX installed base measured by the number of machines it was installed on. People talking about BSD and System V in the 80s, but it was Xenix that ruled on micros. So at the time Microsoft offered both UNIX and MS-DOS. --Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From krewat at kilonet.net Mon Feb 4 10:10:50 2019 From: krewat at kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 19:10:50 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise (Was: OSI stack (Was: Posters)) In-Reply-To: References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 2/3/2019 6:33 PM, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote: > > With apologies for the outburst: > > When I first subscribed to tuhs several years ago (even though I don't > really belong in here; I'm younger than even Linux, much less any of > the Unixen), I *very much* enjoyed reading the various stories about > UUCP, about Sun, about X11, VMS, ARPAnet – often first-hand tales, no > less. > > So I don't know what counts as 'signal' on this list versus 'noise', > but I'd much rather read a million posts about OSI, CLNP and other > networks – a history lesson and information that's been getting scarce > in general – than kill/mute yet another thread full of generic "boo M$ > Windoze" drivel that I can already find on Reddit. > > I concur. However, discussions of how many necks Jimmy Page's guitar had were pretty much way off topic. I mean, really, THREE? Led Zeppelin was slightly before my time (I'm 53). But who doesn't know it was only two? ;) art k. From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Feb 4 10:32:24 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 16:32:24 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20190204003224.GQ6420@mcvoy.com> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 09:07:52AM +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > > >Without Unix, Microsoft would not have created Microsoft "Windows". > > I'd like to see some evidence for that; without Unix, what would we be > running now? I doubt whether it would've been Linux, there being no > inspiration for it... > > My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. Yep. > >Even it has roots in Unix. > > Only inasmuch as it has directories, users, and permissions (which any > semi-decent OS would have anyway)... Admittedly I have never compromised my > integrity by using/programming it, so I am willing to be corrected. > > And yes, I know about POSIX compatibility, but so is Linux, and it's > different enough from Unix to be damned annoying. It's what you are used to. I haven't tried it but apparently Microsoft has implemented the Linux syscall layer that you can just drop a distro on top of windows and the binaries work. From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Mon Feb 4 10:54:50 2019 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:54:50 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise (Was: OSI stack (Was: Posters)) In-Reply-To: References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <34abdea7-db7e-3964-3b13-32cdd7d73c93@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> On 2/3/19 4:33 PM, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote: > When I first subscribed to tuhs several years ago (even though I don't > really belong in here; I'm younger than even Linux, much less any of the > Unixen), FULL STOP I see no reason for you to not belong here. I too am younger than most of the things discussed on this list. But that doesn't some me from participating ~> discussing ~> learning. Nor do I think it should stop you. Just be mindful of where your roots are or aren't. After all, Unix collectively (including Linux) is doing the wrong thing and going the wrong way if it turns people away that want to learn about it. Resume. > I *very much* enjoyed reading the various stories about UUCP, about Sun, > about X11, VMS, ARPAnet – often first-hand tales, no less. I do too. I also enjoy being able to discuss things with people as I'm reading about various technologies elsewhere. That being said, I don't know that TUHS is the best place for some non-Unix related things. That's what the COFF mailing list is for. ;-) > So I don't know what counts as 'signal' on this list versus 'noise', > but I'd much rather read a million posts about OSI, CLNP and other > networks – a history lesson and information that's been getting scarce > in general – than kill/mute yet another thread full of generic "boo M$ > Windoze" drivel that I can already find on Reddit. I'd suggest COFF if you aren't subscribed. I'd also suggest the cctalk mailing list. Also, if you've not read it, I HIGHLY suggest "Where Wizards Stay Up Late - The Origins of the Internet". Finally, doing. Lots of doing or trying. Even if you find out that it's wrong. That's gaining experience that I think makes it easier to learn from. comp.os.vms is another good place to watch ~> read ~> learn. > Thanks, :-) -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4008 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From usotsuki at buric.co Mon Feb 4 11:00:47 2019 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 20:00:47 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: <20190204003224.GQ6420@mcvoy.com> References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> <20190204003224.GQ6420@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, Larry McVoy wrote: > It's what you are used to. I haven't tried it but apparently Microsoft > has implemented the Linux syscall layer that you can just drop a distro > on top of windows and the binaries work. I've used it with Debian. Add an X server and PulseAudio server on the Windows side and it's really not bad. -uso. From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Mon Feb 4 11:09:17 2019 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 20:09:17 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Happy Birthday Ken Thompson! Message-ID: <201902040109.x1419HqH087769@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > without those two we'd all be running M$ Windoze Apropos of which, I complained to Walter Isaacson about his writing them out of "The Innovators"--Turing Award, National Medal of Technology, Japan Prize and all. I suppose I should not be surprised that he didn't deign to answer. Doug From paul.winalski at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 12:03:04 2019 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 21:03:04 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: On 2/3/19, Clem Cole wrote: > > IBM CP-DOS -> OS/2 --\ > \ > ---> NT OS-2 -> NT/WIN ....... > Today's Windows > CMU Mach --\ / > ---> Mica -/ > DEC VMS --/ I think that bottom part should read: CMU Mach --\ ---> VAXeln --> Mica DEC VMS --/ Cutler took the concept of a microkernel from CMU Mach and combined it with design concepts he had used in VMS to create a real-time OS for the VAX called VAXeln. DEC had several proposed machine architectures for a RISC-based successor to VAX. The one from Cutler's DECwest was called PRISM. Mica was the microkernel-based OS for PRISM. The intent was to build VMS and UNIX personality layers on top of the Mica microkernel. PRISM was cancelled in favor of Alpha, and that led to Cutler's departure for Microsoft. > When Cutler did Mica and then NT OS-2 he did not care what the user > interface was. Mica was a pure uk and NT OS-2 was also, but by the time of > the product it became a hybrid. Putting a different user interface, be it > DOS, OS/2, Unix, VMS or Windows was in the kernel design. As with Mica the original design was for various personality modules (DOS, OS/2, Unix, whatever) to be layered on top of the microkernel. The NT microkernel internals looked very familiar to VMS weenies such as I. Cutler was able to resist attempts to smear the layers by putting hooks etc. in the microkernel, but over time the clean break between the kernel and Windows has been muddied. CMU Mach was the microkernel for Jobs's NeXT OS, and with BSD Unix layered on top, was the basis for Apple's OS X. OS X still uses the Mach object file format, MACH-O. -Paul W. From paul.winalski at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 12:16:37 2019 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 21:16:37 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2/3/19, Clem Cole wrote: > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:14 PM Henry Bent wrote: > >> This code was apparently so pervasive and long-lived that the GNU Fortran >> compiler added compatibility for DEC extensions less than two years ago, >> in >> version 7. There must be enough demand for DEC's additions to have made >> it >> worthwhile. >> > Truth is most of the important ones went into Fortran-90 if I understand it > correctly (I'd trust Paul W.s comments if he knows). Again, I'm not a > compiler guy, but I've been known to eat lunch with a few of them :-) The de facto standard for Fortran in the 1970s was IBM Fortran IV. All of the important academic packages, both in the physical sciences and the stats packages (SPSS, BMDP, etc.) used in Economics, Psychology, Sociology, etc., were written in Fortran IV. The ANSI (later ISO) standards committee was more or less an irrelevancy. Vendors added their own proprietary extensions to Fortran IV. With the VAX DEC was able to supplant IBM in the educational/research marketplace by offering mainframe-level performance at a fraction of the IBM price. VAX Fortran, and its extensions to Fortran IV, thus became the new de facto standard in the education/research market in the early 1980s. VAX Fortran did eventually implement all of the features of Fortran 77, but for quite a long time we didn't bother implementing the missing pieces because there was no market demand for them. As Clem said, the important VAX Fortran extensions to Fortran IV have over time made their way into the ISO standard. -Paul W. From wkt at tuhs.org Mon Feb 4 12:23:32 2019 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 12:23:32 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> > So I don't know what counts as 'signal' on this list versus 'noise', > but I'd much rather read a million posts about OSI, CLNP and other > networks – a history lesson and information that's been getting scarce > in general – than kill/mute yet another thread full of generic "boo M$ > Windoze" drivel that I can already find on Reddit. Warren's protocol for off-topic material: let it slide for a day or two, then politely ask people to move it to the COFF list when it doesn't veer back to the Unix direction :-) Cheers, Warren From lm at mcvoy.com Mon Feb 4 12:37:15 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 18:37:15 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> Message-ID: <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 12:23:32PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote: > > So I don't know what counts as 'signal' on this list versus 'noise', > > but I'd much rather read a million posts about OSI, CLNP and other > > networks ??? a history lesson and information that's been getting scarce > > in general ??? than kill/mute yet another thread full of generic "boo M$ > > Windoze" drivel that I can already find on Reddit. > > Warren's protocol for off-topic material: let it slide for a day or two, > then politely ask people to move it to the COFF list when it doesn't > veer back to the Unix direction :-) And I must say you have done a great job of handling stuff going off course. I don't mind a little wander, this list reminds me a lot of Usenet around 1985 or so. Not a ton of people but most are pretty darn interesting. So your policy of letting it wander a bit seems just right to me, yeah the Jimmy Page guitar thing was way off track but it wound down fairly quickly. I agree completely with Mantas' comment about "drivel that I can already find on Reddit." The technical content level for programmers on reddit seems pretty lame. Though the one that really puzzles me is https://news.ycombinator.com/ That place is called "Hacker news" and the level of decent hacker content is amazingly low. Once in a while there would stuff like the Netflix writeup of how they got to 200Gbit/sec on a one core server (with the data coming up to user space to be encrypted, and doing it with 1Mb/s per socket, that's 200,000 sockets running in parallel). That was an amazingly impressive accomplishment and the sort of thing I'd like to see on Hacker news but I rarely do. As in once every 10 years or so. I stopped reading it. So go you, Warren. You have the right touch for the list and while I hope you continue to do so for decades, maybe