41–50 of 57 posts
Are there Unixes where TCP / UDP ports are files? setcap on Linux gets really old when you just want to give a user access to a porf.
it should actually be removed as the article is wrong. even in 2009, how could someone get this wrong? pretty sure 2009 was finally going to be the year of the linux desktop! IOW unix had reached the masses by then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> > In Plan 9, everything is a file > Fixed that. It was a short snarky comment. Also the article mentions that too at the bottom. Yeah they "fixed it" but by that time not enough people cared. The abstraction purity was nice and developers and OS fans loved it, but it just didn't matter for most application. Another way to put it is that Linux was already fairly decent and it wasn't worth switching to a whole new OS…
I understand why it didn't take off, but I don't think it's true that Plan 9 was just a tiny incremental improvement over UNIX's architecture. Modern networking and distributed systems would be a LOT nicer today if Plan 9 had taken off in the 90s. I think the economic benefit over today's state of affairs would have been massive, not just something that appealed to computer geeks' sense of elegance.
But it didn't take off. That's already decided. It wasn't enough. One can say well if it happened 10 years earlier maybe, it would have taken off. Or if Linux never happened. But it's speculative.
Heck, Plan 9 source is there. If so much economic benefit can be derived, why hasn't it become a dominant player. It had been around enough time, and there are enough developers around to have flocked to it and make it overtake Linux by now.
> I think the economic benefit over today's state of affairs would have been massive,
I think we already reaping enormous benefits open source licensing model in general. We live in a world where you can download production grade operating systems, databases, compilers, libraries for free and also inspect their source. That is often taken for granted and is incredible compared to who it used to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand why it didn't take off, but I don't think it's true that Plan 9 was just a tiny incremental improvement over UNIX's architecture. Modern networking and distributed systems would be a LOT nicer today if Plan 9 had taken off in the 90s. I think the economic benefit over today's state of affairs would have been massive, not just something that appealed to computer geeks' sense of elegance.
> Modern networking and distributed systems would be a LOT nicer today if Plan 9 had taken off in the 90s. But it didn't take off. That's already decided. It wasn't enough. One can say well if it happened 10 years earlier maybe, it would have taken off. Or if Linux never happened. But it's speculative. Heck, Plan 9 source is there. If so much economic benefit can be derived, why hasn't it become a dominant player. It…
The reason Plan 9 or its ideas can't be resurrected very easily now is because every machine on the internet has to pretend to be UNIX and speak a thousand ad-hoc protocols. UNIX's many flaws have been papered over, one by one, by incredible brute force (instead of in one fell swoop). I'm only lamenting the fact that the 90s were a crucial period in the development of the commercial internet, and in another timeline it could have developed in a very different direction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In Plan 9 , everything is a file Fixed that.
NT's everything is an object is a much more rational design. OS X is based off similar concepts except in the kernel thanks to NextStep.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
NT's everything is an object is a much more rational design. OS X is based off similar concepts except in the kernel thanks to NextStep.
And what's an object, a somewhat opaque blob with some attributes? It all depends on where in the sand you decide to draw the line.
The problem with files is that signaling has to happen in band or with hacks like ioctls. Or like in plan 9 through seperate files but with fewer guarantees on synchronization.
Is the sendfile system call still the fastest way to transfer data locally on Linux systems? For communicating between processes running locally on system. Or, for example, a server running locally on an android device. Unix domain sockets typically beat TCP connections for most large file transfers. But is there anything faster? And what about transfers over the public net from machine to machine? I usually just use…
Shared memory is faster than sockets
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He also confused "The Art of UNIX Programming" with a "fantastic book".
What's wrong with the book ? I have read it and I think it provides a great introduction to Unix.
I assumed this was common knowledge, but apparently not, so here goes: Another reason not to buy the book is that the author, Eric S Raymond, is a racist sexist Islamophobic conspiracy theory spreading global warming denying gun nut, who threatened to kill Bruce Perens.
In summary, and just because you asked, Eric S Raymond is a mediocre programmer who has made a career of trying to pose as a hacker, define what a hacker is, tell people how to become a hacker, all while viciously, personally, professionally, and unfairly attacking actual successful influential hackers like Richard Stallman, including his philosophy and his life's work, by hijacking and distorting the definition of Free Software and the very definitions of words in the hacker's dictionary, to reflect his own extremist narcissistic racist political ideology, which most certainly does not align with the non-bigoted ideology in the Hacker's Manifesto: "We exist without skin color, without nationality, without religious bias."
