In article <n0hifrFfbu2U1@mid.individual.net>,
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 22:43:33 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
Actually, who says CDE was ever rCLdeadrCY? GNU created their own version >>> of the OSF Motif GUI toolkit, called rCLLesstifrCY, and it continues to be >>> available in Linux distros to this day.
Lesstif died about 15 years ago and never made it to Motif 2.x that
added some widgets. OSF/Motif was open-sources with a LGPL license in
2012 that made Lesstif redundant.
I don't know how many distros make it available, particularly the ones >>moving to Wayland. If you're planning a little Motif programmimg, you'd >>better have space on the bookshelf for Volume 1 - Volume 6B covering X, >>Xlib, Xt, and Motif. You probably don't need Volume 0. Don't ask me how
I know :)
Motif mwm continues to be a nice unobtrusive window manager to use in
VNC sessions. (Now if they would get xterm working again in FreeBSD for that...)
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers
really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the
main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now.
On 2026-03-30, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the >> trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers
really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the
main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now.
Berkeley Software Distribution?
IllumOS?
In article <10qdcb9$296q3$2@dont-email.me>,
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the >>> trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers
really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the
main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now.
Berkeley Software Distribution?
IllumOS?
None of which are technically Unix, in the sense of being
certified as such by the powers that be, but for all intents and
purposes are basically Unix.
The thing about Ken Thompson preferring Linux now is likely a
complete fabrication. Ken went on to work on Plan 9 after Unix,
I think he used a Mac at Google (and probably still does) and
is now happily retired and enjoying time with his grandchildren.
I know he's still using Plan 9 for some things.
- Dan C.
On 2026-03-30, Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote:
In article <10qdcb9$296q3$2@dont-email.me>,
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the
trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers >>>> really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the
main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now.
Berkeley Software Distribution?
IllumOS?
None of which are technically Unix, in the sense of being
certified as such by the powers that be, but for all intents and
purposes are basically Unix.
The thing about Ken Thompson preferring Linux now is likely a
complete fabrication. Ken went on to work on Plan 9 after Unix,
I think he used a Mac at Google (and probably still does) and
is now happily retired and enjoying time with his grandchildren.
I know he's still using Plan 9 for some things.
BSD, ioctl's and sockets aren't tecnically 'Unix'.
Neither is Plan9 which is 'Unix 2.0' but refined.
No terminal, no ioctls, everything it's trully
a file. Rio's it's simple, X11 it's an abomination.
Then there's Unix 3.0, Inferno and Limbo. [snip]
On 2026-03-30, Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote:
In article <10qdcb9$296q3$2@dont-email.me>,
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the
trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers >>>> really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the
main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now.
Berkeley Software Distribution?
IllumOS?
None of which are technically Unix, in the sense of being
certified as such by the powers that be, but for all intents and
purposes are basically Unix.
The thing about Ken Thompson preferring Linux now is likely a
complete fabrication. Ken went on to work on Plan 9 after Unix,
I think he used a Mac at Google (and probably still does) and
is now happily retired and enjoying time with his grandchildren.
I know he's still using Plan 9 for some things.
- Dan C.
BSD, ioctl's and sockets aren't tecnically 'Unix'.
In article <slrn10to11d.467.anthk@openbsd.home>,
Anthk <anthk@disroot.org> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote:
In article <10qdcb9$296q3$2@dont-email.me>,
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:Berkeley Software Distribution?
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the
trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers >>>>> really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the >>>>> main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now. >>>>
IllumOS?
None of which are technically Unix, in the sense of being
certified as such by the powers that be, but for all intents and
purposes are basically Unix.
The thing about Ken Thompson preferring Linux now is likely a
complete fabrication. Ken went on to work on Plan 9 after Unix,
I think he used a Mac at Google (and probably still does) and
is now happily retired and enjoying time with his grandchildren.
I know he's still using Plan 9 for some things.
BSD, ioctl's and sockets aren't tecnically 'Unix'.
Huh? Not only is this a weird non sequitur, it is flatly wrong.
For instance, ioctl(2) came from 7th Edition Research Unix,
written at Bell Labs, by the people who wrote Unix. To say it
is not Unix is factually and historically incorrect.
Neither is Plan9 which is 'Unix 2.0' but refined.
Not really. Plan 9 was a research project that was focused on
building interactive computing environments for then
newly-emerging trends in computing: commodity machines with
large(r) memories, multiple processors, bitmapped graphics
displays, and ubiquitously interconnected with high-speed local
area networks.
It was also a pleasant and productive environment for its
creators, who were working on other things, in addition to
operating systems. Sadly, it never achieved mainstream success,
though it didn't help that it languished in a quality trough
somewhere midway between 7th Edition Unix and 4.3BSD for many
years.
However, many of its important ideas have been incorporated into
other systems: Linux, in particular, harvested many of the
fruits of the Plan9 research (e.g., mutable namespaces), though
the implementation there is not nearly as elegant as the
original.
Of course, plan 9 was influenced by Unix, since that was what
its creators had previously worked on, and it can be thought of
as a successor, but no one thought of it as "Unix 2.0".
No terminal, no ioctls, everything it's trully
a file. Rio's it's simple, X11 it's an abomination.
