HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: als@kowari.cpsg.com.au (Anthony Shipman)
Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
Organization: Computer Power Software
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 05:11:58 GMT

aldavi01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Arlie Davis) writes:

>In <1992Nov13.030529.6207@bilver.uucp> bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) writes:

>> And some of the lastest bourne shells also have fixed it.  In sysv.3.2
>> from Esix if I type

>> cat a b > b    I get this result

>> cat: input/output files 'b' identical

>> So after a decade these have been solved.

>This was a fix to cat, not any of the shells.  And b still gets clobbered.
>It *is* an improvement, though, and mine acts the same way.

>I responded in email to Bryan So that a decent solution is a (hypothetical
>but terribly simple) program called "buffer" would reads its stdin until EOF,
>then opens and writes all to the filename in argv[1].  So, "cat a b > b"
>becomes "cat a b | buffer b".  He seemed to like the suggestion.

TOPS10 did something like this automatically.  If program A started
reading a file and then program B opened the file for writing (not
updating) then the OS created a new version of the file internally and
the reader would continue to see the old version until it closed the
file.  Then the old version would be deleted and the next read would
get the new version.  Readers starting after program B would see the
new (possibly incomplete) version.

The UNIX method seems like it might have been one of the
simplifications done when cutting down from mainframe OSes and now we
are stuck with it.

In my own thought experiments on OS design I divide the file opening
process into a bind phase and a connect phase, analogous to opening a
bsd socket.

A hypothetical UNIX-like OS with TOPS10 version behaviour would have to
defer the opening of stdout until in cat.  eg the shell binds the file
name to stdout and cat completes the open, after it has opened its
input files.

--
Anthony Shipman                 "You've got to be taught before it's too late,
CP Software Export Pty Ltd,      Before you are six or seven or eight,
19 Cato St., East Hawthorn,      To hate all the people your relatives hate,
Melbourne, Australia, 3121       You've got to be carefully taught."  R&H
From: U433214%twncu865.BITNET@pucc.princeton.edu (Andrew Wang)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: how to send files in unix besides mail, cp,mv
Date: 15 Nov 92 15:56:01 GMT

Hi,

use uuencode and uudecode.

~a
.
Husky
Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4704 comp.unix.shell:4718
From: peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.shell
Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 15:38:57 GMT
Organization: Global Village 1

mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) writes:

>	cat a b > b

>files?  Consider instead "echo a b > b".[%]

I did just that with bash and it didn't complain. But yet, echo is often a
built-in command. It complained about 'cat a b >b' but didn't complain about
'cat a b|cat>b' so it's not perfect.

>switched to using dd, which mercifully had not been broken by some
>overzealous fool trying to keep people from shooting themselves in the
>foot.

<GRIN>

>Yes, it might.  So what?  Is "acceptance in the general microcomputer
>market place" something we wish for UNIX?  If it means dumbing down the
>interface until people no longer have enough rope to hang themselves,
>well, you can if you want, but I'll keep using what I've got.

Acceptance in the general microcomputer market also means more software, lower
prices, more support (every (S)VGA card ships with Windows drivers, but X11
support is harder to get), more UNIX related jobs (or do you prefer to use
Windows at work? :), more UNIX everything.

Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions
From: brianm@meaddata.com (Brian Montgomery)
Subject: mapping extended keyboard in vi/ksh
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:33:05 GMT
Distribution: usa

hi netters,
       I need your expertise in vi to help figure out this problem.

I want to map the extended keyboard to some macros in vi.  

Like for example I want to map the 
pageup key to  
pagedown key to  
home   key to :1G
end    key to :G


Another problem is mapping of the arrow keys. 

I use the kornshell and I would like to map the arrow keys to 
up arrow to k
down arrow to j
right arrow to l
left arrow to h
home key to ^
end key to $



Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Emailing me your responses would be a good idea
as I don't frequent the net often. I will summarise and post , if
I get enough requests (> 10).