think about picking out someone who seems like a younger you as a backup. I like this list a lot. Cheers all, --lm From bakul at bitblocks.com Mon Feb 4 12:57:53 2019 From: bakul at bitblocks.com (Bakul Shah) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 18:57:53 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> On Feb 3, 2019, at 6:37 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > And I must say you have done a great job of handling stuff going off > course. I don't mind a little wander, this list reminds me a lot of > Usenet around 1985 or so. Not a ton of people but most are pretty > darn interesting. So your policy of letting it wander a bit seems > just right to me, yeah the Jimmy Page guitar thing was way off track > but it wound down fairly quickly. I have said this before (or at least thought it!) but I, and I suspect some others, think of TUHS much like comp.unix.wizards of the old. Though Jimmy >PAGE< would certainly fit TUHS :-) From imp at bsdimp.com Mon Feb 4 13:26:10 2019 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 20:26:10 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 7:55 PM Bakul Shah On Feb 3, 2019, at 6:37 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > > And I must say you have done a great job of handling stuff going off > > course. I don't mind a little wander, this list reminds me a lot of > > Usenet around 1985 or so. Not a ton of people but most are pretty > > darn interesting. So your policy of letting it wander a bit seems > > just right to me, yeah the Jimmy Page guitar thing was way off track > > but it wound down fairly quickly. > > I have said this before (or at least thought it!) but I, and I > suspect some others, think of TUHS much like comp.unix.wizards > of the old. > > Though Jimmy >PAGE< would certainly fit TUHS :-) > So would Jimmy SWAP. Warner > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Mon Feb 4 13:26:27 2019 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 22:26:27 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 9:55 PM Bakul Shah wrote: > Though Jimmy >PAGE< would certainly fit TUHS :-) > Well, I guess it depends on the SIZE of Jimmy Page. And...Does he go to 11? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBiJ-K0IpDA - Dan C. (I'm sorry; I know I really shouldn't but Spinal Tap is such a cultural reference amongst Unix people....) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com Mon Feb 4 13:57:40 2019 From: jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 03:57:40 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: Indeed, without Unix there wouldn't have been the same rise of Mach, or the drive to make a portable VMS, as there wouldn't be a C either. Many of the leaked internal tools to build NT reflect that all the back office stuff was on Xenix and VMS.  Just as you can find mentions of emacs in the makefiles for NT, and how their life would be in jeopardy for changing the tab indentions. Unix had such an incredible impact on the market that without it everything would be different. Without Xenix micros would have continued to be snubbed by the high end crowd depriving that critical jump from machines that cost more than a large house to personal space. What would be the portable OS to rule them all?  TripOS is the best I can imagine.  BCPL everywhere. Get Outlook for Android On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:34 AM +0800, "Clem Cole" wrote: On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 5:08 PM Dave Horsfall wrote: My vague (and rough) recollection is CP/M -> DOS -> Windows. "Windows" == Win95 -- which was a user Interface spec the kernel died IBM CP-DOS -> OS/2 --\                                       \                                         ---> NT OS-2 -> NT/WIN .......   Today's WindowsCMU Mach --\                  /                      ---> Mica -/DEC VMS   --/ When Cutler did Mica and then NT OS-2 he did not care what the user interface was.  Mica was a pure uk and NT OS-2 was also, but by the time of the product it became a hybrid.   Putting a different user interface, be it DOS, OS/2, Unix, VMS or Windows was in the kernel design. Clemᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at horsfall.org Mon Feb 4 14:55:37 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:55:37 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, Bakul Shah wrote: > I have said this before (or at least thought it!) but I, and I suspect > some others, think of TUHS much like comp.unix.wizards of the old. That's pretty much how I think of it (until the filthy spammers trashed the joint, of course, there being no authentication in those days, because there was no need for it; if there was a problem child, you merely picked up the phone or sent a short email to the site admin: end of problem[*]). > Though Jimmy >PAGE< would certainly fit TUHS :-) Well done, sir :-) Perhaps we need a list for Old-Unix-Lovers-Into-Rock? [*] With exceptions; one ISP merely had an auto-responder on their abuse address ("He's gone"), but that's OT (ask me privately, if anyone cares). -- Dave, the anti-spammer Unix-loving ageing hippie From jon at fourwinds.com Mon Feb 4 16:20:31 2019 From: jon at fourwinds.com (Jon Steinhart) Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2019 22:20:31 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Signal/noise In-Reply-To: <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190204022332.GA14788@minnie.tuhs.org> <20190204023715.GU6420@mcvoy.com> <1ACB2A2B-FE88-42E4-B08A-BDA6D074D902@bitblocks.com> Message-ID: <201902040620.x146KVei010122@darkstar.fourwinds.com> Bakul Shah writes: > On Feb 3, 2019, at 6:37 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > > > And I must say you have done a great job of handling stuff going off > > course. I don't mind a little wander, this list reminds me a lot of > > Usenet around 1985 or so. Not a ton of people but most are pretty > > darn interesting. So your policy of letting it wander a bit seems > > just right to me, yeah the Jimmy Page guitar thing was way off track > > but it wound down fairly quickly. > > I have said this before (or at least thought it!) but I, and I > suspect some others, think of TUHS much like comp.unix.wizards > of the old. > > Though Jimmy >PAGE< would certainly fit TUHS :-) Yeah, I was really wanting the poster of George Goebels playing his two-headed VAX. From peter at rulingia.com Mon Feb 4 16:25:22 2019 From: peter at rulingia.com (Peter Jeremy) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 17:25:22 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: <20190204062522.GA78675@server.rulingia.com> On 2019-Feb-03 15:58:39 -0500, Clem Cole wrote: >Portability was designed as an >>import<< idea, and they tried to keep you >from exporting by getting you to use 'value add.' This is definitely the approach used by FSF/GNU - witness gcc and bash. On 2019-Feb-04 09:07:52 +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >And yes, I know about POSIX compatibility, but so is Linux, and it's >different enough from Unix to be damned annoying. IMO, POSIX wouldn't exist without Unix. On 2019-Feb-04 03:57:40 +0000, Jason Stevens wrote: >What would be the portable OS to rule them all?  TripOS is the best I can imagine.  BCPL everywhere. That was my thought as well, though TripOS started in 1976 so it's likely that the development team were aware of Unix and make have taken some of its ideas onboard. That said, Unix was not portable to start with. I think that the important parts were that the source was readily available within academia, it was written in a high level language and it was small enough to be understood. -- Peter Jeremy -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 963 bytes Desc: not available URL: From usotsuki at buric.co Mon Feb 4 17:59:03 2019 From: usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:59:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: <20190204062522.GA78675@server.rulingia.com> References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> <20190204062522.GA78675@server.rulingia.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2019-Feb-03 15:58:39 -0500, Clem Cole wrote: >> Portability was designed as an >>import<< idea, and they tried to keep you >> from exporting by getting you to use 'value add.' > > This is definitely the approach used by FSF/GNU - witness gcc and bash. I think the term is "Embrace, Extend, Exterminate" -uso. From mcmer-tuhs at tor.at Mon Feb 4 19:33:50 2019 From: mcmer-tuhs at tor.at (Marcus MERIGHI) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:33:50 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20190204093350.GC47448@tor.at> Hello, clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole), 2019.02.03 (Sun) 23:20 (CET): > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 4:10 PM Cág wrote: > > > I wish I could say that. I feel like nobody needs Fortran anymore, and > > my skills are being wasted. > > > FYI - the last time I saw the numbers, about 75-85% of the production at > CERN was Fortran. This is very similar to the USA's high energy labs. I > have not seen the numbers of the Darmstadt European space folks, but I > would not be surprised if they are much different than NASA's. That was a Sven Pruefer (Prüfer) mentions that Fortran is in heavy use at German Space Operations Center: https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9923-space_ops_101#t=735 Marcus From mutiny.mutiny at india.com Mon Feb 4 19:43:24 2019 From: mutiny.mutiny at india.com (Donald ODona) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:43:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <95250783.149661.1549273404898.JavaMail.tomcat@india-live-be03> Ken invented *NIX(up to edition 3 he wrote 100% of the sources), ed(before regexp qed), b (and therefore most of c). Ken is one of the most underrated persons of all. I hope the day will come, humankind will show respect ! At 3 Feb 2019 20:24:34 +0000 (+00:00) from Dave Horsfall : > Co-inventor of Unix, he was born on this day in 1943. Just think: without > those two, we'd all be running M$ Windoze and thinking that it's wonderful (I > know, it's an exaggeration, but think about it). > > -- Dave From steffen at sdaoden.eu Mon Feb 4 22:32:59 2019 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 13:32:59 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] Commercial UNIX was other stuff before In-Reply-To: <20190204093350.GC47448@tor.at> References: <20190204093350.GC47448@tor.at> Message-ID: <20190204123259.4purQ%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Marcus MERIGHI wrote in <20190204093350.GC47448 at tor.at>: |Hello, | |clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole), 2019.02.03 (Sun) 23:20 (CET): |> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 4:10 PM Cág wrote: |> |>> I wish I could say that. I feel like nobody needs Fortran anymore, and |>> my skills are being wasted. |>> |> FYI - the last time I saw the numbers, about 75-85% of the production at |> CERN was Fortran. This is very similar to the USA's high energy labs. I |> have not seen the numbers of the Darmstadt European space folks, but I The much larger site with "actual science" in it is located in Oberpfaffenhofen, Bavaria. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) From dave at horsfall.org Tue Feb 5 01:04:25 2019 From: dave at horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 02:04:25 +1100 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> <20190204062522.GA78675@server.rulingia.