gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (12/07/89)
In article <11976@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Saligrama Subbarao) writes: > Here is a question I have been wanting to ask for a long time but > always forgot to. WHY doesn't someone make a whole NORTON UTILITES > for UNIX? I mean, it is SO easy to unerase files in MS-DOS. If UNIX > is a superior operating system, why hasn't someone come up with a > qu command to unerase files, an ncd to change directories and some of > the other goodies we get with the Norton Utilities 4.5 Advanced > Edition? UNIX is a multi-user, multi-processing, timesharing system; consequently, if you mistakenly remove the last link to a file (does Norton give you links?), the data blocks having been reclaimed by the system are likely to have been overwritten by other processes before you have time to take remedial action. Also note that UNIX implements inter-user access protection, so a random user cannot access the raw disk as would be required to fiddle around like most such utility packages. > -Is UNIX really superior ??? Sure. On UNIX you can easily implement any number of solutions to the accidental deletion "problem" (if it seems to be a problem for you). The very aspects of UNIX which make raw disk diddlers infeasible are among the features that make it powerful.
sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) (12/07/89)
I missed the original posting: > In article <11976@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Saligrama Subbarao) writes: >> Here is a question I have been wanting to ask for a long time but >> always forgot to. WHY doesn't someone make a whole NORTON UTILITES >> for UNIX? I mean, it is SO easy to unerase files in MS-DOS. If UNIX >> is a superior operating system, why hasn't someone come up with a >> qu command to unerase files, an ncd to change directories and some of >> the other goodies we get with the Norton Utilities 4.5 Advanced >> Edition? I believe the people at Norton _are_ working on utilities for Unix. >> -Is UNIX really superior ??? Is DOS? DOS doesn't come with Norton utilities. It's separate, eh? -- Michael Sullivan uunet!jarthur.uucp!aqdata!sullivan aQdata, Inc. San Dimas, CA
aris@tabbs.UUCP (Aris Stathakis) (12/07/89)
From article <11758@smoke.BRL.MIL>, by gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn): > In article <11976@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Saligrama Subbarao) writes: }> Here is a question I have been wanting to ask for a long time but }> always forgot to. WHY doesn't someone make a whole NORTON UTILITES }> for UNIX? I mean, it is SO easy to unerase files in MS-DOS. If UNIX }> is a superior operating system, why hasn't someone come up with a }> qu command to unerase files, an ncd to change directories and some of }> the other goodies we get with the Norton Utilities 4.5 Advanced }> Edition? } } UNIX is a multi-user, multi-processing, timesharing system; consequently, } if you mistakenly remove the last link to a file (does Norton give you } links?), the data blocks having been reclaimed by the system are likely } to have been overwritten by other processes before you have time to take } remedial action. Ok, maybe not undeleting files - but i'd give my left nut to see a Norton Commander under Xenix - or any tool that will let me manipulate files quickly and easily under Xenix. Even a utility like NCD would make life ALOT easier. Just a thought... Aris -- Aris Stathakis | Bang: ..!uunet!ddsw1!olsa99!tabbs!aris or aris@tabbs.UUCP - Gimme a beer and money sandwich.... Hold the bread - - Waldo (D.R.) Dobbs
chuckb@lotex.UUCP (Chuck Bentley) (12/08/89)
In article <11976@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Saligrama Subbarao) writes: > Here is a question I have been wanting to ask for a long time but > always forgot to. WHY doesn't someone make a whole NORTON UTILITES > for UNIX? I mean, it is SO easy to unerase files in MS-DOS. If UNIX > -Is UNIX really superior ??? > Kartik Subbarao With all the utilities that have been written over the past 15+ years, if it were a simple matter to do what you want, don't you think someone would have done it by now? Consider; when running a multi-user, multi-tasking system, how do you ensure that the area of the disk that is freed up by an 'rm' is kept available for the fool (excuse me, *user* :-) that just deleted a file before considering the consequences? There are a number of procedures that have been posted to the net to protect this kind of person from themselves. The simplest is to create a new command called 'del' (look familiar? :-). This moves the selected file into a hidden directory like ~/.trashcan. Another command 'undel' simply moves the file back. To keep the file system from filling up the System Administrator puts an entry into cron to search for any files in each persons root/.trashcan directory that are older than a given number of days, and deletes them. In the meantime, if the user realizes his mistake soon enough, the file can be restored. Of course, judicious use of the sytem backup facilities can usually take care of the problem, although not as easily. There have been a number of 'tree' like programs posted to the net. I have one written using the bourne shell. If anyone would like it, send me email. Chuck... ..!moray!lotex!chuckb
