vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) (08/17/88)
In article <8344@smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: >There are many good new ideas that can be incorporated into >future operating systems. ... There is one in >the works called "Plan 9" that embodies some good concepts.. "Plan 9"... as in "Plan 9 From Outer Space"? Somehow I have to think they're going to change the name before marketing it. Sounds interesting, though. Who's working on it; where can I get more information? (Unless it's another one of these relentlessly interactive, icon-based, rodent-infested, dumb-user-friendly, smart-user-crippling systems that are so trendy these days, in which case I'm not interested.) -- Mike Van Pelt Help stamp out Mickey-Mouse Unisys Silicon Valley computer interfaces -- vanpelt@unisv.UUCP Menus are for Restaurants!
gwyn@smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (08/18/88)
In article <565@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >Who's working on it; It's a research project at Bell Labs. I don't want to name the participants, to spare them being deluged with inquiries. >where can I get more information? I believe there was a report given at a recent EUUG meeting; perhaps there's something in the proceedings. (Wish I had a copy.) I'm sure there will be more published as the project proceeds. >(Unless it's another one of these relentlessly interactive, icon-based, >rodent-infested, dumb-user-friendly, smart-user-crippling systems that >are so trendy these days, in which case I'm not interested.) No, it's a post-UNIX distributed system that supports networked workstations in a different way than you're accustomed to seeing. Not all bit-map mouse-using systems are designed for dumb users.
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (08/19/88)
In article <565@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >"Plan 9"... as in "Plan 9 From Outer Space"? "Plan 9 from Bell Labs", actually. >Somehow I have to think they're going to change the name >before marketing it. They're not marketing it. It is strictly a research system. Unless AT&T does a bit of a turnaround, the only way you'll ever see it is when bits of it start showing up in System V Release 57. >Sounds interesting, though. Who's working on it; where can >I get more information? ... The Bell Labs research crowd (Ritchie, Pike, et al). Check recent Usenix and EUUG proceedings for relevant papers. -- Intel CPUs are not defective, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology they just act that way. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
oz@yunexus.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) (08/19/88)
In article <565@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >In article <8344@smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes: >>There are many good new ideas that can be incorporated into >>future operating systems. ... There is one in >>the works called "Plan 9" that embodies some good concepts.. > >"Plan 9"... as in "Plan 9 From Outer Space"? Yep, I think that is the idea. :-) >Somehow I have to think they're going to change the name >before marketing it. Marketing ?? What marketing ?? Rob Pike says the ordinary mortals will never see it, and it is a "pure" re-write of Un*x, by Pike, Thompson, others. I know of no published paper about it, but Pike will occasionally do a lecture on it. [I think EUUG got one last year.] >Mike Van Pelt oz -- Crud that is not paged | Usenet: ...!utzoo!yunexus!oz is still crud. | ...uunet!mnetor!yunexus!oz andrew@alice | Bitnet: oz@[yulibra|yuyetti] | Phonet: +1 416 736-5257x3976
bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton) (08/19/88)
In article <846@yunexus.UUCP> oz@yunexus.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) writes: >In article <565@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >> >>"Plan 9"... as in "Plan 9 From Outer Space"? > >Yep, I think that is the idea. :-) > >Marketing ?? What marketing ?? Rob Pike says the ordinary mortals >will never see it, and it is a "pure" re-write of Un*x, by Pike, >Thompson, others. I know of no published paper about it, but Pike >will occasionally do a lecture on it. Is this the one where Thompson finally gets to spell creat() "with an e"? --Blair
jherr@umbio.MIAMI.EDU (Jack Herrington) (08/19/88)
in article <846@yunexus.UUCP>, oz@yunexus.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) says: > >In article <565@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >> >>"Plan 9"... as in "Plan 9 From Outer Space"? > > Marketing ?? What marketing ?? Rob Pike says the ordinary mortals > will never see it, and it is a "pure" re-write of Un*x, by Pike, > Thompson, others. I know of no published paper about it, but Pike > will occasionally do a lecture on it. [I think EUUG got one last > year.] > So how many re-writes of UNIX do we have running right now, let me see how many I know of. - Berkeley is developing BSD 4.4 - AT&T is developing SVr4. - GNU is making GNU. - Sun and AT&T are "merging" UNIX for AT&T SVr5? - Plan 9. - Xenix. - Posix. - Mach (not UNIX, but damn close). There have to be others, maybe I can keep sort of a running list and post it to both here and 'rec.humor'!. -Jack Herrington jherr@umbio (or jherr%umbio@umigw.miami.edu) "Now I have a Machine Gun, Ho, Ho, Ho!"