Thanks in advance 


Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,alt.folklore.computers
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: So You Want To Be A Wizard? (A modest proposal)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 10:13:21 GMT

One can not become a true wizard without understanding the paths not taken.
Read Software Tools to understand the Tao of Fortran. If you can write
portable text-crunching code in Fortran-66 you are ready to take the next
step...

One can not become a true wizard without learning that the Source has a
Dark Side. Explore the net and study the works of others, for experience
is the best teacher, and you can learn much from those who failed to
listen to it. There is much darkness in the halls of FTP...

One can not become a wizard without knowing adversity. Take the oldest, least
powerful, and least compatible piece of junk you have access to, and port any
GNU software to it. Only then will you learn how to write portable code, and
why.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   Oletko halannut suttasi tnn?
  'U`    
Tarjoilija, tm ateria el viel.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:30:25 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.234721.3224@nic.csu.net> oleg@gd. (Oleg Kibirev) writes:
> Seriously, I would really appreciate a call like eprintf that accepts the same
> arguments as printf but also has staff like %n for program name, %m for message,
> %p for callers PID etc. This would encourage people to use more meaninfull diagnostics.

I'd rather have the opposite:

	error(severity, object, annotation);

If annotation==NULL, use errno or other implementation-defined method.

The last thing we need is more program-specific error formats.
-- 
Peter da Silva / 77487-5012 USA / +1 713 274 5180
true(<<VV$@\\$'&O 9$O%'$LT$&$"V6"$&$<4$?'&$ #I&&?$=$<<@)24 24 scale 3 21 moveto
{dup 36 eq{pop not}{dup 7 and 4 sub exch 56 and 8 div 4 sub 2 index{rlineto}{
rmoveto}ifelse}ifelse}forall stroke pop showpage % Har du kramat din varg idag?
From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Please explain...
Date: 21 Nov 1992 02:36:47 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: telecaster.think.com
Keywords: Telnet, pseudo-terminals, sockets

In article <1992Nov20.093151.19989@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse) writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.190632.13873@news.uit.no>, orjanr@staff.cs.uit.no (Xrjan Robertsen) writes:
>> I thought all communication had to pass through telnetd, but
>> monitoring this process (with monitor) shows no I/O activity when
>> telnet and the remote shell is communicating.  How can this be ?
>
>monitor, whatever that is, 

My guess is it's something similar to trace or truss.

>			    is either broken or is not designed to do
>what you're trying to do with it.  If the remote system (the one where
>telnetd and the remote shell are running) is even remotely "normal" (by
>which I really mean something more like "typical"), all communication
>between the net and the remote shell must go through telnetd.

Unfortunately, Mr. Robertsen didn't mention what kind of system he's using.
Perhaps it has a STREAMS module that permits two streams devices to be
connected directly, so that most data doesn't have to go through the
user-mode process.  The ITS operating system for PDP-10's has a system call
that links two devices in this manner; it can be given a set of characters
that should cause a break in this automatic forwarding, e.g. so that the
daemon process can handle special characters such as TELNET IACs or
terminal escape sequences.

Another possibility is that the system has the telnet server built into the
kernel (much as many systems have NFS servers in the kernel).  In that
case, telnetd only exists to make the system call that starts it up
(analogous to nfsd).

Now, I don't personally know of any Unix systems that do either of these,
but I don't claim to be familiar with many obscure Unix variants (oops,
does that mean I'm not wizardly enough to post this? :-)
-- 
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.misc
From: ski8032@tamsun.tamu.edu (The Man Behind The Curtain)
Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 19:05:58 GMT

Thus spake peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva):
>In article <1992Nov19.000136.3970@tamsun.tamu.edu> ski8032@tamsun.tamu.edu (The Man Behind The Curtain) writes:
>> echo a > a
>> echo b > b
>> cat a b > b
>> cat: input b is output
>> cat a
>> a
>> cat b
>> a
>
>echo a > a 
>echo b > b 
>cat a b > b 
>b: File exists.
>cat a 
>a
>cat b 
>b
>
>So, what's your problem?

Four of the four Un*x systems I just tested react just the way I
described.  You must be using a more sophisticated shell than
that which I am using (tcsh), but I think that it probably only catches
simple problems; once an expression gets even slightly complex,
I would guess that it does not catch all of these kind of things.