michaelb@wshb.UUCP ( WSHB employee) (12/13/89)
> >> Here is a question I have been wanting to ask for a long time but > >> always forgot to. WHY doesn't someone make a whole NORTON UTILITES > >> for UNIX? I mean, it is SO easy to unerase files in MS-DOS. I think this question deserves a lot more attention than it's getting. One of the editorials in one of the recent trade magazines spoke about ease of use legitimizing a technology and gave the example of the FAX machine becoming the electronic information transfer standard. The editor was exactly correct in his accessment. We have a $1000 FAX machine and a $28,000 computer. My corporate headquarters has several $1000 FAX machines and several $100,000 computers. We send our weekly time sheets over the FAX because both the station manager on my end and the payroll officer on the other end understand the FAX machines. There are millions of MS-DOS machines on desktops all around the country because people who couldn't care less about understanding how the machine works can do things fairly easily. Norton's unerase program may not be the best example to use here because actually unerasing a file is so complicated in a multiuser, multitasking environment. If Unix is to capture a significant share of the desktops in the world, it has got to become easier for the unfamiliar to use. Granted, if you have been working with Unix for the past 5 years ( or 2, or 10 ) you may be able to approximate all of the features available from Norton with a little bit of thought. My wife, who really has no idea why a magnet is dangerous to a floppy, can move files all around the disk on her MS-DOS machine because of PC-TOOLS and can move the working directory around because of NCD. These programs are not toys to make Messy-DOS OK, but are real live productivity aids to people who don't want to remember arcane arguments to program names they find obscure. Until one can look in the back of any Computer Shopper and find ad's for these kinds of utilities, Unix cannot take the Boardroom away from MS-DOS. -- Michael Batchelor -- Systems/Operations Engineer WSHB - An International Broadcast Station of The Christian Science Monitor Syndicate, Inc. uunet!wshb!michaelb 803/625-4880
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (12/14/89)
In article <1989Dec6.235050.26453@aqdata.uucp> sullivan@aqdata.uucp (Michael T. Sullivan) writes: >I believe the people at Norton _are_ working on utilities for Unix. Quite true. We (Segue) are developing a set of Norton Utilities for Unix jointly with Norton and Interactive Systems. (We announced them at Uniforum in San Francisco last spring.) They provide functions similar to the DOS utilities although in many cases the implementations and user interfaces are different. We do indeed get back deleted files. Look for them sometime in 1990. -- John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650 johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl "Now, we are all jelly doughnuts."
exspes@gdr.bath.ac.uk (P E Smee) (12/15/89)
In article <370@wshb.UUCP> michaelb@wshb.UUCP ( WSHB employee) writes: >> >> Here is a question I have been wanting to ask for a long time but >> >> always forgot to. WHY doesn't someone make a whole NORTON UTILITES >> >> for UNIX? I mean, it is SO easy to unerase files in MS-DOS. > > I think this question deserves a lot more attention than it's getting. >... If Unix is to capture >a significant share of the desktops in the world, it has got to become easier >for the unfamiliar to use. Well, join the club, then. I've always claimed that while Unix is a great development system for use by experienced programmers, it borders on criminal to turn naive users loose on it unless you've provided a less arcane and more friendly wrapper. It never ceases to amaze me (in the portion of my job which is 'user support' just how many innocent looking ways people can find to get themselves into trouble. The 'non-computer' folk (those who are NOT interested in computers but just want to use them to help with problems they ARE interested in) seem to prefer (MS,PC)-DOS or VAX VMS. A less-rich environment keeps them out of trouble. -- Paul Smee, Univ of Bristol Comp Centre, Bristol BS8 1TW, Tel +44 272 303132 Smee@bristol.ac.uk :-) (..!uunet!ukc!gdr.bath.ac.uk!exspes if you MUST)
wswietse@tuewse.lso.win.tue.nl (Wietse Venema) (12/15/89)
In the past, a few interesting attempts have been done to provide a "user-friendly" front-end to UNIX. Two approaches known to me are vsh (visual shell) and menunix (menu-oriented shell). Both programs provide a way to select files from the current working directory, and allow the binding of frequently-used commands to a single key. Check out your nearest source-file archives if you are interested.
gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) (12/16/89)
In article <751@tuewsd.lso.win.tue.nl>, wswietse@tuewse.lso.win.tue.nl (Wietse Venema) writes: > In the past, a few interesting attempts have been done to provide a > "user-friendly" front-end to UNIX. Two approaches known to me are vsh > (visual shell) and menunix (menu-oriented shell). And don't forget the "Adventure shell", which allows you to carry files around in your knapsack. No kidding!
subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Subbarao) (12/19/89)
I would like to thank everyonee who helped me understand why there cannot feasibly be an unremove command on a multi-user operating system -- I have followed some suggestions on aliasing rm. Again, thanks. -An up and coming UNIX personality, Kartik Subbarao -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- subbarao@phoenix.princeton.edu "Hey, I LIKE .sig files" subbarao@bogey.princeton.edu disclaimer : none, because I don't WORK for subbarao@gauguin.princeton.edu anyone yet.
mchinni%pica.army.mil@pica.army.mil (Michael J. Chinni, SMCAR-CCS-E) (09/27/90)
F Y I
----- Forwarded message # 1:
Received: from gw-mail by CC2.PICA.ARMY.MIL id aa03916; 26 Sep 90 16:06 EDT
Received: from LETTERKENN-EMH1.ARMY.MIL by GW-MAIL.PICA.ARMY.MIL id aa10951;
26 Sep 90 16:05 EDT
Received: from xls-sperry01 by lead-sperry08.letterkenn-emh1.army.mil
id aa18489; 25 Sep 90 16:26 EDT
Received: from xls-sperry01 by xls-sperry01.letterkenn-emh1.army.mil id aa29113;
25 Sep 90 16:17 EDT
Received: from att by xls-sperry01.letterkenn-emh1.army.mil id aa29104;
25 Sep 90 16:16 EDT
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 16:13:32 EDT
From: Tom Harrison <tharriso@cbg-99sima.army.mil>
To: unixtie%xls-sperry01.letterkenn-emh1.army.mil@PICA.ARMY.MIL
Subject: [Qncdsis2: Norton Utilities for UNIX]
Reply-To: tharriso@cbg-99sima.army.mil
Phone: DSN/AV: 570-9166 COMM: (717) 267-9166
Message-ID: <9009261605.aa10951@GW-MAIL.PICA.ARMY.MIL>
TO: UNIXTIE Subscribers
The attached is forwarded for your information.
Thanks to Steve Petruska for his efforts and sharing those results.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Tom Harrison USAMC SIMA
UNIX Team Leader ATTN: AMXSI-TLB
DSN/AV: 570-9166 Chambersburg, PA 17201-4180
COMMERCIAL: (717) 267-9166
Primary E Mail Address: tharriso@cbg-99sima.army.mil
Secondary E Mail Address: tharriso@letterkenn-emh1.army.mil
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
----- Forwarded message # 1:
Received: from letterkenn-emh1.army.mil by att.cbg-99sima.army.mil id aa06892;
25 Sep 90 14:22 EDT
Received: from letterkenn-emh1.army.mil
by xls-sperry01.letterkenn-emh1.army.mil id aa25121;
25 Sep 90 14:17 EDT
Received: from saad-emh1.army.mil by lead-sperry08.letterkenn-emh1.army.mil
id aa16063; 25 Sep 90 14:17 EDT
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 11:07:15 PDT
From: Qncdsis2@saad-emh1.army.mil
To: tharriso@letterkenn-emh1.army.mil
cc: qncdsis2@saad-emh1.army.mil
Subject: Norton Utilities for UNIX
In response to the open inquiry on UNIXTIE concerning NORTON
Utilities for UNIX, I have just completed a discussion with Sales
Representatives from SYMATEC/Peter Norton and INTERACTIVE
Systems. INTERACTIVE is the "distributor" for the UNIX version
of NORTON Utilities.
Norton Utilities for UNIX currently runs on ONLY 386-based
PC platforms running UNIX. Contrary to common belief, NORTON
does NOT run on any of the MINI-based platforms currently in use
by UNIXTIE members.
INTERACTIVE has plans for the following UNIX ports:
a. SCO UNIX / INTEL-386 - available December 1990
b. SUN / HP UNIX - available 2nd Quarter 1991
C. There are NO PLANS to port NORTON Utilities for
UNIX to UNISYS, PLEXUS, ENCORE, PYRAMID or 286-based
INTELs anytime in the near (or distant) future.
For those who need more information, the INTERACTIVE Systems
phone numbers are:
800-346-7111 (I got no answer from this number)
or
213-453-8649
I hope this answers some of the questions on NORTON for UNIX
that have appeared in our forum. As usual I am available to
answer questions arising from this correspondence.
Steve Petruska
USAISC-SACRAMENTO
DSN : 839-3315
COMM : 916-388-3315
e-mail: qncdsis2@saad-emh1
----- End of forwarded messages
----- End of forwarded messages