oz@yunexus.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) (08/22/88)
In article <282@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> jherr@umbio.MIAMI.EDU (Jack Herrington) writes: > >So how many re-writes of UNIX do we have running right now, let me >see how many I know of. > >- Berkeley is developing BSD 4.4 >- AT&T is developing SVr4. >- GNU is making GNU. >- Sun and AT&T are "merging" UNIX for AT&T SVr5? >- Plan 9. >- Xenix. >- Posix. >- Mach (not UNIX, but damn close). > >There have to be others, maybe I can keep sort of a running list and >post it to both here and 'rec.humor'!. Heheeee.. You make an interesting point. [You forgot to include minix] Did I hear someone mention "standards" ?? Or does history repeat itself ?? Yep, It does. rec.humor should get lotsa postings within the year 2000, about portability, standards, the "ultimate" Un*x, and other trivia about "my nix is better then your nix" while someone at Bell labs is running plan-9 warp 8, ["release" would be a misnomer] and the neighborhood cabbie is re-writing cat -v ... FSF folks will be puzzling over "GNU: not enough core" messages on a 1024 meg sun5/3000. Doug Gwyn's rack will contain a 35-volume SXID (system-10 Interface Definition) that will be the latest AT&T-SUN sub-standard. [Sources will require a security clearence]. oz -- Crud that is not paged | Usenet: ...!utzoo!yunexus!oz is still crud. | ...uunet!mnetor!yunexus!oz andrew@alice | Bitnet: oz@[yulibra|yuyetti] | Phonet: +1 416 736-5257x3976
smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven Bellovin) (08/23/88)
``Plan 9'' is not a product, and is not intended to be. It is research -- an experimental investigation into a different way of computing. The developers started from several basic assumptions: that CPUs are very cheap but that we don't really know how to combine them effectively; that *good* networking is very important; that an intelligent user interface (complete with dot-mapped display and mouse) is a Right Decision; that existing systems with networks, mice, etc., are not the correct way to do things, and in particular that today's workstations are not the way to go. (No, I won't bother to explain all their reasoning; that's a long and separate article.) Finally, the UNIX system per se is dead as a vehicle for serious research into operating system structure; it has grown too large, and is too constrained by 15+ years of history. Now -- given those assumptions, they decided to throw away what we have today and design a new system. Compatibility isn't an issue -- they are not in the product-building business. (Nor are they in the ``let's make another clever hack'' business.) Of course aspects of Plan 9 resemble the UNIX system quite strongly -- is it any surprise that Pike, Thompson, et al., think that that's a decent model to follow? But Plan 9 isn't, and is not meant to be, a re-implementation of the UNIX system. If you want, call it a UNIX-like system. Will Plan 9 ever be released? I have no idea. Will it remain buried? I hope not. Large companies do not sponsor large research organizations just for the prestige; they hope for an (eventual) concrete return in the form of concepts that can be made into (or incorporated into) products. --Steve Bellovin Disclaimer: this article is not, of course, an official statement from AT&T. Nor is it an official statement of the reasoning behind Plan 9. I do think it's accurate, though, and I'm sure I'll be told if I'm wrong...