Is it consistent?  What does tail -10 .fingerees > .fingerees do?
What does echo `cat a b` > b do?  If I do a ln /usr/bin/cat zog; ./zog
a b > b, does it report the same message?  If I write a shell
script foo like this:

#!/bin/sh
cat a b

does foo > b work correctly?

>Peter da Silva / 77487-5012 USA / +1 713 274 5180

-- 
Till next time,                \o/   \o/
                                V \o/ V     email:pinky@tamu.edu
<>  Sam  Inala  <>                 V
From: mkumar@cs.utexas.edu (Mohan J. Kumar)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Need a raw ethernet interface
Date: 22 Nov 92 21:41:49 GMT

I used a package called EtherPeek on the Mac. I think it could display
CRC errors. I am not sure about UDP protocal errors.

Mohan
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mohan J. Kumar			e-mail: mkumar@cs.utexas.edu
Univ of Texas at Austin		Phone: (512)-371-7106
From: mouse@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (der Mouse)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Please explain...
Keywords: Telnet, pseudo-terminals, sockets
Date: 20 Nov 92 09:31:51 GMT
Organization: McGill Research Centre for Intelligent Machines

In article <1992Nov18.190632.13873@news.uit.no>, orjanr@staff.cs.uit.no (Xrjan Robertsen) writes:

> When you use telnet, telnetd [...more or less accurate sketch of how
> telnetd works...].  Right?

Pretty much, assuming that you telnet to a typical UNIXish system.

> What I don't understand is how input/output from the shell (to/from
> the slave side of the terminal) ends up going over the socket back to
> the local telnet?

Output from the remote shell goes to the (slave) pty.  telnetd then
reads it from the (master) pty and writes telnet protocol stream to the
network connection.  The local telnet then reads this and turns it into
local output.  Input takes the converse path.

> I thought all communication had to pass through telnetd, but
> monitoring this process (with monitor) shows no I/O activity when
> telnet and the remote shell is communicating.  How can this be ?

monitor, whatever that is, is either broken or is not designed to do
what you're trying to do with it.  If the remote system (the one where
telnetd and the remote shell are running) is even remotely "normal" (by
which I really mean something more like "typical"), all communication
between the net and the remote shell must go through telnetd.

					der Mouse

			    mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu
Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4774 comp.unix.questions:13569 comp.unix.programmer:5334 comp.unix.internals:1964
From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.programmer,comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: Changing the owner of a process
Date: 18 Nov 92 05:38:32 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Los Tejanos SCUBA Club and Beer Joint, Austin, Tejas

In article <1992Nov17.142837.21252@dale.ksc.nasa.gov> eposnak@dale.ksc.nasa.gov (Ed Posnak) writes:

[ This is actually one of the answers he quoted.  Mark Buda is the
  writer ... ]

>The uid, in every version of Unix I've seen, is stored in the proc
>structure in the kernel. You should be able to fiddle with this at
>will in a device driver, and since it's in the proc structure and not
>the u area, it'll always be there even if the process is swapped out.
>It *should* be just a matter of searching for the entry and changing
>it.

The UIDs are stored in the (struct user).  They are u.u_uid and u.u_ruid.
Without giving away too much, that's where the system looks for things
like access() and so on.  For a really bad time, check out the source
to suser().  It will convince you of this fact.

>This technique should also serve to implement something like renice()
>under Xenix, which doesn't have it. (The nice value also being stored
>in the proc structure.)