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
"In the U.S., blacks are 12% of the population but commit 50% of violent crimes; can anyone honestly think this is unconnected to the fact that they average 15 points of IQ lower than the general population? That stupid people are more violent is a fact independent of skin color." -Eric S Raymond
"A clash of civilizations driven by the failure of Islamic/Arab culture (though I would stress the problem of the Islamic commandment to jihad more than he does). I think he [Steven den Beste] is also right to say that our long-term objective must be to break, crush and eventually destroy this culture, because we can't live on the same planet with people who both carry those memes and have access to weapons of mass destruction. They will hate us and seek to destroy us not for what we've done but for what we are." -Eric S Raymond
"And for any agents or proxy of the regime interested in asking me questions face to face, I’ve got some bullets slathered in pork fat to make you feel extra special welcome." -Eric S Raymond
"When I hear the words "social responsibility", I want to reach for my gun." -Eric S Raymond
As much as he thinks he and everyone else should own lots guns, Eric S Raymond has recently stated (2017) that he believes blacks are too unintelligent to own or to be trained to use guns:
https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/816449724127608833
>Unfortunately, this doesn't cover the BLM crowd, which would have an average IQ of about 85 if it's statistically representative of American blacks as a whole. I've never tried to train anyone that dim and wouldn't want to.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
Eric S. Raymond (born 1957) is a computer programmer, advocate of open source software, and author or editor of several written works, including The Cathedral and the Bazaar and the Jargon File. Coincidentally, "Yonder Racism" is an anagram of his name.
Unfortunately, his work and expertise in computer technology[1][2] has been all but overshadowed by his batshit insane wingnut tendencies in the wake of 9/11, his misogynistic claims,[3] and his increasingly wanky ego-gazing,[4][5] as he acknowledges that people aren't so crazy about him anymore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Russ_Nelson#Blacks_are_la...
Eric S Raymond threw down the gauntlet and defended Russ Nelson's infamous "Blacks are Lazy" article by calling everyone who wanted him to resign his position as president of OSI "fools and thugs", and demanded OSI spend their precious time and resources fighting critics of racism and defending Russ Nelson's racist beliefs which ESR shares, instead of promoting open source software.
http://www.eweek.com/servers/new-osi-president-steps-down
>“Abetting somebody elses witch hunt is no less disgusting than starting your own.” “Personally, I wanted to fight this on principle,” Raymond said. “Russ resigned the presidency rather than get OSI into that fight, and the board quite properly respected his wishes in the matter. That sacrifice makes me angrier at the fools and thugs who pulled him down.”
This would be funny if it weren't exactly like Trump's recent "'nt" flip-flop on Putin:
>Nelson subsequently sought to explain himself in an essay titled "Blacks are Not Lazy."
https://encyclopediadramatica.rs/Eric_S._Raymond
In 1999, Debian developer Bruce Perens published an "email threat" that he allegedly received from Raymond. Raymond then "clarified" that he only meant to defame Perens. From this we can assume that he is batshit insane and will fucking kill and or write to anyone that says anything about him or his software. If you are lucky you might get an O'Rielly book about you.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/1999/04/msg00623.html
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: email threat
From: bruce@perens.com
Date: 5 Apr 1999 22:48:42 -0000
Message-id:
Today I received the following threat in e-mail from Eric Raymond. The message
was copied to the Silicon Valley Linux User's Group officers, who you may
consult regarding its authenticity. The police have been notified.
Because I know that Eric is a firearms enthusiast, for my own protection,
I feel the best strategy is for me to publicize the threat widely.
Thanks
Bruce Perens
> Damn straight I took it personally. And if you ever again behave like
> that kind of disruptive asshole in public, insult me, and jeopardize
> the interests of our entire tribe, I'll take it just as personally --
> and I will find a way to make you regret it. Watch your step.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with the book ? I have read it and I think it provides a great introduction to Unix.
One obvious problem with the book which this article demonstrates is that it leaves the reader with the mistaken impression that "In Unix Everything Is a File". I assumed this was common knowledge, but apparently not, so here goes: Another reason not to buy the book is that the author, Eric S Raymond, is a racist sexist Islamophobic conspiracy theory spreading global warming denying gun nut, who threatened to kill Br…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> > In Plan 9, everything is a file > Fixed that. It was a short snarky comment. Also the article mentions that too at the bottom. Yeah they "fixed it" but by that time not enough people cared. The abstraction purity was nice and developers and OS fans loved it, but it just didn't matter for most application. Another way to put it is that Linux was already fairly decent and it wasn't worth switching to a whole new OS…
I understand why it didn't take off, but I don't think it's true that Plan 9 was just a tiny incremental improvement over UNIX's architecture. Modern networking and distributed systems would be a LOT nicer today if Plan 9 had taken off in the 90s. I think the economic benefit over today's state of affairs would have been massive, not just something that appealed to computer geeks' sense of elegance.
Plan9 is a joke, file abstraction is a ridiculous idea. File abstraction is terrible for anything beyond storing information.
It sucks for multimedia, IPC, input. Unix showed that, escaping from file abstraction in any domain (except networking, maybe). That's why we use d-bus instead of pipes, opengl instead of writing buffer etc. People need disposable, modular and introspectable APIs, like in mirageos, lisp machines or smalltalk OSs, not a ridiculous file crap.