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) (08/24/88)
As quoted from <282@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> by jherr@umbio.MIAMI.EDU (Jack Herrington): +--------------- | So how many re-writes of UNIX do we have running right now, let me | see how many I know of. | | - Berkeley is developing BSD 4.4 | - AT&T is developing SVr4. | - GNU is making GNU. | - Sun and AT&T are "merging" UNIX for AT&T SVr5? | - Plan 9. | - Xenix. | - Posix. | - Mach (not UNIX, but damn close). +--------------- - The merged Unix/Xenix product codeveloped by AT&T and Microsoft - Altos System V (Altos got sick of waiting for the above) - Do Comer's Xinu and Tanenbaum's Minix count? I understand AT&T and Microsoft are a bit miffed at Altos for not waiting until the "official" merged product was out to release their version. Maybe that's why Altos decided to join the OSF? (Oooooh, my aching head!) ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery, uunet!marque!ncoast!allbery DELPHI: ALLBERY For comp.sources.misc send mail to ncoast!sources-misc
vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) (08/25/88)
In article <10533@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven Bellovin) writes: >``Plan 9'' ... is research ... The developers started from >several basic assumptions: ... that an intelligent user interface >(complete with dot-mapped display and mouse) is a Right Decision; Argh! Mice! I hate meeces to pieces! :-) I certainly hope (well, actually, from what I know about the people involved, I'm reasonably confident) that if they must design a system that is "user (*bletch*) friendly", they make it one which does not cripple the person who (a) knows what they're doing and (b) is not stricken with nameless dread at the sight of a "%" prompt. But seriously, making the system easier to learn (which you must only do once) at the expense of making it harder to use (which you must do every day) is a mistake which far too many people are making these days. One of the strengths of Unix is that it is very easy to use, at the expense of its oft-cited "User unfriendliness". -- Mike Van Pelt Help stamp out Mickey-Mouse Unisys Silicon Valley computer interfaces -- vanpelt@unisv.UUCP Menus are for Restaurants!
madd@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Jim Frost) (08/25/88)
In article <282@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> jherr@umbio.MIAMI.EDU (Jack Herrington) writes: |So how many re-writes of UNIX do we have running right now, let me |see how many I know of. [...] |- Xenix. I was under the impression that Xenix was the microsoft port of SysV to the intel architecture, not a rewrite. jim frost madd@bu-it.bu.edu
chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (08/25/88)
In article <583@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: >... making the system easier to learn (which you must only do >once) at the expense of making it harder to use (which you must do every >day) is a mistake which far too many people are making these days. It depends: If you really *are* going to use the system only occasionally, then `friendliness' is important; otherwise, usability dominates. >Mike Van Pelt Help stamp out Mickey-Mouse >Unisys Silicon Valley computer interfaces -- >vanpelt@unisv.UUCP Menus are for Restaurants! [thoughtful pause] Or: `If you go to the same restaurant every day for lunch, do you read the menu each time?' -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris
gwyn@smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) (08/25/88)
In article <583@unisv.UUCP> vanpelt@unisv.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes: -In article <10533@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven Bellovin) writes: ->``Plan 9'' ... is research ... The developers started from ->several basic assumptions: ... that an intelligent user interface ->(complete with dot-mapped display and mouse) is a Right Decision; -I certainly hope (well, actually, from what I know about the people -involved, I'm reasonably confident) that if they must design a -system that is "user (*bletch*) friendly", they make it one which -does not cripple the person who (a) knows what they're doing and -(b) is not stricken with nameless dread at the sight of a "%" prompt. Steve did not say "user friendly", meaning mindless-user friendly, as in the typical Macintosh interface. Have you used the Blit-style interface? It beats the hell out of ordinary dumb CRTs.