Unfortunately, now that we know the data is in the (struct user),
I won't be getting out my source to a XENIX renice ...  This also
means that the device driver idea won't work since the other processes
u-area may be anywheres.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                  [  TSAKC  ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151           [ DoF #17 ]        @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4741 comp.unix.shell:4745 comp.unix.misc:4208
From: oleg@gd. (Oleg Kibirev)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
Date: 17 Nov 92 07:47:20 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Departement of California State University in Fresno

In article <1992Nov14.145943.1288@global.hacktic.nl> peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser) writes:
>kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson) writes:
>
>>Is there any reason why there can't be another stream for more
>>user-friendly messages?
>
>Yes! Feeping creaturism. I'm pro user friendly messages, but, IMHO, consistency
>and clarity are much more important than verboseness. Furthermore, it would
>require existing programs to be extended with the verbose message.
>
>A better approach would be, IMHO, to leave the messages what they are and make
>every program return a meaningful error number. A seperate program could

This remindes me about real old Hewlett Packard BASIC interpeter...
???
RUN
ERROR 4578 IN LINE 8083

>figure out which verbose message belongs to that number. That saves several K's
>of text for each program and makes translation to foreign langauges much
>easier. The user who uses such a tool gradually learns to associate the terse

I suppose you have heard about shared libraries ;-).

Seriously, I would really appreciate a call like eprintf that accepts the same
arguments as printf but also has staff like %n for program name, %m for message,
%p for callers PID etc. This would encourage people to use more meaninfull diagnostics.

Oleg
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: >>TAR file on tape distroyed, are files recoverable?<<
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 04:31:41 GMT

In article <1992Nov14.214413.23844@bcars6a8.bnr.ca> norm@bcarh1ff.BNR.CA (Norm MacNeil) writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov10.184320.5998@microware.com>, troyf@microware.com
>(Troy Frericks) writes:
>|> I have a tape that contained a large 'tar' file.  The data is not
>|> replaceable.  The data that is needed is at the end of the tar
>|> file, but it is inaccessable because the wrong parameter was
>|> passed to tar when attempting to retrieve it.  The 'c' for
>|> create, rather than 'x' for eXtract was passed, which caused
>|> tar to write a tiny tar file over the beginning of the
>|> larger one.

>  I don't know if it'll work but try using dd.  For example,
>    dd if=/dev/nrst0 of=/dev/null
>  will read from the /dev/rst0 (non-rewinding) tape device and send the output
>  to nothing.  This will get the tape point past the small file.  You should
>  be able to type
>    dd if=/dev/rst0 of=tar.file
>  which will read the rest of the data off the tape and place it into tar.file.
>  Now the problem is now to rectify the file so that tar can recogznie the
>  format...

Unless this is a 1/4 tape cartridge - and then there is really
no hope.  When writing to tape a FULL TRACK erase head is
engaged on the first pass so all tracks are effectively botched
- not just the first part of the first pass.

And also the hardware won't let you past the EOF written after
the mistaken write.


-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill

Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4798 comp.unix.questions:13634 comp.unix.programmer:5360 comp.unix.internals:1967
From: kev@dsbc.icl.co.uk (Kevin Walsh)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.programmer,comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: Changing the owner of a process
Date: 19 Nov 92 16:50:21 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.wizards
Organization: Cursor Software Limited, London, England

In article <21902@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> In article <1992Nov17.142837.21252@dale.ksc.nasa.gov> eposnak@dale.ksc.nasa.gov (Ed Posnak) writes:
> 
> [ This is actually one of the answers he quoted.  Mark Buda is the
>   writer ... ]
> 
> >The uid, in every version of Unix I've seen, is stored in the proc
> >structure in the kernel. You should be able to fiddle with this at
> >will in a device driver, and since it's in the proc structure and not
> >the u area, it'll always be there even if the process is swapped out.
> >It *should* be just a matter of searching for the entry and changing
> >it.
> 
> The UIDs are stored in the (struct user).  They are u.u_uid and u.u_ruid.
> Without giving away too much, that's where the system looks for things
> like access() and so on.  For a really bad time, check out the source
> to suser().  It will convince you of this fact.
> 
> >This technique should also serve to implement something like renice()
> >under Xenix, which doesn't have it. (The nice value also being stored
> >in the proc structure.)
> 
> Unfortunately, now that we know the data is in the (struct user),
> I won't be getting out my source to a XENIX renice ...  This also
> means that the device driver idea won't work since the other processes
> u-area may be anywheres.
>
The user structure (u area) for a foreign process isn't unobtainable.
The process itself can be found easily and the u area should be one of
the regions pointed to by the p_region member of the proc structure.