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Steve Nickolas wrote: > I think the term is "Embrace, Extend, Exterminate" I heard it as "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish"; witness their attempt to take over PPP (which eventually had to accommodate their "extensions"), and Usenet before that, which thankfully failed, because they wanted a central authority. How the hell do you think that Usenet flourished? It was an utter anarchy, that's why! And the marketoid control-freaks hated it... If you look carefully at PPP, you will see certain negotiations which ∆ simply don't belong at that level (DNS etc). Cough MS/CHAP cough... If you want to talk PPP to an NT server, well, you'd better be prepared to accommodate their "extensions". And to those bods who think we're bashing M$, well, there might be a damned good reason for it (some of us here go back a *long* time, so you might have to brush up on your history, and grow out of your short pants). -- Dave, who used to be known as "Fowler Ware" on aus.flame From toby at telegraphics.com.au Tue Feb 5 01:39:09 2019 From: toby at telegraphics.com.au (Toby Thain) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:39:09 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> <20190204062522.GA78675@server.rulingia.com> Message-ID: On 2019-02-04 2:59 AM, Steve Nickolas wrote: > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Peter Jeremy wrote: > >> On 2019-Feb-03 15:58:39 -0500, Clem Cole wrote: >>> Portability was designed as an >>import<< idea, and they tried to >>> keep you >>> from exporting by getting you to use 'value add.' >> >> This is definitely the approach used by FSF/GNU - witness gcc and bash. > > I think the term is "Embrace, Extend, Exterminate" Never heard that one. A Dalek would have a lot of trouble with the Embrace part. > > -uso. > From aek at bitsavers.org Tue Feb 5 03:08:37 2019 From: aek at bitsavers.org (Al Kossow) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 09:08:37 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: References: <20190203213907.GA6142@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: <80270aa5-090d-445a-0476-51bb014eb791@bitsavers.org> On 2/3/19 7:57 PM, Jason Stevens wrote: > What would be the portable OS to rule them all? TOPS-20 re-written in Mesa That should make some people's heads explode. The technology was there.. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Tue Feb 5 06:29:47 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:29:47 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Grant Taylor > I'm not quite sure what you mean by naming a node vs network interface. Does one name (in the generic high-level sense of the term 'name'; e.g. an 'address' is a name for a unit of main memory) apply to the node (host) no matter how many interfaces it has, or where it is/moves in the network? If so, that name names the node. If not... > But I do know for a fact that in IPv4, IP addresses belonged to the > system. No. Multi-homed hosts in IPv4 had multiple addresses. (There are all sorts of kludges out there now, e.g. a single IP address shared by a pool of servers, precisely because the set of entity classes in IPvN - hosts, interfaces, etc - and namespaces for them were not rich enough for the things that people actually wanted to do - e.g. have a pool of servers.) Ignore what term(s) anyone uses, and apply the 'quack/walk' test - how is it used, and what can it do? > I don't understand what you mean by using "names" for "path selection". Names (in the generic sense above) used by the path selection mechanism (routing protocols do path selection). > That's probably why I don't understand how routes are allocated by a > naming authority. They aren't. But the path selection system can't aggregate information (e.g. routes) about multiple connected entities into a single item (to make the path selection scale, in a large network like the Internet) if the names the path selection system uses for them (i.e. addresses, NSAP's, whatever) are allocated by several different naming authorities, and thus bear no relationship to one another. E.g. if my house's street address is 123 North Street, and the house next door's address is 456 South Street, and 124 North Street is on the other side of town, maps (i.e. the data used by a path selection algorithm to decide how to get from A to B in the road network) aren't going to be very compact. Noel From cbbrowne at gmail.com Tue Feb 5 06:53:27 2019 From: cbbrowne at gmail.com (Christopher Browne) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 15:53:27 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Software Archeology: QED Message-ID: Sorry to drop in on the thread a bit late, and, strictly speaking, not (according to headers) connected to the thread; I am well acquainted with David Tilbrook, who is sadly not doing too well; it is not surprising that Leah Neukirchen was unable to get a hold of him as he hasn't been using email for some number of years > 1, and is definitely not programming. Hugh Redelmeier and I are looking into trying to do some preservation of his QEF toolset that included the QED port. Neither Hugh nor I are ourselves QED users; I'm about 30 years into my Emacs learning curve, albeit using Remacs (the Rust implementation) lately, while Hugh maintains JOVE to the extent to which it remains maintained. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/pub/hugh/jove-dev/ -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" From bakul at bitblocks.com Tue Feb 5 07:13:17 2019 From: bakul at bitblocks.com (Bakul Shah) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 13:13:17 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <2CFCAF1D-9EEC-43EB-AEC5-D58C30C5D923@bitblocks.com> On Feb 4, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> From: Grant Taylor > >> I'm not quite sure what you mean by naming a node vs network interface. > > Does one name (in the generic high-level sense of the term 'name'; e.g. an > 'address' is a name for a unit of main memory) apply to the node (host) no > matter how many interfaces it has, or where it is/moves in the network? If so, > that name names the node. If not... Xerox Network System (XNS) also had this property. A node had a unique 48 bit address and each network had a unique 32 bit address. Absolute host numbering meant you could move a host to another network easily. IDP packet layout: {checksum(2), length(2), transport ctl(1), packet type(1), dst net(4), dst host(6), dst socket(2), src net(4), src host(6), src socket(2), transport data(0 to 456), pad(0 to 1 byte) } IDP is @layer 3, same as IPv4 or IPv6. From clemc at ccc.com Tue Feb 5 07:34:16 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 16:34:16 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <2CFCAF1D-9EEC-43EB-AEC5-D58C30C5D923@bitblocks.com> References: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <2CFCAF1D-9EEC-43EB-AEC5-D58C30C5D923@bitblocks.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:23 PM Bakul Shah wrote: > On Feb 4, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > >> From: Grant Taylor > > > >> I'm not quite sure what you mean by naming a node vs network interface. > > > > Does one name (in the generic high-level sense of the term 'name'; e.g. > an > > 'address' is a name for a unit of main memory) apply to the node (host) > no > > matter how many interfaces it has, or where it is/moves in the network? > If so, > > that name names the node. If not... > > Xerox Network System (XNS) also had this property. A node had a > unique 48 bit address and each network had a unique 32 bit address. > Absolute host numbering meant you could move a host to another > network easily. IDP packet layout > Yeah, at the time, MetCalfe had the advantage of seeing what NCP and IP had already learned. We used to say in hindsight, Ethernet had too many address bits and IP not enough. So Noel and team invented ARP ;-) Clem ᐧ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Tue Feb 5 09:42:08 2019 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 18:42:08 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! Message-ID: <201902042342.x14Ng8Q2023252@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> > Ken wrote ... ed(before regexp ed) Actually Ken wrote a regexp qed (for Multics) before he wrote ed. He wrote about it here, before the birth of Unix: Programming Techniques: Regular expression search algorithm Ken Thompson June 1968 Communications of the ACM: Volume 11 Issue 6, June 1968 This is the nondetermistic regexp recognizer that's been used ever since. Amusingly a reviewer for Computing Reviews panned the article on the grounds that everybody already knew how to write a deterministic recognizer that runs in linear time. There's no use for this slower program. What the reviewer failed to observe is that it may take time exponential in the size of the regexp (and ditto for space) to make such a recognizer. In real life for a one-shot recognizer that can easily be the dominant cost. The problem of exponential construction time arose in Al Aho's egrep. I was an early adopter--for the calendar(1) daemon. The daemon generated a date recognizer that accepted most any (American style) date. The regular expresssions were a couple of hundred bytes long, full of alternations. Aho was chagrinned to learn that it took about 30 seconds to make a recognizer that would be used for less than a second. That led Al to the wonderful invention of a lazily-constructed recognizer that would only construct the states that were actually visited during recognition. At last a really linear-time algorithm! This is one of my favorite examples of the synergy of having sytems builders and theoreticians together in one small department. Doug From lm at mcvoy.com Tue Feb 5 13:49:28 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:49:28 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Ken Thompson! In-Reply-To: <201902042342.x14Ng8Q2023252@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201902042342.x14Ng8Q2023252@coolidge.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20190205034928.GK6420@mcvoy.com> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 06:42:08PM -0500, Doug McIlroy wrote: > This is one of my favorite examples of the synergy of having > sytems builders and theoreticians together in one small > department. Amen to that. One of my profs was Udi Manber, a super deep theory guy. I dragged him into systems and he did great. From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Wed Feb 6 04:01:23 2019 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 11:01:23 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <896294eb-44c0-4fed-0436-37f087611c59@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> On 02/04/2019 01:29 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > Does one name (in the generic high-level sense of the term 'name'; > e.g. an 'address' is a name for a unit of main memory) apply to the node > (host) no matter how many interfaces it has, or where it is/moves in > the network? If so, that name names the node. If not... The vagaries of multi-homed hosts make the answer more complicated. I generally think that a host name applies to the host, no matter how many interfaces it has, or where it is / moves in the network. But that's the "host name". There are other names, like service names, that apply to a service and can (re)pointed to any desired back end host name at any given time. I usually think that host names should resolve to all IPs that are bound to a host. I then rely on the DNS server to apply some optimization when possible about which IP is returned first based on the client's IP. I also depend on clients preferring IPs in the directly attached network segment(s). > No. Multi-homed hosts in IPv4 had multiple addresses. (There are all sorts > of kludges out there now, e.g. a single IP address shared by a pool of > servers, precisely because the set of entity classes in IPvN - hosts, > interfaces, etc - and namespaces for them were not rich enough for the > things that people actually wanted to do - e.g. have a pool of servers.) Please allow me to clarify. First, I'm excluding load balancers or similar techniques that spread an IP out across multiple back end servers. Save for saying that I'd argue that such an IP belongs to the load balancer, not the back end server. That aside. Multi-homed IPv4 hosts (all that I've tested) usually allow traffic to a local IP to come in on any interface, even if it's not the interface that the IPv4 address is bound to. Take the following host: +---+ +-----------------+ +---+ | A +---+ eth0 B eth1 +---+ C | +---+ +-----------------+ +---+ Even if B has IPv4 forwarding disabled, A will very likely be able to talk to B via the IPv4 address bound to eth1. Likewise C can talk to B using the IPv4 address bound to eth0. My understanding is that IPv6 changes this paredigm to be explicitly the opposite. If B has IPv6 forwarding disabled, A can't talk to B via the IPv6 address bound to eth1. Nor can C talk to B via the IPv6 address bound to eth0. That's why I was saying that the IPv4 addresses on eth0 and eth1 belonged to the OS running on B, not the specific interfaces. > Ignore what term(s) anyone uses, and apply the 'quack/walk' test - > how is it used, and what can it do? I will have to test this when time permits. But the above matches how I remember the duck quacking and walking. > Names (in the generic sense above) used by the path selection mechanism > (routing protocols do path selection). > > They aren't. But the path selection system can't aggregate information > (e.g. routes) about multiple connected entities into a single item (to > make the path selection scale, in a large network like the Internet) > if the names the path selection system uses for them (i.e. addresses, > NSAP's, whatever) are allocated by several different naming authorities, > and thus bear no relationship to one another. > > E.g. if my house's street address is 123 North Street, and the house next > door's address is 456 South Street, and 124 North Street is on the other > side of town, maps (i.e. the data used by a path selection algorithm to > decide how to get from A to B in the road network) aren't going to be > very compact. Agreed. The number of routes / prefixes and the paths to get to them has been exploding for quite a while now. I think the IPv4 Default Free Zone is approaching 800,000 routes / paths. -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4008 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org Wed Feb 6 08:14:22 2019 From: dfawcus+lists-tuhs at employees.org (Derek Fawcus) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 22:14:22 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] IP weak/strong host model (was Re: OSI stack (Was: Posters)) In-Reply-To: <896294eb-44c0-4fed-0436-37f087611c59@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> References: <20190204202947.69A4818C082@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <896294eb-44c0-4fed-0436-37f087611c59@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: <20190205221422.GA24750@bugle.employees.org> On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 11:01:23AM -0700, Grant Taylor via TUHS wrote: > > Multi-homed IPv4 hosts (all that I've tested) usually allow traffic to a > local IP to come in on any interface, even if it's not the interface > that the IPv4 address is bound to. > > Take the following host: > > +---+ +-----------------+ +---+ > | A +---+ eth0 B eth1 +---+ C | > +---+ +-----------------+ +---+ > > Even if B has IPv4 forwarding disabled, A will very likely be able to > talk to B via the IPv4 address bound to eth1. Likewise C can talk to B > using the IPv4 address bound to eth0. This is generally referred to as the weak host model (or End System), as opposed to the strong host model. See RFC 1122, sect 3.3.4.2. > My understanding is that IPv6 changes this paredigm to be explicitly the > opposite. If B has IPv6 forwarding disabled, A can't talk to B via the > IPv6 address bound to eth1. Nor can C talk to B via the IPv6 address > bound to eth0. That is not my understanding. Either protocol can use either model in a given system. In theory it could even differ depending upon configurations. Most systems I've worked on have used the weak model, but that is largely, because they were routers, and looked up destinations in a FIB (or RIB) before (or as well as) considering interface addresses. Some OS's I've used followed the weak scheme, some followed the strong scheme. The following suggests that Linux defaults to weak, and that BSDs default to strong; I've never tested that BSD case, but from memory OSX (xnu) defaults to weak. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/258810/linux-source-routing-strong-end-system-model-strong-host-model DF From imp at bsdimp.com Thu Feb 7 03:16:24 2019 From: imp at bsdimp.com (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 10:16:24 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 8:43 PM Warner Losh wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 8:03 AM Noel Chiappa >> > From: Warner Losh >> >> > a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't >> > become standard, woof!) >> >> Why? >> > > Posters like this :). OSI was massively over specified... > oops. Hit the list limit. Posters like this: https://people.freebsd.org/~imp/20190203_215836.jpg which show just how over-specified it was. I also worked at The Wollongong Group back in the early 90's and it was a total dog on the SysV 386 machines that we were trying to demo it on. A total and unbelievable PITA to set it up, and crappy performance once we got it going. Almost bad enough that we didn't show it at the trade show we were going to.... And that was just the lower layers of the stack plus basic name service. x.400 email addresses were also somewhat overly verbose. In many ways, it was a classic second system effect because they were trying to fix everything they thought was wrong with TCP/IP at the time without really, truly knowing the differences between actual problems and mere annoyances and how to properly weight the severity of the issue in coming up with their solutions. So x.400 vs smtp mail addresses: "G=Warner;S=Losh;O=WarnerLoshConsulting;PRMD=bsdimp;A=comcast;C=us" vis " imp at bsdimp.com" (assuming I got all the weird bits of the x.400 address right, it's been a long time and google had no good examples on the first page I could just steal...) The x.400 addresses were so unwieldy that a directory service was added on top of them x.500, which was every bit as baroque IIRC. TP4 might not have been that bad, but all the stuff above it was kinda crazy... Warner -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Thu Feb 7 03:23:08 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 09:23:08 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20190206172308.GI20698@mcvoy.com> On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:16:24AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > In many ways, it was a > classic second system effect because they were trying to fix everything > they thought was wrong with TCP/IP at the time without really, truly > knowing the differences between actual problems and mere annoyances and how > to properly weight the severity of the issue in coming up with their > solutions. Perfectly stated. From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Feb 7 03:49:13 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 12:49:13 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:16:24AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > In many ways, it was a classic second system effect because they were > trying to fix everything they thought was wrong with TCP/IP at the time I'm not sure this part is accurate: the two efforts were contemporaneous; and my impression was they were trying to design the next step in networking, based on _their own_ analysis of what was needed. > without really, truly knowing the differences between actual problems > and mere annoyances and how to properly weight the severity of the issue > in coming up with their solutions. This is I think true, but then again, TCP/IP fell into some of those holes too: fragmentation for one (although the issue there was unforseen problems in doing it, not so much in it not being a real issue), all the 'unused' fields in the IP and TCP headers for things that never got really got used/implemented (Type of Service, Urgent, etc). ` Noel From paul.winalski at gmail.com Thu Feb 7 04:22:08 2019 From: paul.winalski at gmail.com (Paul Winalski) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 13:22:08 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On 2/6/19, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:16:24AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > > In many ways, it was a classic second system effect because they were > > trying to fix everything they thought was wrong with TCP/IP at the time > > I'm not sure this part is accurate: the two efforts were contemporaneous; and > my impression was they were trying to design the next step in networking, based > on _their own_ analysis of what was needed. That's my recollection as well. The OSI effort was dominated by the European telcos, nearly all of which were government-run monopolies. They were as much (if not more) interested in protecting their own turf as in developing the next step in networking. A lot of the complexity came from the desire to be everything to everybody. As is often the case, the result was being nothing to nobody. Phase V of DEC's networking product (DECnet) supported X.25 as an alternative to DEC's proprietary transport/routing layer. I had to install this on one of our VAXen so we could test DECmail, our forthcoming X.400 product. I remember X.25 being excessively complicated and a bear to set up compared to Phase IV DECnet (the proprietary protocol stack). -Paul W. From kevin.bowling at kev009.com Thu Feb 7 06:47:15 2019 From: kevin.bowling at kev009.com (Kevin Bowling) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 13:47:15 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: At risk of inciting some inflammation I think TCP was a success because of BSD/UNIX rather than its own merits. Moving the stack into the kernel, therefore not requiring elaborate external communications controllers (like IBM's VTAM, predecessors, and other vendor networking approaches that existed since the '60s), and piggybacking on the success of UNIX and then "open systems" cemented victory. It has basically been made to work at scale, the same way gasoline engines have been made to work in automobiles. There were protocols that fit better in the era like DeltaT with a simpler state machine and connection handling. Then there was a mad dash of protocol development in the mid to late ‘80s that were measured by various metrics to outperform TCP in practical and theoretical space. Some of these seemed quite nice like XTP and are still in use in niche defense applications. Positive, rather than negative acknowledgement has aged well as computers got more powerful (the sender can pretty well predict loss when it hasn't gotten an ACK back and opportunistically retransmit). But RF people do weird things that violate end to end principle on cable modems and radios to try and minimize transmissions. One thing I think that is missing in my contemporary modern software developers is a willingness to dig down and solve problems at the right level. People do clownish things like write overlay filesystems in garbage collected languages. Google's QUIC is a fine example of foolishness. I am mortified that is genuinely being considered for the HTTP 3 standard. But I guess we've entered the era where enough people have retired that the lower layers are approached with mysticism and deemed unable and unsuitable to change. So the layering will continue until eventually things topple over like the garbage pile in the movie Idiocracy. Since the discussion meandered to the distinction of path selection/routing.. for provider level networks, label switching to this day makes a lot more sense IMO.. figure out a path virtual circuit that can cut through each hop with a small flow table instead of trying to coagulate, propagate routes from a massive address space that has to fit in an expensive CAM and buffer and forward packets at each hop. Regards, Kevin On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 10:49 AM Noel Chiappa wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:16:24AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > > In many ways, it was a classic second system effect because they were > > trying to fix everything they thought was wrong with TCP/IP at the > time > > I'm not sure this part is accurate: the two efforts were contemporaneous; > and > my impression was they were trying to design the next step in networking, > based > on _their own_ analysis of what was needed. > > > without really, truly knowing the differences between actual problems > > and mere annoyances and how to properly weight the severity of the > issue > > in coming up with their solutions. > > This is I think true, but then again, TCP/IP fell into some of those holes > too: fragmentation for one (although the issue there was unforseen > problems in > doing it, not so much in it not being a real issue), all the 'unused' > fields > in the IP and TCP headers for things that never got really got > used/implemented (Type of Service, Urgent, etc). > > ` Noel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kevin.bowling at kev009.com Thu Feb 7 08:58:38 2019 From: kevin.bowling at kev009.com (Kevin Bowling) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 15:58:38 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] more/BSD Message-ID: I have a hungry hp300. Does anyone have Mt Xinu's creation, more/BSD, archived? Regards, Kevin From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Feb 7 09:18:52 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 18:18:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190206231852.5B33018C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Kevin Bowling > I think TCP was a success because of BSD/UNIX rather than its own > merits. Nope. The principle