TUHS November 2017

tuhs@tuhs.org

82 participants
124 discussions

Re: [TUHS] Determining what was on a tape back in the day

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Clem Cole > stp is from the Harvard distribution. The MIT PWB1 system I have has the source; the header says: M. Ferentz Brooklyn College of CUNY September 1976 If it can't be found on TUHS, I can upload it. No man page, though. :-( Noel

6 years, 4 months

ed(1) and Pipes.

by Norman Wilson

Ralph Corderoy: ed(1) pre-dates pipes. When pipes came along, stderr was needed, and lots of new idioms were found to make use of them. Why didn't ed gain a `filter' command to accompany `r !foo' and `w !bar'? === I sometimes wonder that too. When I use `ed,' it is usually really qed, an extended ed written by the late-1970s UNIX crowd here at U of T. (Rob Pike, Tom Duff, David Tilbrook, and Hugh Redelmeier, I think.) qed is something of a kitchen sink, full of clumsy programmability features that I never use. The things that keep me using it are: -- Multiple buffers, each possibly associated with a different file or just anonymous -- The ability to copy or move text (the traditional t and m commands) between buffers as well as within one -- The ability to send part or all of a buffer to a shell command, to read data in from a shell command, or to send data out and replace it with that from the shell command: >mail user ... <ps -ef |tr a-z A-Z I use the last quite often; it makes qed sort of a workbench for manipulating and mining text. One can do the same with the shell and temporary files, but using an editor buffer is much handier. sam has similar abilities (but without all the needless programmability). Were sam less clumsy to use in its non-graphical mode, I'd probably have abandoned qed for sam. Norman Wilson Toronto ON (for real now)

6 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] basic tools / Universal Unix

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Ralph Corderoy > Then the real definition, ending in an execution of the empty `q'. > qq/4$^Ma2^[@qq Gah. That reminds me of nothing so much as TECO (may it long Rest in Peace). Noel

6 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Morris Worm!

by Doug McIlroy

> let's not forget that amazing vi-trainer called rogue. Also amazing is its robust survival at angband.org.

6 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] TECO was: Re: basic tools / Universal Unix

by Doug McIlroy

>Speaking of which, am I the only one annoyed by Penguin/OS' silly coloured "ls" output? Syntax coloring, of which IDE's seem to be enamored, always looks to me like a ransom note. For folks who like colorized text, Writers Workbench had a tool that can be harnessed to do a bang-up job of syntax colorizing for English: "parts" did a remarkable job of inferring parts of spechc in running text. Doug

6 years, 5 months

A Human 'Make' Program (almost)

by Forrest, Jon

I started with V6 Unix at UC Santa Barbara in 1977. I remember that when V7 came out, I learned about the 'make' program and started using it with great success to help me build a large Fortran package for signal processing. For its size, there was a lot going on in Santa Barbara at that time. It was one of the first 4 Arpanet nodes, and there were a bunch of companies making networking products and doing speech research as a result. I was a student at UC Santa Barbara but I started toying with the idea of finding a real job, mostly to make more money. I found several possibilities and went to interview at one. This place had an a need for somebody to, in essence, be a human 'make' program. The computer they used, some kind of Data General, was so slow that they couldn't do a build more that once or twice a day. So, in an attempt to speed up the build, they wanted to hire somebody who would, by hand, keep track of the last modification date of all the components in the package they sold, and do a build that only performed the necessary steps to generate the package - in other words a human make program. Apparently they figured that this would save enough time to justify the $24K salary they were willing to pay. $24K in 1978 wasn't a bad salary at all. I didn't take the job, but I've often thought that what I should have done would have been to take the job under the condition that I could mostly work remotely. Then, I could have used the 'make' program on our V7 Unix system to generate the optimal script to build the package, and then taken the script back to the company to run on the Data General computer. I figure this would have taken maybe an hour a day. The rest of the time I could have spent on the beach thinking about ways to spend that $24K. Jon Forrest

6 years, 5 months

Happy birthday, Morris Worm!

by Dave Horsfall

The infamous Morris Worm was released in 1988; making use of known vulnerabilities in Sendmail/finger/RSH (and weak passwords), it took out a metric shitload of SUN-3s and 4BSD Vaxen (the author claimed that it was accidental, but the idiot hadn't tested it on an isolated network first). A temporary "condom" was discovered by Rich Kulawiec with "mkdir /tmp/sh". -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

6 years, 5 months

Bell Labs 'se' screen editor?

by arnold＠skeeve.com

Hi All. In 1983, while a grad student at Ga Tech, I did some contract programming at Southern Bell. The system was a PDP 11/70 running USG Unix 4.0 (yes, it existed! That's another story.) Beside ed, the system had a screen editor named 'se' (not related to the Ga Tech 'se' screen editor). It apparently was written within AT&T. ISTR that it was written mainly for Vaxen but had been squeezed and made to run on the PDP 11. Did anyone else ever use this? Know anything about it? I never saw it or heard it about it again; it didn't ship with System V. Thanks, Arnold

6 years, 5 months

Origin of 'kill -9'?

by Dan Cross

I am somewhat embarrassed to admit that this just occurred to me. Is the reason that SIGKILL has the numeric value 9 because cats are reported to have nine lives? Clearly the connection between 'cat' and 'kill -9' would make for a irreverent but harmless inside joke if so.... - Dan C.

6 years, 5 months

Re: [TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 24, Issue 72

by Doug McIlroy

> I especially liked the bit in which Tom's virus infected a multi-level secured UNIX system that Doug McIlroy and Jim Reeds were developing which they didn't spot until they turned on all their protections ... and programs started crashing all over the place. That's not quite right. The system was running nicely with a lattice-based protection system (read from below, write to above) working fine. Processes typocally begin at lattice bottom, but move to hivel levels depending on what data they see (including, of course any exec-ed file.) All the standard utilities, being usable by anyone are at lattice bottom. Cool, until you realize that highly trusted system programs such as sudo are at lattice bottom and are protected only by the old rwx bits, not by the read-write rules. So, following an idea of Biba's, that integrity rules are the opposite of secrecy rules. You don't want to forbid writing to high-integrity places, nor read from low-integrity places. This was done by setting the default security level away from the lattice bottom. High-integrity stuff was below this floor; high-secrecy above. The Duff story is about the day we moved the floor off bottom. An integrity violation during the boot sequence stopped the system cold. Clearly we'd misconfigured something. But no, after a couple of days of fruitless search, Jim Reeds lit up, "We caught a virus!" We were unaware of Duff's experiment. He had been chagrined when it escaped from one machine, but was able to decontaminate all the machines in the center. Except ours, which was not on the automatic software distrutioin list, since it was running a different system.

6 years, 5 months

← Newer
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
13
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

TUHS November 2017