I missed the original post that must have given the reasons why this
very dubious thing needs to be done anyway.  Sounds like an easy target
for a security breach if you can change the uid of any process sumply by
sending a pid and uid to a driver.

-- 
   _/   _/  _/_/_/_/  _/    _/  _/_/_/  _/    _/
  _/_/_/   _/_/      _/    _/    _/    _/_/  _/     K e v i n  W a l s h
 _/ _/    _/          _/ _/     _/    _/  _/_/      kev@dsbc.icl.co.uk
_/   _/  _/_/_/_/      _/    _/_/_/  _/    _/
From: sulistio@sutro.SFSU.EDU (Sulistio Muljadi)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: List of hot keys
Date: 22 Nov 92 00:37:03 GMT
Organization: San Francisco State University

Hi
I am looking for a list of hot keys to reboot UNIX workstations..
I know that NeXT has several keys to halt/reboot the computer.
Does anybody has one for SGI, SUN, HPs, IBMs, DECs, etc...
If yes, please post it...
Thanks
-- 
Mul			    |  Alt. address: sulistio@sutro.sfsu.edu
sulistio@futon.sfsu.edu	    |		     sulistio@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
#include "std/disclaimer.h" | NeXTmail ->    sarong!sulistio@cs.sfsu.edu 
>Genius is one per cent inspiration and ninety-nine per cent perspiration.
Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4847 alt.folklore.computers:16628
From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: So You Want To Be A Wizard? (A modest proposal)
Date: 23 Nov 1992 04:19:22 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gandalf.think.com

In article <1jXlcG#575FKP4KlPy74ZPYBY5ltVXn=esr@snark.thyrsus.com> esr@snark.thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
>Speak, O Guru: What books should I study?  Are the O'Reilly "Nutshell"
>guides a good place to start?

O, Guru, I beseech thee that thou includest "Advanced Programming in the
UNIX Environment", begat of W. Richard Stevens.  He knoweth many versions,
and the intricacies and similarities thereof, and includeth many examples
(of which the novice may availeth himself at the altar of UUNET).
-- 
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.misc
From: mcdowell@exlog.com (Steve McDowell)
Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
Organization: EXLOG, Inc.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 19:35:12 GMT

In message <BxvFDo.5G7@netnews.jhuapl.edu> bandy@netnews.jhuapl.edu (Mike Bandy) writes:
>
> Run VMS!  The VMS command line interpretor does all these things flawlessly.

People run UNIX for a reason. VMS isn't usually an alternative. 

> The Ultrix system I used at grad school allowed the command
> to be recalled with the up/down keys, cursor positioned at the point
> that needed changing via left/right arrows, etc.  Admitedly, I'm not a real
> power user, but I have never been able to remember how to recall/edit past the 
> previous using the "^" sequence.  And the fact that it does the edit, then
> executes it, rather than waiting for a carriage return has always disturbed me.

Then get a new shell. Ksh comes to mind. And it comes with most SysV systems. And
it runs on most BSD-derived systems. I think the point's been made before that 
the user interface is *not* the operating system, and that (to me) is one of the 
many joys of UNIX.

> I know I'm setting myself up to be flamed; bring it on.

No flames, just calm rational discussion. Whether "running VMS" is rational I'll
leave up to you.

-- 
Steve McDowell             . . . . o o o o o 		Opinions are 
Exlog, Inc.	                  _____      o     	mine, not my 
mcdowell@exlog.com      _____====  ]OO|_n_n__][.    	employers..
		       [_________]_|__|________)<   
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
From: bhays@teal.csn.org (Boyd Hays)
Subject: Any terminfo compilers available?
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:07:22 GMT

Hello,
    I need to write a program that parses terminfo source files. There was
    something available about 5 years ago, a small lex scanner, but I can't
    find it anywhere.

    Does anyone know where I might find the source for such a beast?

Thanks in advance,

Boyd Hays
bhays@csn.org
Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4701 comp.unix.shell:4716