HURD

[maus]

Has anyone ever used HURD?. The Stallman OS?.

[Simp Busters]

Post by maus
Has anyone ever used HURD?. The Stallman OS?.

Did you mean TURD?

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

Post by maus
Has anyone ever used HURD?. The Stallman OS?.

​Yes, i am sure that some people have used it.

--
⚗︎ | /blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr.
bluemanedhawk.github.io
Bitches stole my whole ass ␔🭖᷿᪳𝼗᷍⏧𒒫𐻾ࣛ↉�⃣ quoted-p

[jimtaylor]

Yee-up. In terms of normal usage, you wouldn't see much difference next
to GNU/Linux, but there are some very interesting features like
translators that other systems don't have.

Trouble is, it's still (afaik) 686-only and lacks sound capabilities, so
it's not what you'd call ready for prime time. It likely never will be.

[Peter Flass]

Post by jimtaylor
Yee-up. In terms of normal usage, you wouldn't see much difference next
to GNU/Linux, but there are some very interesting features like
translators that other systems don't have.
Trouble is, it's still (afaik) 686-only and lacks sound capabilities, so
it's not what you'd call ready for prime time. It likely never will be.

Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems, unless there was something
really special about one. If there were, since they’re open-source, the
other would soon have the same.

[Grant Taylor]

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems

And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser degree.

FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.

Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.

Then how many different Linux distributions are there?

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were at least 50 different Unix
(like) OSs today. I'd only be moderately surprised if there weren't
more than 100 Unix (like OSs today.

[Lynn Wheeler]

Post by Grant Taylor
And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser degree.
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.
Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.

80s ...

USB did BSD unix work-alike
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BSD_operating_systems
UCLA did LOCUS unix work-alike ... IBM used it for AIX/386 & AIX/370
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_Computing_Corporation
CMU did MACH unix work-alike ... CONVEX used it, Apple used it, others
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_(kernel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSF/1

IBM contracted for AT&T port to PC/RT for "AIX" from the company that
had done the AT&T port for (IBM/PC) PC/IX. IBM also did a BSD port to
PC/RT marketed as "AOS"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RT_PC

note:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RT_PC#As_part_of_the_NSFNET_backbone

Starting in early 80s, I had HSDT, T1 and faster computer links and was
working with NSF director to interconnect the NSF supercomputer centers.
Then congress cuts the budget, some other things happen and finally RFP
is released (in part based on what we already had running) ... mar1986
preliminary announce
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#12
The OASC has initiated three programs: The Supercomputer Centers Program
to provide Supercomputer cycles; the New Technologies Program to foster
new supercomputer software and hardware developments; and the Networking
Program to build a National Supercomputer Access Network - NSFnet.

IBM internal politics not allowing us to bid (being blamed for online
computer conferencing inside IBM, likely contributed). The NSF director
tried to help by writing the company a letter (with support from other
gov. agencies) ... but that just made the internal politics worse (as
did claims that what we already had operational was at least 5yrs ahead
of the winning bid), as regional networks connect in, it becomes the
NSFNET backbone, precursor to modern internet
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/401444/grid-computing/

The winning bid actually was 440kbit links (driven by the PC/RT routers)
... possibly to make it look like it met the RFP, they had T1 "trunks"
driving multiple 440kbit links with telco multiplexors. I was then
ridiculing them about the T1 link "claims".

I was then asked to be the "red team" for the T3 effort (possibly figure
it would shut me up) with several people from a half dozen labs was the
"blue team". I presented 1st and then the blue team presentation. Five
minutes into the "blue team" presentation, the executive running the
review, pounded on the table and said he would lie down in front of
garbage truck before he let any but the "blue team" proposal go forward.
I get up and walk out.

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:19:15 -0600

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems

And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser degree.
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.

The reasons for the first three and the important differences can
be summed up by their respective slogans:

FreeBSD: The power to serve
NetBSD: Of course it runs NetBSD
OpenBSD: Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long
time!

MacOS is mostly about the UI, Darwin is the underlying open source
unixalike with a Mach kernel and mostly FreeBSD userland.

Efficiency, portability, user friendliness and security are often at
odds and require compromises to be made. Having variants focusing on each
is good.

One thing that is surprising given the above list is that the BSD
based firewall appliances use FreeBSD as a base not OpenBSD.