reason for TCP/IP's success was that it got there first, and established a user community first. That advantage then fed back, to increase the lead. Communication protocols aren't like editors/OS's/yadda-yadda. E.g. I use Epsilon - but the fact that few others do isn't a problem/issue for me. On the other hand, if I designed, implemented and personally adopted the world's best communication protocol... so what? There'd be nobody to talk to. That's just _one_ of the ways that communication systems are fundamentally different from other information systems. Noel From ggm at algebras.org Thu Feb 7 09:37:57 2019 From: ggm at algebras.org (George Michaelson) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 09:37:57 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: References: <20190203150237.A869418C07A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Alive and well in LDAP as a syntactic form. So, strongly alive in functional systems worldwide, and in X.509 certificates. As a typed entity in email addresses? NOPE. -G On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 3:17 AM Warner Losh wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 8:43 PM Warner Losh wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 8:03 AM Noel Chiappa >> >>> > From: Warner Losh >>> >>> > a bunch of OSI/ISO network stack posters (thank goodness that didn't >>> > become standard, woof!) >>> >>> Why? >> >> >> Posters like this :). OSI was massively over specified... > > > oops. Hit the list limit. > > Posters like this: > > https://people.freebsd.org/~imp/20190203_215836.jpg > > which show just how over-specified it was. I also worked at The Wollongong Group back in the early 90's and it was a total dog on the SysV 386 machines that we were trying to demo it on. A total and unbelievable PITA to set it up, and crappy performance once we got it going. Almost bad enough that we didn't show it at the trade show we were going to.... And that was just the lower layers of the stack plus basic name service. x.400 email addresses were also somewhat overly verbose. In many ways, it was a classic second system effect because they were trying to fix everything they thought was wrong with TCP/IP at the time without really, truly knowing the differences between actual problems and mere annoyances and how to properly weight the severity of the issue in coming up with their solutions. > > So x.400 vs smtp mail addresses: "G=Warner;S=Losh;O=WarnerLoshConsulting;PRMD=bsdimp;A=comcast;C=us" vis "imp at bsdimp.com" > > (assuming I got all the weird bits of the x.400 address right, it's been a long time and google had no good examples on the first page I could just steal...) The x.400 addresses were so unwieldy that a directory service was added on top of them x.500, which was every bit as baroque IIRC. > > TP4 might not have been that bad, but all the stuff above it was kinda crazy... > > Warner From kevin.bowling at kev009.com Thu Feb 7 09:40:24 2019 From: kevin.bowling at kev009.com (Kevin Bowling) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:40:24 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190206231852.5B33018C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190206231852.5B33018C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Seems like a case of winners write the history books. There were corporate and public access networks long before TCP was set in stone as a dominant protocol. Most F500 were interchanging on SNA into the 1990s. And access networks like Tymnet, etc to talk to others. TCP, coupled with the rise of UNIX and the free wheel sharing of BSD code, are what made the people to talk to. On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:19 PM Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > From: Kevin Bowling > > > I think TCP was a success because of BSD/UNIX rather than its own > > merits. > > Nope. The principle reason for TCP/IP's success was that it got there first, > and established a user community first. That advantage then fed back, to > increase the lead. > > Communication protocols aren't like editors/OS's/yadda-yadda. E.g. I use > Epsilon - but the fact that few others do isn't a problem/issue for me. On the > other hand, if I designed, implemented and personally adopted the world's best > communication protocol... so what? There'd be nobody to talk to. > > That's just _one_ of the ways that communication systems are fundamentally > different from other information systems. > > Noel From lm at mcvoy.com Thu Feb 7 09:52:57 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 15:52:57 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: References: <20190206231852.5B33018C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20190206235257.GU20698@mcvoy.com> On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 04:40:24PM -0700, Kevin Bowling wrote: > Seems like a case of winners write the history books. There were > corporate and public access networks long before TCP was set in stone > as a dominant protocol. Most F500 were interchanging on SNA into the > 1990s. And access networks like Tymnet, etc to talk to others. Yeah, but those were all tied to some vendor. TCP/IP was the first wide spread networking stack that you could get from a pile of different vendors, Sun, Dec, SGI, IBM's AIX, every kernel supported it. System V was late to the party, Lachman bought the rights to Convergent's STREAMs based TCP/IP stack and had a tidy business for a while selling that stack to lots of places. It was an awful stack, I know because I ported it to a super computer and then to SCO's UNIX. When Sun switched to a System Vr4 kernel, they bought it in some crazy bad deal and tried to use it in Solaris. That lead to the tcp latency benchmark in lmbench because Oracle's clustered database ran like shit on Slowaris and I traced it down to their distributed lock manager and then whittled that code down to lat_tcp.c. Sun eventually dumped that stack and went with Mentat's code and tuned that back up. Sun actually dumped the socket code and went just with STREAMs interfaces but was forced to bring back sockets. Socket's aren't great but they won and there is no turning back. > TCP, coupled with the rise of UNIX and the free wheel sharing of BSD > code, are what made the people to talk to. BSD wasn't free until much later than TCP/IP. TCP/IP was developed in the 1970's. http://www.securenet.net/members/shartley/history/tcp_ip.htm https://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_tcpip.htm From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Feb 7 10:02:55 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 19:02:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190207000255.E1F1318C084@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Kevin Bowling > Seems like a case of winners write the history books. Hey, I'm just trying to pass on my best understanding as I saw it at the time, and in retrospect. If you're not interested, I'm happy to stop. > There were corporate and public access networks long before TCP was set > in stone as a dominant protocol. Sure, there were lots of alternatives (BITNET, HEPNET, SPAN, CSNET, along with commercial systems like TYMNET and TELENET, along with a host of others whose names now escape me). And that's just the US; Europe had an alphabet soup of its own. But _very_ early on (1 Jan 1983), DARPA made all their fundees (which included all the top CS departments across the US) convert to TCP/IP. (NCP was turned off on the ARPANET,and everyone was forced to switch over, or get off the network.) A couple of other things went for TCP/IP too (e.g. NSF's super-computer network). A Federal ad hoc inter-departmental committee called the FRICC moved others (e.g. NASA and DoE) in the direction of TCP/IP, too. That's what created the large user community that eventually drove all the others out of business. (Metcalfe's Law.) Noel From kevin.bowling at kev009.com Thu Feb 7 10:04:06 2019 From: kevin.bowling at kev009.com (Kevin Bowling) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:04:06 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190206235257.GU20698@mcvoy.com> References: <20190206231852.5B33018C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <20190206235257.GU20698@mcvoy.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:52 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 04:40:24PM -0700, Kevin Bowling wrote: > > Seems like a case of winners write the history books. There were > > corporate and public access networks long before TCP was set in stone > > as a dominant protocol. Most F500 were interchanging on SNA into the > > 1990s. And access networks like Tymnet, etc to talk to others. > > Yeah, but those were all tied to some vendor. TCP/IP was the first > wide spread networking stack that you could get from a pile of different > vendors, Sun, Dec, SGI, IBM's AIX, every kernel supported it. System V > was late to the party, Lachman bought the rights to Convergent's STREAMs > based TCP/IP stack and had a tidy business for a while selling that stack > to lots of places. It was an awful stack, I know because I ported it to > a super computer and then to SCO's UNIX. When Sun switched to a System > Vr4 kernel, they bought it in some crazy bad deal and tried to use it > in Solaris. That lead to the tcp latency benchmark in lmbench because > Oracle's clustered database ran like shit on Slowaris and I traced it > down to their distributed lock manager and then whittled that code > down to lat_tcp.c. Sun eventually dumped that stack and went with > Mentat's code and tuned that back up. Sun actually dumped the socket > code and went just with STREAMs interfaces but was forced to bring > back sockets. Socket's aren't great but they won and there is no > turning back. > > > TCP, coupled with the rise of UNIX and the free wheel sharing of BSD > > code, are what made the people to talk to. > > BSD wasn't free until much later than TCP/IP. TCP/IP was developed in > the 1970's. > > http://www.securenet.net/members/shartley/history/tcp_ip.htm > > https://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_tcpip.htm This is where I am out of my depth, was it a "success" before the mid-late '80s as some dominant force? My reading is no outside universities with UNIX/BSD. The meteoric success came a bit later in the '80s with NSFNET, the rise of Cisco, and then the internet exchange culture in the early '90s CIX, PAIX, Metropolitan Fiber Systems etc got us to today and off Bell System stuff. From kevin.bowling at kev009.com Thu Feb 7 10:11:08 2019 From: kevin.bowling at kev009.com (Kevin Bowling) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 17:11:08 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <20190207000255.E1F1318C084@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190207000255.E1F1318C084@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 5:03 PM Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > From: Kevin Bowling > > > Seems like a case of winners write the history books. > > Hey, I'm just trying to pass on my best understanding as I saw it at the time, > and in retrospect. If you're not interested, I'm happy to stop. There's nothing personal. It just doesn't mesh with what I understand from non-UNIX first party sources in some mainframe, telco, and networking books. If I'm wrong I'll gladly update my opinion. I wasn't there. I try to incorporate other sources outside UNIX into my readings on computer history. Maybe I see connections where there were none, or they really were just parallel universes that didn't influence each other. > > There were corporate and public access networks long before TCP was set > > in stone as a dominant protocol. > > Sure, there were lots of alternatives (BITNET, HEPNET, SPAN, CSNET, along with > commercial systems like TYMNET and TELENET, along with a host of others whose > names now escape me). And that's just the US; Europe had an alphabet soup of its > own. > > But _very_ early on (1 Jan 1983), DARPA made all their fundees (which included > all the top CS departments across the US) convert to TCP/IP. (NCP was turned > off on the ARPANET,and everyone was forced to switch over, or get off the > network.) A couple of other things went for TCP/IP too (e.g. NSF's > super-computer network). A Federal ad hoc inter-departmental committee called > the FRICC moved others (e.g. NASA and DoE) in the direction of TCP/IP, > too. > > That's what created the large user community that eventually drove all the > others out of business. (Metcalfe's Law.) Is it fair to say most of the non-gov systems were UNIX during the next handful of years? I