Then there's Unix 3.0, Inferno and Limbo. [snip]
That's not even close to true, even for the people who created
Inferno. The point there was to productize the Plan 9 ideas
with an eye towards incorporation into commercial products.
Inferno had brilliant engineering but failed in the market place
because AT&T/Lucent did not know how to market, let alone sell,
it. Inferno was used in a few of their products (the managed
firewall; the PathStar access server), but that was about it.
Limbo itself was one in a succession of langauges structured
around CSP as a first-class primitive, but as a language, wasn't
terribly notable on its own. Go is the lastest incarnation in
that line, and is far more interesting on every level than Limbo
every was.
Every now and then someone hears about Plan 9 and/or Inferno
and gets super excited about what they see as the True Unix Way,
and then they proceed to make these grand, sweeping statements.
But it's important to recognize that these are almost never
technically or historically accurate, and are essentially always
rooted in a wistful ideology by people who were not involved yet
see it as their duty to take up the mantle of the true path.
Anyway, the point remains: Ken Thompson is not some kind of
Linux booster now, despite Lawrence's assertions.
- Dan C.
On 2026-04-13, Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote:
In article <slrn10to11d.467.anthk@openbsd.home>,
Anthk <anthk@disroot.org> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Dan Cross <cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net> wrote:
In article <10qdcb9$296q3$2@dont-email.me>,
Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-03-30, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:22:24 -0000 (UTC), Anthk wrote:Berkeley Software Distribution?
I evolved a bit over Unix, which is a dead end.
The only rCLUnixrCY still standing is ApplerCOs macOS, which still uses the
trademark as a selling point, but I donrCOt think any of the customers >>>>>> really care any more.
People wanting the old tradition of openness, adaptability and
hackability are using Linux nowadays. ThatrCOs what Ken Thompson, the >>>>>> main brain behind the original Unix at Bell Labs, prefers to use now. >>>>>
IllumOS?
None of which are technically Unix, in the sense of being
certified as such by the powers that be, but for all intents and
purposes are basically Unix.
The thing about Ken Thompson preferring Linux now is likely a
complete fabrication. Ken went on to work on Plan 9 after Unix,
I think he used a Mac at Google (and probably still does) and
is now happily retired and enjoying time with his grandchildren.
I know he's still using Plan 9 for some things.
BSD, ioctl's and sockets aren't tecnically 'Unix'.
Huh? Not only is this a weird non sequitur, it is flatly wrong.
For instance, ioctl(2) came from 7th Edition Research Unix,
written at Bell Labs, by the people who wrote Unix. To say it
is not Unix is factually and historically incorrect.
Neither is Plan9 which is 'Unix 2.0' but refined.
Not really. Plan 9 was a research project that was focused on
building interactive computing environments for then
newly-emerging trends in computing: commodity machines with
large(r) memories, multiple processors, bitmapped graphics
displays, and ubiquitously interconnected with high-speed local
area networks.
It was also a pleasant and productive environment for its
creators, who were working on other things, in addition to
operating systems. Sadly, it never achieved mainstream success,
though it didn't help that it languished in a quality trough
somewhere midway between 7th Edition Unix and 4.3BSD for many
years.
However, many of its important ideas have been incorporated into
other systems: Linux, in particular, harvested many of the
fruits of the Plan9 research (e.g., mutable namespaces), though
the implementation there is not nearly as elegant as the
original.
Of course, plan 9 was influenced by Unix, since that was what
its creators had previously worked on, and it can be thought of
as a successor, but no one thought of it as "Unix 2.0".
No terminal, no ioctls, everything it's trully
a file. Rio's it's simple, X11 it's an abomination.
Then there's Unix 3.0, Inferno and Limbo. [snip]
That's not even close to true, even for the people who created
Inferno. The point there was to productize the Plan 9 ideas
with an eye towards incorporation into commercial products.
Inferno had brilliant engineering but failed in the market place
because AT&T/Lucent did not know how to market, let alone sell,
it. Inferno was used in a few of their products (the managed
firewall; the PathStar access server), but that was about it.
Limbo itself was one in a succession of langauges structured
around CSP as a first-class primitive, but as a language, wasn't
terribly notable on its own. Go is the lastest incarnation in
that line, and is far more interesting on every level than Limbo
every was.
Every now and then someone hears about Plan 9 and/or Inferno
and gets super excited about what they see as the True Unix Way,
and then they proceed to make these grand, sweeping statements.
But it's important to recognize that these are almost never
technically or historically accurate, and are essentially always
rooted in a wistful ideology by people who were not involved yet
see it as their duty to take up the mantle of the true path.
Anyway, the point remains: Ken Thompson is not some kind of
Linux booster now, despite Lawrence's assertions.
Plan9 and now 9front are refined Unix
and Alef/Go/Limbo was the attempt
to create a true sucessor to C with the C bloat/perks from Unix
and POSIX.
Inferno was the pure consolidation of plan9's
philosophy made into a VM.
Acme under Inferno can almost be
dealt as the newest Acme ever, the 9front one it's just
a slightly tweaked one from Plan9.
BSD, ioctl's and sockets aren't tecnically 'Unix'.
Neither is Plan9 which is 'Unix 2.0' but refined.
No terminal, no ioctls, everything it's trully
a file.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 02:53:03 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
10 files (20,373K bytes) |
| Messages: | 264,422 |