[Gordon Henderson]

Post by Grant Taylor

Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems

And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser degree.
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.
Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.
Then how many different Linux distributions are there?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were at least 50 different Unix
(like) OSs today. I'd only be moderately surprised if there weren't
more than 100 Unix (like OSs today.

I'm writing (have written) a little retro style OS in BCPL to run on
some "retro new" hardware and it's turning out to be very Unix like in
appearance - CLI, posix-ish system calls, etc. I've thought of ways to
get away from it but it's not a simple as just renaming the commands. Unix
is everywhere, even when it's not ...

-Gordon

[Charlie Gibbs]

Post by Gordon Henderson
I'm writing (have written) a little retro style OS in BCPL to run on
some "retro new" hardware and it's turning out to be very Unix like in
appearance - CLI, posix-ish system calls, etc. I've thought of ways to
get away from it but it's not a simple as just renaming the commands. Unix
is everywhere, even when it's not ...

BCPL? Shades of AmigaOS (which in some ways was a bit Unixy itself).
Maybe it's just that once you find the optimum way to do something,
there's no reason to change it - at least until the marketroids stick
their noses in. :-(

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 16:28:59 GMT

Post by Charlie Gibbs
BCPL? Shades of AmigaOS (which in some ways was a bit Unixy itself).

It would be - Tripos was the Cambridge answer to Unix at least
largely because BCPL, Martin Richards and no C at Cambridge (that changed
eventually).

[Bob Eager]

Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot

Post by Charlie Gibbs
BCPL? Shades of AmigaOS (which in some ways was a bit Unixy itself).

It would be - Tripos was the Cambridge answer to Unix at least
largely because BCPL, Martin Richards and no C at Cambridge (that
changed eventually).

I just spent some time reconstructing TRIPOS for the PDP-11. It runs, but
really doesn't have enough memory to be comfortable.

[Bob Eager]

Post by Gordon Henderson

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems

And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser degree.
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.
Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.
Then how many different Linux distributions are there?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were at least 50 different Unix
(like) OSs today. I'd only be moderately surprised if there weren't
more than 100 Unix (like OSs today.

I'm writing (have written) a little retro style OS in BCPL to run on
some "retro new" hardware and it's turning out to be very Unix like in
appearance - CLI, posix-ish system calls, etc. I've thought of ways to
get away from it but it's not a simple as just renaming the commands.
Unix is everywhere, even when it's not ...

As a BCPL fan (done several compilers) I'm interested.

[Gordon Henderson]

Post by Bob Eager

Post by Gordon Henderson
I'm writing (have written) a little retro style OS in BCPL to run on
some "retro new" hardware and it's turning out to be very Unix like in
appearance - CLI, posix-ish system calls, etc. I've thought of ways to
get away from it but it's not a simple as just renaming the commands.
Unix is everywhere, even when it's not ...

As a BCPL fan (done several compilers) I'm interested.

I don't feel it's anything special, however one mans ordinary is another mans
"oh yea", or something ...

Started as an idea of something retro and I wanted an "upgrade" from the 65c02
system I'd built, so built a 65C816 system with 512KB of RAM. Then wrote a
cintcode VM thingy for it to make BCPL run. It's a sort of single user
multi-tasking thing - a 32-bit VM running on a 16/8 bit CPU with an 8-bit
memory bus at 16Mhz. It's not going to win any speed prizes.. but it achieved my
aim of a system capable of self-hosting where I can edit and compile programs
directly on it.

The 65c816 is not the easiest of things to write code for - 64KB banks
of RAM which was not easy to "linearise" for BCPL. It was too little, too
late when it came out and reall should never have been, but there you go.
It kept a few 6502 fans happy :)

The CLI is sort of shell-like and the underlying library has MRs stream
IO library on-top of an open, read, write, close & seek layer. The multi
threading is done at the Cintcode layer - a bit like the transputer
microcode does and it works is a remarkably similar fashion...

Wee demo here:

I have ported it to RISC-V where it flies. I did this initially by writing
a RISC-V emulator in BCPL then writing the Cintcode VM in RISC-V assembler
then bootstrapping my OS under my emulator. Turtles all the way down and
all that. It was even slower but a good proof of concept. I ran it on a real
RV system (ESP32-C3) but I need to write a filing system for it to take that
further.