am asking for clarification, not a leading question. Regards, Kevin From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Feb 7 10:45:57 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 19:45:57 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190207004557.99A8118C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Larry McVoy > TCP/IP was the first wide spread networking stack that you could get > from a pile of different vendors, Sun, Dec, SGI, IBM's AIX, every kernel > supported it. Well, not quite - X.25 was also available on just about everything. TCP/IP's big advantage over X.25 was that it worked well with LAN's, whereas X.25 was pretty specific to WAN's. Although the wide range of TCP/IP implementations available, as well as the multi-vendor support, and its not being tied to any one vendor, was a big help. (Remember, I said the "_principle_ reason for TCP/IP's success" [emphasis added] was the size of the community - other factors, such as these, did play a role.) The wide range of implementations was in part a result of DARPA's early switch-over - every machine out there that was connected to the early Internet (in the 80s) had to get a TCP/IP, and DARPA paid for a lot of them (e.g. the BBN one for VAX Unix that Berkeley took on). The TOPS-20 one came from that source, a whole bunch of others (many now extinct, but...). MIT did one for MS-DOS as soon as the IBM PC came out (1981), and that spun off to a business (FTP Software) that was quite successful for a while (Windows 95 was, IIRC, the first uSloth product with TCP/IP built in). Etc, etc. Noel From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Thu Feb 7 11:03:22 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 20:03:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190207010322.DB0AA18C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Kevin Bowling > t just doesn't mesh with what I understand Ah, sorry, I misunderstood your point. Anyway, this is getting a little far afield for TUHS, so at some point it would be better to move to the 'internet-history' list if you want to explore it in depth. But a few more... > Is it fair to say most of the non-gov systems were UNIX during the next > handful of years? I assume you mean 'systems running TCP/IP'? If so, I really don't know, because for a while during that approximate period one saw many internets which weren't connected to the Internet. (Which is why the capitalization is important, the ill-educated morons at the AP, etc notwithstanding.) I have no good overall sense of that community, just anecdotal (plural is not 'data'). For the ones which _were_ connected to the Internet, then prior to the advent of the DNS, inspection of the host table file(s) would give a census. After that, I'm not sure - I seem to recall someone did some work on a census of Internet machines, but I forget who/were. If you meant 'systems in general' or 'systems with networking of some sort', alas I have even less of an idea! :-) Noel From gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net Fri Feb 8 04:07:27 2019 From: gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net (Grant Taylor) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 11:07:27 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: References: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <0572e855-9aac-337f-4f1b-66dda3839e14@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> Seeing as how this is diverging from TUHS, I'd encourage replies to the COFF copy that I'm CCing. On 02/06/2019 01:47 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote: > There were protocols that fit better in the era like DeltaT with a > simpler state machine and connection handling.  Then there was a mad > dash of protocol development in the mid to late ‘80s that were measured > by various metrics to outperform TCP in practical and theoretical > space.  Some of these seemed quite nice like XTP and are still in use in > niche defense applications. $ReadingList++ > Positive, rather than negative acknowledgement has aged well as > computers got more powerful (the sender can pretty well predict loss > when it hasn't gotten an ACK back and opportunistically retransmit). > But RF people do weird things that violate end to end principle on cable > modems and radios to try and minimize transmissions. Would you care to elaborate? > One thing I think that is missing in my contemporary modern software > developers is a willingness to dig down and solve problems at the right > level.  People do clownish things like write overlay filesystems in > garbage collected languages.  Google's QUIC is a fine example of > foolishness.  I am mortified that is genuinely being considered for the > HTTP 3 standard.  But I guess we've entered the era where enough people > have retired that the lower layers are approached with mysticism and > deemed unable and unsuitable to change.  So the layering will continue > until eventually things topple over like the garbage pile in the movie > Idiocracy. I thought one of the reasons that QUIC was UDP based instead of it's own transport protocol was because history has shown that the possibility and openness of networking is not sufficient to encourage the adoption of newer technologies. Specifically the long tail of history / legacy has hindered the introduction of a new transport protocol. I thought I remembered hearing that Google wanted to do a new transport protocol, but they thought that too many things would block it thus slowing down it's deployment. Conversely putting QUIC on top of UDP was a minor compromise that allowed the benefits to be adopted sooner. Perhaps I'm misremembering. I did a quick 45 second search and couldn't find any supporting evidence. The only thing that comes to mind is IPsec's ESP(50) and AH(51) which—as I understand it—are filtered too frequently because they aren't ICMP(1), TCP(6), or UDP(17). Too many firewalls interfere to the point that they are unreliable. > Since the discussion meandered to the distinction of path > selection/routing.. for provider level networks, label switching to this > day makes a lot more sense IMO.. figure out a path virtual circuit that > can cut through each hop with a small flow table instead of trying to > coagulate, propagate routes from a massive address space that has to fit > in an expensive CAM and buffer and forward packets at each hop. I think label switching has it's advantages. I think it also has some complications. I feel like ATM, Frame Relay, and MPLS are all forms of label switching. Conceptually they all operate based on a per-programed path. -- Grant. . . . unix || die -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4008 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From akosela at andykosela.com Fri Feb 8 04:22:14 2019 From: akosela at andykosela.com (Andy Kosela) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 12:22:14 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <0572e855-9aac-337f-4f1b-66dda3839e14@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> References: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <0572e855-9aac-337f-4f1b-66dda3839e14@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: On Thursday, February 7, 2019, Grant Taylor via TUHS wrote: > Seeing as how this is diverging from TUHS, I'd encourage replies to the > COFF copy that I'm CCing. > > On 02/06/2019 01:47 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote: > >> There were protocols that fit better in the era like DeltaT with a >> simpler state machine and connection handling. Then there was a mad dash >> of protocol development in the mid to late ‘80s that were measured by >> various metrics to outperform TCP in practical and theoretical space. Some >> of these seemed quite nice like XTP and are still in use in niche defense >> applications. >> > > $ReadingList++ XTP was/is indeed very interesting. It was adopted by US Navy for SAFENET and created by Greg Chesson who was active in the early UNIX community. Not sure if we have him here on this list though. --Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Fri Feb 8 04:33:05 2019 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 13:33:05 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] [COFF] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: References: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <0572e855-9aac-337f-4f1b-66dda3839e14@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 1:22 PM Andy Kosela wrote: > On Thursday, February 7, 2019, Grant Taylor via TUHS > wrote: > >> Seeing as how this is diverging from TUHS, I'd encourage replies to the >> COFF copy that I'm CCing. >> >> On 02/06/2019 01:47 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote: >> >>> There were protocols that fit better in the era like DeltaT with a >>> simpler state machine and connection handling. Then there was a mad dash >>> of protocol development in the mid to late ‘80s that were measured by >>> various metrics to outperform TCP in practical and theoretical space. Some >>> of these seemed quite nice like XTP and are still in use in niche defense >>> applications. >>> >> >> $ReadingList++ > > > XTP was/is indeed very interesting. It was adopted by US Navy for SAFENET > and created by Greg Chesson who was active in the early UNIX community. > Not sure if we have him here on this list though. > Sadly, Greg Chesson passed away a couple of years ago after battling cancer for some time. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Feb 8 04:50:54 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 10:50:54 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) In-Reply-To: <0572e855-9aac-337f-4f1b-66dda3839e14@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> References: <20190206174913.E518318C07B@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <0572e855-9aac-337f-4f1b-66dda3839e14@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> Message-ID: <20190207185054.GA20698@mcvoy.com> On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 11:07:27AM -0700, Grant Taylor via TUHS wrote: > On 02/06/2019 01:47 PM, Kevin Bowling wrote: > >There were protocols that fit better in the era like DeltaT with a simpler > >state machine and connection handling.?? Then there was a mad dash of > >protocol development in the mid to late ???80s that were measured by > >various metrics to outperform TCP in practical and theoretical space.?? > >Some of these seemed quite nice like XTP and are still in use in niche > >defense applications. > > $ReadingList++ Greg Chesson was the guy behind XTP. I worked for him at SGI, he was a hoot (lost him to cancer a while back). I think I've posted this before but here he is not long before he died (he came up to bitch about kids these days with their shiney frameworks and new fangled languages, what's wrong with C?) http://mcvoy.com/lm/xtp+excavator He was an engineer to the core, he refused to take any info from me on how to run the machine, just sat there and figured it out. --lm From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Feb 8 05:04:23 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 14:04:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] OSI stack (Was: Posters) Message-ID: <20190207190423.99CA518C075@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Grant Taylor via TUHS > Seeing as how this is diverging from TUHS, I'd encourage replies to > the COFF copy that I'm CCing. Can people _please_ pick either one list _or_ the other to reply to, so those on both will stop getting two copies of every message? My mailbox is exploding! Noel From doug at cs.dartmouth.edu Tue Feb 12 10:04:33 2019 From: doug at cs.dartmouth.edu (Doug McIlroy) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 19:04:33 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] "Re: [groff] modernize -T ascii rendering of opening single quote" Message-ID: <201902120004.x1C04X9n044703@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Unless my leg is being pulled, I sent that for pure amusement. Gcc has a very open mind on the subject, using both options in the same sentence. ----------------------------------------------------------- > Doug wrote: > > A diagnostic from gcc chimes in: > > 'mktemp' is deprecated: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous; use `mkstemp' ... > https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Quote-Characters My impression was Doug was passing on a warning about the continued used of mktemp(3) rather than the continued use of ASCII. From g.branden.robinson at gmail.com Tue Feb 12 10:28:54 2019 From: g.branden.robinson at gmail.com (G. Branden Robinson) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 11:28:54 +1100 Subject: [TUHS] "Re: [groff] modernize -T ascii rendering of opening single quote" In-Reply-To: <201902120004.x1C04X9n044703@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201902120004.x1C04X9n044703@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: <20190212002851.5cuj7l2myorywwts@crack.deadbeast.net> [looping the groff list back in] At 2019-02-11T19:04:33-0500, Doug McIlroy wrote: > Unless my leg is being pulled, I sent that for pure amusement. > Gcc has a very open mind on the subject, using both options > in the same sentence. A truly Solomonic solution. X-D > > Doug wrote: > > > A diagnostic from gcc chimes in: > > > 'mktemp' is deprecated: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous; use `mkstemp' > ... > > https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Quote-Characters > > My impression was Doug was passing on a warning about the continued used > of mktemp(3) rather than the continued use of ASCII. Regards, Branden -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jpl.jpl at gmail.com Thu Feb 14 23:14:26 2019 From: jpl.jpl at gmail.com (John P. Linderman) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 08:14:26 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing Message-ID: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/13/magazine/women-coding-computer-programming.