smb@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven Bellovin) (08/26/88)
In article <583@unisv.UUCP>, vanpelt@unisv.UUCP writes: > Argh! Mice! I hate meeces to pieces! :-) > > I certainly hope (well, actually, from what I know about the people > involved, I'm reasonably confident) that if they must design a > system that is "user (*bletch*) friendly", they make it one which > does not cripple the person who (a) knows what they're doing and > (b) is not stricken with nameless dread at the sight of a "%" prompt. I wasn't clear in my original posting. As far as I know, Plan 9 does not use Sun- (or Apple-....) style icons to do everything in the world. The mouse is a pointing and editing device; it is not intended to replace the shell. --Steve Bellovin
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) (08/30/88)
As quoted from <24550@bu-cs.BU.EDU> by madd@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Jim Frost): +--------------- | In article <282@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> jherr@umbio.MIAMI.EDU (Jack Herrington) writes: | |So how many re-writes of UNIX do we have running right now, let me | |see how many I know of. | [...] | |- Xenix. | | I was under the impression that Xenix was the microsoft port of SysV | to the intel architecture, not a rewrite. +--------------- Wrong. Not only does Xenix exist for the 68000 (Radio Scrap [ ;-) ] Model 16, AKA Tandy 6000) but I've heard that there is a Vax Xenix (though why anyone would want to run Vax Xenix when there are plenty of *real* Unixes to run is beyond me). Also: many (not all, but many) Xenix "System V's" are really Version 7 internally (/etc/ttys instead of /etc/inittab), and *all* Xenix 3's are Version 7 instead of System III. On the other hand, it's *not* a rewrite, either, except insofar as the "fake" System III/V versions have code added that wasn't in the V7 source Microsoft was working from. And the (few?) "real" System V versions are apparently based on Interactive's 386 Unix port. Summary: Xenix is an odd duck. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery, uunet!marque!ncoast!allbery DELPHI: ALLBERY For comp.sources.misc send mail to ncoast!sources-misc
aad@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri) (09/01/88)
The last time I looked through the maps, I saw a couple PDP-11/70's running "Xenix". -- @disclaimer(Any concepts or opinions above are entirely mine, not those of my employer, my GIGI, or my 11/34) beak is beak is not Anthony A. Datri,SysAdmin,StepstoneCorporation,stpstn!aad
daveh@marob.MASA.COM (Dave Hammond) (09/02/88)
In article <2049@stpstn.UUCP> aad@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri) writes: > >The last time I looked through the maps, I saw a couple >PDP-11/70's running "Xenix". You sure that wasn't `Venix' ? I've worked on several -11's running Venix, including 11/23's and 11/73's. Dave Hammond UUCP: {uunet|...}!marob.masa.com!!daveh DOMAIN: daveh@marob.masa.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
aad@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri) (09/10/88)
In article <396@marob.MASA.COM> daveh@marob.masa.com (Dave Hammond) writes: >In article <2049@stpstn.UUCP> aad@stpstn.UUCP (Anthony A. Datri) writes: >>The last time I looked through the maps, I saw a couple >>PDP-11/70's running "Xenix". [actually, it was over a year ago when I noticed them] >You sure that wasn't `Venix' ? I've worked on several -11's running Venix, >including 11/23's and 11/73's. from my current maps: u.aus.nsw.1:#S DEC PDP 11/73; SCO Xenix 2.4+ u.swe.1:#S Plessey 11/23, XENIX-11, V7 u.swe.1:#S Plessey 11/23, XENIX-11 3.0 u.swe.1:#S PDP 11/23, XENIX V2.2 u.swe.1:#S PDP 11/60 Venix/11 (probably others running Venix, too) So they weren't actually 11/70's, but there *is* an 11/70 in there that says it's running something called Interactive Systems IS/3, as well an 11 running RSX. -- @disclaimer(Any concepts or opinions above are entirely mine, not those of my employer, my GIGI, or my 11/34) beak is beak is not Anthony A. Datri,SysAdmin,StepstoneCorporation,stpstn!aad