Enjoy,

Gordon

[Peter Flass]

Post by Gordon Henderson

Post by Grant Taylor

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems

And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser degree.
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.
Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.
Then how many different Linux distributions are there?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were at least 50 different Unix
(like) OSs today. I'd only be moderately surprised if there weren't
more than 100 Unix (like OSs today.

I'm writing (have written) a little retro style OS in BCPL to run on
some "retro new" hardware and it's turning out to be very Unix like in
appearance - CLI, posix-ish system calls, etc. I've thought of ways to
get away from it but it's not a simple as just renaming the commands. Unix
is everywhere, even when it's not ...

It’s like an earworm

Post by Gordon Henderson
-Gordon

[Kurt Weiske]

To: Grant Taylor
-=> Grant Taylor wrote to alt.folklore.computers <=-


GT> And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser
GT> degree.

GT> FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.

GT> Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
GT> be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.

Don't forget IRIX, SGI's product. I had the responsibility of managing
Solaris, IRIX and FreeBSD boxes under one roof back then, and it was
manageable for one person.

I was the Solaris guy, but had an envy for those SGI boxes. Great
keyboards, wonderful case design, but insecure as all hell out of the
box. It took a concerted effort to lock down a new box.

kurt weiske | kweiske at realitycheckbbs dot org
| http://realitycheckbbs.org
| 1:218/***@fidonet


... Reward for a job well done: More work
--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Win32 NewsLink 1.114
* realitycheckBBS - Aptos, CA - telnet://realitycheckbbs.org

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

Post by Kurt Weiske
To: Grant Taylor
-=> Grant Taylor wrote to alt.folklore.computers <=-
GT> And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser
GT> degree.
GT> FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.
GT> Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
GT> be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.
Don't forget IRIX, SGI's product. I had the responsibility of managing
Solaris, IRIX and FreeBSD boxes under one roof back then, and it was
manageable for one person.
I was the Solaris guy, but had an envy for those SGI boxes. Great
keyboards, wonderful case design, but insecure as all hell out of the
box. It took a concerted effort to lock down a new box.

There was also BSD/OS from BSDI, A/UX from Apple & PCIX from IBM.

[Scott Lurndal]

Post by Kurt Weiske
To: Grant Taylor
-=> Grant Taylor wrote to alt.folklore.computers <=-
GT> And yet the '90s had exactly that. We still have it to a lesser
GT> degree.
GT> FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and in some ways macOS.
GT> Solaris, AIX, OpenMVS, HP-UX, SCO OpenServer, SCO UnixWare. There may
GT> be other more traditional Unixes than I'm aware of.
Don't forget IRIX, SGI's product. I had the responsibility of managing
Solaris, IRIX and FreeBSD boxes under one roof back then, and it was
manageable for one person.

And Convergent's CTIX, and Unisys SVR4/mk.

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems, unless there was something
really special about one. >

I completely agree. It is inherently silly for two things to compete
within the same niche when cooperating would be so much better for
everybody.

Post by Peter Flass
If there were, since they’re open-source, the other would soon have the
same.

​I don't know about that one. Different projects have different
priorities, so something that makes sense in one wouldn't necessarily be
good for the other.

--
⚗︎ | /blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr.
bluemanedhawk.github.io
Bitches stole my whole ass ␔🭖᷿᪳𝼗᷍⏧𒒫𐻾ࣛ↉�⃣ quoted-printabl

[Grant Taylor]

It is inherently silly for two things to compete within the same niche
when cooperating would be so much better for everybody.

Yet capitalism has so many examples to the contrary.

[maus]

Post by Blue-Maned_Hawk

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems, unless there was something
really special about one. >

I completely agree. It is inherently silly for two things to compete
within the same niche when cooperating would be so much better for
everybody.

Post by Peter Flass
If there were, since they’re open-source, the other would soon have the
same.

​I don't know about that one. Different projects have different
priorities, so something that makes sense in one wouldn't necessarily be
good for the other.

Chair mao, "Let 100 flowers blossom"
Which in time proved that monolithic is not good.

[Lynn Wheeler]

Post by maus
Chair mao, "Let 100 flowers blossom"
Which in time proved that monolithic is not good.

The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society Endangers Our Future
https://www.amazon.com/Price-Inequality-Divided-Society-Endangers-ebook/dp/B007MKCQ30/
pg35/loc1169-73:

In business school we teach students how to recognize, and create,
barriers to competition -- including barriers to entry -- that help
ensure that profits won't be eroded. Indeed, as we shall shortly see,
some of the most important innovations in business in the last three
decades have centered not on making the economy more efficient but on
how better to ensure monopoly power or how better to circumvent
government regulations intended to align social returns and private
rewards

...