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From finnoleary at inventati.org Fri Feb 15 00:02:31 2019 From: finnoleary at inventati.org (Finn O'Leary) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:02:31 +0000 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 08:14 -0500, John P. Linderman wrote: >> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/13/magazine/women-coding-computer-programming.html This is something I noticed when I was watching the 1980s MIT OCW videos of Sussman and Ableson teaching SICP. If you pay attention to the glances the camera takes of the audience, it's got a wide diversity of age-groups and genders (Of course (heh), I don't know if that's because of the circumstances of that particular course, or if MIT's entry requirements have changed. I wonder if anyone here can clarify that). -- - Finn PGP fingerprint: 739B 6C5C 3DE1 33FA "Too enough is always not much!" From dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu Fri Feb 15 04:51:08 2019 From: dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu (Deborah Scherrer) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 10:51:08 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68aa2bf7-a854-3c52-810d-ff1babb6e705@solar.stanford.edu> In the early days of Usenix, I used to keep track of the women. Initially, about 30% of the organization was female. That dropped every year. I also used to count the number of women at the Usenix conferences. By the time of a large one, about 3,000 people in San Francisco, I counted 12 women... On 2/14/19 5:14 AM, John P. Linderman wrote: > https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/13/magazine/women-coding-computer-programming.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu Fri Feb 15 05:29:40 2019 From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:29:40 -0500 (EST) Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing Message-ID: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > From: Deborah Scherrer > In the early days of Usenix, I used to keep track of the women. > Initially, about 30% of the organization was female. That dropped every > year. Interesting. Any ideas/thoughts on what was going on, what caused that? Noel From web at loomcom.com Fri Feb 15 05:47:18 2019 From: web at loomcom.com (Seth Morabito) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:47:18 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <0d7f24f7-98c2-4fb0-973b-b7cfbe91133c@www.fastmail.com> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019, at 11:30 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Deborah Scherrer > > > In the early days of Usenix, I used to keep track of the women. > > Initially, about 30% of the organization was female. That dropped every > > year. > > Interesting. Any ideas/thoughts on what was going on, what caused that? I have seen some interesting stories about this phenomenon. There was a piece on NPR's "Planet Money" in 2014 that offers one possible explanation that home computers in the 1980s were more commonly bought for boys than for girls, and that this eventually created an experience gap. Prior to the home computer revolution, they reason, no experience with computers was assumed when pursuing math and computer science in college, but afterward, experience with home computers was assumed, and boys had more of it than girls. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding > Noel -Seth -- Seth Morabito Poulsbo, WA web at loomcom.com From dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu Fri Feb 15 06:02:00 2019 From: dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu (Deborah Scherrer) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:02:00 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> There have been several studies. As I remember, girls in school do indeed receive as much encouragement in computers as do males. And girls do indeed have access to as many resources as males. So the studies came to no conclusions. My personal thought is that, in high school, it's the "nerd" factor. If I were back in high school and saw the kind of guys that are getting into computers now, I would stay a thousand miles away from them and that field. But, alas, I don't think anyone has tried to research that idea... And/or: I have a friend who was a professor of CS in Amsterdam. She had many grad students of both sexes. She says she had to practically force the women to stay in the field. They would see the guys getting overly focused on the computer details themselves, completely overlooking the goals of the project. The women would get frustrated and complain to the professor. She would have to convince them that the guys just did that, and that the women should stay on track. I do admit, I have a husband who does that. Personally, I have ALWAYS looked at computers as a tool to accomplish something grander than just being a computer. But I am usually out-shouted. ;-) On 2/14/19 11:29 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > From: Deborah Scherrer > > > In the early days of Usenix, I used to keep track of the women. > > Initially, about 30% of the organization was female. That dropped every > > year. > > Interesting. Any ideas/thoughts on what was going on, what caused that? > > Noel From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Feb 15 06:30:38 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:30:38 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <20190214203038.GY26831@mcvoy.com> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 12:02:00PM -0800, Deborah Scherrer wrote: > My personal thought is that, in high school, it's the "nerd" factor. If I > were back in high school and saw the kind of guys that are getting into > computers now, I would stay a thousand miles away from them and that field. > But, alas, I don't think anyone has tried to research that idea... I'm decades past high school but have one kid just out of high school and another still in. So some conduit of info there. And I coached hockey at Los Gatos for a couple of years, a little more insight there. >From what I can tell, things are pretty different. When I was going through high school and college, being a nerd wasn't cool, nerds didn't get anywhere near the popular girls. These days, the girls have figured out that the nerds have a future so they like that. In general, there seems to be a lot less cliques and bullying. I would have thought girls seeing nerds as having positives would make them want to be part of the CS world but maybe not. I do think, given that work is frequently a place where you can find a partner (I found my wife, or she found me, at SGI), that it is a problem if there isn't a good balance. If you get 10% women then every time a new one shows up the sharks will circle. Not exactly a welcoming environment. > And/or: I have a friend who was a professor of CS in Amsterdam. She had > many grad students of both sexes. She says she had to practically force the > women to stay in the field. They would see the guys getting overly focused > on the computer details themselves, completely overlooking the goals of the > project. The women would get frustrated and complain to the professor. She > would have to convince them that the guys just did that, and that the women > should stay on track. That's true for specialists. And it is a reason that CS schools should teach systems programming. You really can't do well in that unless you see the whole picture. You can fake it for a while but eventually you need to see the whole picture to figure out where you need to be putting effort. I was visiting my old systems prof in Madison and he said that systems programming is coming back, employers like Google have been bitching that nobody knows how to do kernel work or even think about it. I believe it, I get "bug" reports about LMbench only to find they are trying to benchmark a VM. What kind of idiot tries to measure a VM? Using microbenchmarks? This was a CS grad student! From jon at fourwinds.com Fri Feb 15 06:37:51 2019 From: jon at fourwinds.com (Jon Steinhart) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 12:37:51 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> Deborah Scherrer writes: > There have been several studies. As I remember, girls in school do > indeed receive as much encouragement in computers as do males. And > girls do indeed have access to as many resources as males. So the > studies came to no conclusions. > > My personal thought is that, in high school, it's the "nerd" factor. If > I were back in high school and saw the kind of guys that are getting > into computers now, I would stay a thousand miles away from them and > that field. But, alas, I don't think anyone has tried to research that > idea... > > And/or: I have a friend who was a professor of CS in Amsterdam. She had > many grad students of both sexes. She says she had to practically force > the women to stay in the field. They would see the guys getting overly > focused on the computer details themselves, completely overlooking the > goals of the project. The women would get frustrated and complain to > the professor. She would have to convince them that the guys just did > that, and that the women should stay on track. > > I do admit, I have a husband who does that. Personally, I have ALWAYS > looked at computers as a tool to accomplish something grander than just > being a computer. But I am usually out-shouted. ;-) I think that many of us old folk on this list started out in a time when getting a computer to be a computer was an accomplishment. But I agree that enough of that has been done that using computers as tools subservient to larger goals is where the bulk of the work exists today. There's a theory that sounds superficially plausible to me, which is that women leave the field because they're more responsible than men. The theory is that women think more about whether a profession will provide them with the security and stability necessary to support a family. When women look at STEM fields they see people being laid off, being forced to train their outsourced replacements, and so on. The American government sends out the mixed messages of "we need people trained in STEM" along with "we don't care about science". Plus there are all of the pontifications about how AI is going to replace many of the jobs. So this theory says that it just doesn't look like an attractive field to people who want stability and security, and that women statistically want that more than men do. Jon From toby at telegraphics.com.au Fri Feb 15 08:22:24 2019 From: toby at telegraphics.com.au (Toby Thain) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:22:24 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> Message-ID: <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> On 2019-02-14 3:37 PM, Jon Steinhart wrote: > Deborah Scherrer writes: >> There have been several studies. As I remember, girls in school do >> indeed receive as much encouragement in computers as do males. And >> girls do indeed have access to as many resources as males. So the >> studies came to no conclusions. >> >> My personal thought is that, in high school, it's the "nerd" factor. If >> I were back in high school and saw the kind of guys that are getting >> into computers now, I would stay a thousand miles away from them and >> that field. But, alas, I don't think anyone has tried to research that >> idea... >> >> And/or: I have a friend who was a professor of CS in Amsterdam. She had >> many grad students of both sexes. She says she had to practically force >> the women to stay in the field. They would see the guys getting overly >> focused on the computer details themselves, completely overlooking the >> goals of the project. The women would get frustrated and complain to >> the professor. She would have to convince them that the guys just did >> that, and that the women should stay on track. >> >> I do admit, I have a husband who does that. Personally, I have ALWAYS >> looked at computers as a tool to accomplish something grander than just >> being a computer. But I am usually out-shouted. ;-) > > I think that many of us old folk on this list started out in a time when > getting a computer to be a computer was an accomplishment. But I agree > that enough of that has been done that using computers as tools subservient > to larger goals is where the bulk of the work exists today. > > There's a theory that sounds superficially plausible to me, which is that > women leave the field because they're more responsible than men. The theory I was REALLY hoping gender essentialism wouldn't be enlisted in this thread. Oh well. > is that women think more about whether a profession will provide them with > the security and stability necessary to support a family. ... > > Jon > From dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu Fri Feb 15 08:37:40 2019 From: dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu (Deborah Scherrer) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 14:37:40 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> Message-ID: Actually, I suspect it's just the opposite. For example, veterinarians used to be entirely male. Why, cause they made Big Bucks. Then, as salaries went down, more women got into the field. Why, because they cared about the animals. Now vets make something like $25K when they get out of their 7-8 years of school, and they are almost all female. I never did anything cause of the money (but then, I married very young and had a quite capable husband who ended up a professor at Stanford). At any rate, I chose my major, my grad studies, and my 2 careers cause I loved the fields. Took a 45% cut in salary when I went from high tech to Stanford/NASA. Didn't even think about that.... On 2/14/19 2:22 PM, Toby Thain wrote: > On 2019-02-14 3:37 PM, Jon Steinhart wrote: >> Deborah Scherrer writes: >>> There have been several studies. As I remember, girls in school do >>> indeed receive as much encouragement in computers as do males. And >>> girls do indeed have access to as many resources as males. So the >>> studies came to no conclusions. >>> >>> My personal thought is that, in high school, it's the "nerd" factor. If >>> I were back in high school and saw the kind of guys that are getting >>> into computers now, I would stay a thousand miles away from them and >>> that field. But, alas, I don't think anyone has tried to research that >>> idea... >>> >>> And/or: I have a friend who was a professor of CS in Amsterdam. She had >>> many grad students of both sexes. She says she had to practically force >>> the women to stay in the field. They would see the guys getting overly >>> focused on the computer details themselves, completely overlooking the >>> goals of the project. The women would get frustrated and complain to >>> the professor. She would have to convince them that the guys just did >>> that, and that the women should stay on track. >>> >>> I do admit, I have a husband who does that. Personally, I have ALWAYS >>> looked at computers as a tool to accomplish something grander than just >>> being a computer. But I am usually out-shouted. ;-) >> I think that many of us old folk on this list started out in a time when >> getting a computer to be a computer was an accomplishment. But I agree >> that enough of that has been done that using computers as tools subservient >> to larger goals is where the bulk of the work exists today. >> >> There's a theory that sounds superficially plausible to me, which is that >> women leave the field because they're more responsible than men. The theory > I was REALLY hoping gender essentialism wouldn't be enlisted in this > thread. Oh well. > >> is that women think more about whether a profession will provide them with >> the security and stability necessary to support a family. ... >> >> Jon >> From akosela at andykosela.com Fri Feb 15 09:35:16 2019 From: akosela at andykosela.com (Andy Kosela) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:35:16 -0600 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> Message-ID: Is this thread really a good place for TUHS discussion? Maybe COFF would be better suited for it. And maybe the explanation why there are more men in IT is simpler than some folks who forcefully try to create elaborate sociological theories think. In nature males are just wired differently from females. And that is why they ARE different, like 1 and 0. Otherwise they would be just one sex. And as we know nothing can come from just one number... --Andy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lm at mcvoy.com Fri Feb 15 09:40:27 2019 From: lm at mcvoy.com (Larry McVoy) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:40:27 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> Message-ID: <20190214234027.GA26831@mcvoy.com> > > There's a theory that sounds superficially plausible to me, which is that > > women leave the field because they're more responsible than men. The theory > > I was REALLY hoping gender essentialism wouldn't be enlisted in this > thread. Oh well. Politically correct(?) thoughts that attempt to counter facts aren't helpful to *any* discussion. Yeah, there are always going to be people that buck the norms, that doesn't change the fact that most members of both genders are going show traits found in their gender. The exceptions don't break the rules. You might be educated by listening to what transgender people who are on hormone therapy have to say. MtF will tell you they lose a ton of upper body strenght. Hormones are a thing, backed by lots of science, and men and women have different hormones and are, as a result, different. You'll notice I never used the terms "better" or "worse". Just different. I'm all for more women in CS, if they want to be there (and the people of CS, the dudes, have work to do to make the women want to be there). I fully agree that both genders should be encouraged to try to succeed at whatever they want. To a point. Pushing people to do something that they'll never be good at is mean. Figuring if they will/won't be good is sometimes tricky, sometimes obvious. I just wish people wouldn't bring political correctness into discussions, it doesn't help. I also get that people don't like being put in neat little boxes. But taking away those boxes for the exceptions is not always the right thing. Are you fine with fire departments changing the physical fitness rules so women can join? As in full on join, not be put on the radios or driving, stuff that they can do just fine, but full on fire fighters? I dunno about you, but 100 pound woman is not who I want to see when my 200 body needs to be carried out of a burning building. Rather than try and make everyone fit into the same boxes, why not sort them into the boxes where they can excel? If some buff woman can meet the requirements to be a fire fighter, go for it, go her. But don't change the requirements so woman without the necessary strength can get the job, that's just putting her in a position where she won't succeed. And that's not helpful at all. We're CS people, we know how to optimize, and I can assure you it won't work by saying everyone is capable of everything. I coached roller hockey and it is the exact opposite of saying everyone can do everything. You learn each person's strengths and their weaknesses, play to the strengths, figure out which weaknesses can be turned into strengths, and leave the ones that can't in the locker room. I've seen women at the adult level of hockey that can blow away 99% of most men but that's an exception. Here's the norm: the US Women's National team practices against high school boys because they are evenly matched, the national men's team would crush them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqJk-JEkdIo Same thing in tennis: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-male-professional-tennis-players-are-better-than-female-professional-ones Putting everyone in one box is unfair to one gender or the other, depending on the box. From wangude at gmail.com Fri Feb 15 09:45:06 2019 From: wangude at gmail.com (Thomas Kellar) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 18:45:06 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> Message-ID: I am learning from the discussion. I disagree with the binary argument. Women and men both have personalities and brains that range over a huge spectrum of differences. It is society that tries to force them into particular molds. On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 6:36 PM Andy Kosela wrote: > > > > Is this thread really a good place for TUHS discussion? Maybe COFF would be better suited for it. > > And maybe the explanation why there are more men in IT is simpler than some folks who forcefully try to create elaborate sociological theories think. In nature males are just wired differently from females. And that is why they ARE different, like 1 and 0. Otherwise they would be just one sex. And as we know nothing can come from just one number... > > --Andy From dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu Fri Feb 15 09:46:54 2019 From: dscherrer at solar.stanford.edu (Deborah Scherrer) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:46:54 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> Message-ID: <58ddd6ed-82e3-e64d-b564-81368dc34950@solar.stanford.edu> Thanks, Thomas. On 2/14/19 3:45 PM, Thomas Kellar wrote: > I am learning from the discussion. I disagree with the binary > argument. Women and men both have personalities and brains that range > over a huge spectrum of differences. It is society that tries to force > them into particular molds. > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 6:36 PM Andy Kosela wrote: >> >> >> Is this thread really a good place for TUHS discussion? Maybe COFF would be better suited for it. >> >> And maybe the explanation why there are more men in IT is simpler than some folks who forcefully try to create elaborate sociological theories think. In nature males are just wired differently from females. And that is why they ARE different, like 1 and 0. Otherwise they would be just one sex. And as we know nothing can come from just one number... >> >> --Andy From jon at fourwinds.com Fri Feb 15 09:52:00 2019 From: jon at fourwinds.com (Jon Steinhart) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 15:52:00 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] Women in computing In-Reply-To: References: <20190214192940.ED58418C0AB@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <1b71e45e-5711-ee8d-2bc8-4ea6298311dd@solar.stanford.edu> <201902142037.x1EKbpnR017241@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <33ce5850-f0b5-1fa9-d459-58d4e2416e80@telegraphics.com.au> Message-ID: <201902142352.x1ENq0Bp013751@darkstar.fourwinds.com> Another interesting note on this topic. I saw a presentation on the Diana Project a few months ago, and it seems like it's making a real positive difference for women in computing. Check it out. Without intending to set off anybody's political correctness alarms, an interesting interesting comment from the presentation was that a large percentage of the current crop of female computer folks are into cryptography. Without passing any sort of judgement on it, it seems like those sort of puzzle-solving problems are sucking a lot of women into CS. Jon From wkt at tuhs.org Fri Feb 15 10:05:34 2019 From: wkt at tuhs.org (Warren Toomey) Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 10:05:34 +1000 Subject: [TUHS] "Women" topic moved to COFF Message-ID: <20190215000534.GA29663@minnie.tuhs.org> All, I've locked the "Women in Computing" topic in the TUHS list as it's not specifically Unix and liable to be contentious. Feel free to continue it over on the COFF list. E-mail me if you'd like to join the COFF list. Cheers, Warren