The original purpose of patent office in the constitution was to protect
creative/innovative individuals from institutions trying to preserve
existing status quo (disruptive innovation making economy more
efficient). It is more and more being inverted, corporations doing
enormous numbers of defensive patents protecting status quo and
inhibiting innovation. Business schools now teach how to monopolize
markets and use patents to control innovation and change, preserving
status quo. The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society
Endangers Our Future
https://www.amazon.com/Price-Inequality-Divided-Society-Endangers-ebook/dp/B007MKCQ30/
pg35/loc1169-73:

In business school we teach students how to recognize, and create,
barriers to competition -- including barriers to entry -- that help
ensure that profits won't be eroded. Indeed, as we shall shortly see,
some of the most important innovations in business in the last three
decades have centered not on making the economy more efficient but on
how better to ensure monopoly power or how better to circumvent
government regulations intended to align social returns and private
rewards.

False Profits: Reviving the Corporation's Public Purpose
https://www.uclalawreview.org/false-profits-reviving-the-corporations-public-purpose/

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 08:43:04 -1000

Post by Lynn Wheeler
In business school we teach students how to recognize, and create,
barriers to competition -- including barriers to entry -- that help
ensure that profits won't be eroded.

Lock these people up and make them play iterated prisoner's dilema
based games until they get the point.

[Charlie Gibbs]

Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 08:43:04 -1000

Post by Lynn Wheeler
In business school we teach students how to recognize, and create,
barriers to competition -- including barriers to entry -- that help
ensure that profits won't be eroded.

Lock these people up and make them play iterated prisoner's dilema
based games until they get the point.

They've already gotten the point, at least as far as they're
concerned. They're psychopaths and are following their
self-defined road to success.

Recommended reading:

Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work
Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare
HarperBusiness, 2006
ISBN 978-0-06-083772-3

An even bigger problem is that corporations themselves are psychotic:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/our-humanity-naturally/201103/why-corporations-are-psychotic

Given the passive stance people are taking toward this threat,
I can imagine a 21st-century re-write of that 5th Dimension song:

This is the dawning of the age of the psychopath
Age of the psychopaaaaaaaath...

[LOL Lion]

Post by Charlie Gibbs

Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 08:43:04 -1000

Post by Lynn Wheeler
In business school we teach students how to recognize, and create,
barriers to competition -- including barriers to entry -- that help
ensure that profits won't be eroded.

Lock these people up and make them play iterated prisoner's dilema
based games until they get the point.

They've already gotten the point, at least as far as they're
concerned. They're psychopaths and are following their
self-defined road to success.
Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work
Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare
HarperBusiness, 2006
ISBN 978-0-06-083772-3

Or Robert Hare's book, Without Conscience, which is about psychopathy in
general. (Snakes in Suits is about corporate psychopaths.)

And a documentary:

http://www.fisheadmovie.com/

Watch online here, and use this password: fhmovie
https://vimeo.com/29078157

The more people who understand this, the fewer problems we will have on this planet.

[Carlos E.R.]

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems, unless there was
something really special about one. >

I completely agree.  It is inherently silly for two things to compete
within the same niche when cooperating would be so much better for
everybody.

Not when the goals and criteria for each are quite different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Hurd

Post by Peter Flass
If there were, since they’re open-source, the other would soon have the
same.

​I don't know about that one.  Different projects have different
priorities, so something that makes sense in one wouldn't necessarily be
good for the other.

[Blue-Maned_Hawk]

Post by Carlos E.R.

Post by Peter Flass
Don’t really need two similar unix-like systems, unless there was
something really special about one.

I completely agree.  It is inherently silly for two things to compete
within the same niche when cooperating would be so much better for
everybody.

Not when the goals and criteria for each are quite different.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Hurd

​If that's the case, then that would mean that they're not competing
within the same niche.

--
⚗︎ | /blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr.
bluemanedhawk.github.io
Bitches stole my whole ass ␔🭖᷿᪳𝼗᷍⏧𒒫𐻾ࣛ↉�⃣ quoted-

[Anthk]

Post by maus
Has anyone ever used HURD?. The Stallman OS?.

You can set some VM from Guix using the Hurd kernel and the Guix
userland for testing purposes.