Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[dmr]

>> kinda weird how find(1) got deprecated.  like dd(1), the options
>> were ghastly, but it got the job done.


> There was no find in research Unix, AFAIK, but I never used it directly
> (except older PDP-11 versions on emulators).  find(1) is too limited; you
> have everything you need with du and the shell.

No, it was there, in 6th and 7th editions and thereafter.  A
xenograft from USG, but there, albeit with a BUGS section
saying "The syntax is painful."

 > Hmm...  In terms of Unix, it would be nice if something >7th ed could
 > make it's way out of Bell Labs.  I think at this point, it'd be more for
 > historical or academic interest than anything else.  I wonder what SCO
 > would have to say about the issue?

There are those chipping away at this.  Part of the problem
is that the SCO Unix property is (or has) transitioned to Caldera.
Yet another new company in which to find someone who can make
a decision.

	Dennis

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

dmr@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> No, [find(1)] was there, in 6th and 7th editions and thereafter.
> A xenograft from USG, but there, albeit with a BUGS section
> saying "The syntax is painful."

Unfortunately, there has never (to my knowledge) been a really
satisfactory tree walker in any version of UNIX.  Even "xargs",
which one would think would be debugged by now, fails when
there are spaces, ampersands, etc. in leaf names.  I know of
several attempts to provide library or kernel support for tree
walking; the reason none were specified for POSIX <dirent.h>
(which I was the main proponent for) was that none of them had
worked well enough in practice to make a convincing case that
they should be standardized.  I think this is a solvable problem
for which a really good solution would eventually attract users.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
> Unfortunately, there has never (to my knowledge) been a really
> satisfactory tree walker in any version of UNIX.  Even "xargs",
> which one would think would be debugged by now, fails when
> there are spaces, ampersands, etc. in leaf names.

very true.  be careful with that xargs, eugene ...

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Dan Cross]

In article <20010816013325.0875A19B08@mail.cse.psu.edu> you write:
>> There was no find in research Unix, AFAIK, but I never used it directly
>> (except older PDP-11 versions on emulators).  find(1) is too limited; you
>> have everything you need with du and the shell.
>
>No, it was there, in 6th and 7th editions and thereafter.  A
>xenograft from USG, but there, albeit with a BUGS section
>saying "The syntax is painful."

Whoops; okay, I stand corrected.

> > Hmm...  In terms of Unix, it would be nice if something >7th ed could
> > make it's way out of Bell Labs.  I think at this point, it'd be more for
> > historical or academic interest than anything else.  I wonder what SCO
> > would have to say about the issue?
>
>There are those chipping away at this.  Part of the problem
>is that the SCO Unix property is (or has) transitioned to Caldera.
>Yet another new company in which to find someone who can make
>a decision.

Isn't Caldera very much into the whole, ``opens source'' bit?  Perhaps
that can be leveraged....  Of course, I can sympathize with the dealing
with a new company's beaurocracy issue.  On a personal note, if I can do
anything to assist with the efforts of those working on this, I'd be
more than happy to offer what limited resources I have.

	- Dan C.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Jon Snader]

On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 12:02:56PM -0400, Dan Cross wrote:
> >
> >There are those chipping away at this.  Part of the problem
> >is that the SCO Unix property is (or has) transitioned to Caldera.
> >Yet another new company in which to find someone who can make
> >a decision.
> 
> Isn't Caldera very much into the whole, ``opens source'' bit?  Perhaps
> that can be leveraged....  Of course, I can sympathize with the dealing
> with a new company's beaurocracy issue.  On a personal note, if I can do
> anything to assist with the efforts of those working on this, I'd be
> more than happy to offer what limited resources I have.
> 

Apparently Caldera is already moving in the desired direction.  See
http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-20-003-06-CD

Jon Snader

Re[2]: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Matt]

>> Isn't Caldera very much into the whole, ``opens source'' bit?  Perhaps
>> that can be leveraged....  Of course, I can sympathize with the dealing
>> with a new company's beaurocracy issue.  On a personal note, if I can do
>> anything to assist with the efforts of those working on this, I'd be
>> more than happy to offer what limited resources I have.
>> 

JS> Apparently Caldera is already moving in the desired direction.  See
JS> http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-20-003-06-CD

as the drift continues :

if you follow the opinions of the /. crowd you'll know Caldera is
not considered hardcore OSS. Some evangelists are positively hostile
to them. I'm neutral on the issue (read reasonably ignorant).

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Jon Snader]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 08:04:40PM +0100, Matt wrote:
> 
> JS> Apparently Caldera is already moving in the desired direction.  See
> JS> http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-20-003-06-CD
> 
> as the drift continues :
> 
> if you follow the opinions of the /. crowd you'll know Caldera is
> not considered hardcore OSS. Some evangelists are positively hostile
> to them. I'm neutral on the issue (read reasonably ignorant).
> 

I wasn't taking a position on what church Caldera worships at, I was
merely suggesting that their willingness to open the source to Open
Unix 8 may be an indication that they would be willing to release the
source to the research versions of Unix as well.

Jon Snader

Caldera source [ was Re: Re[2]: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone? ]

[Aharon Robbins]

>JS> Apparently Caldera is already moving in the desired direction.  See
>JS> http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-20-003-06-CD

Gee, I hope no-one tells them that Brian Kernighan has been able to make
his awk available for going on eight years now.  First via netlib, these
days off his home page (http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/bwk).

Arnold ("Why is that animal looking at me funny?") Robbins

[9fans] Re: Caldera source

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi,

> Gee, I hope no-one tells them that Brian Kernighan has been able to
> make his awk available for going on eight years now.  First via
> netlib, these days off his home page
> (http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/bwk).

Brian's version should be preferred out of the two;  it looks to have
more bugs fixed.

    echo awk | awk '{gsub(/a/, "\\\\&")} 1'


Ralph.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Dan Cross]

In article <20010821123217.A11647@ix.netcom.com> you write:
>Apparently Caldera is already moving in the desired direction.  See
>http://news.linuxprogramming.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-20-003-06-CD

That is good news; the time might be ripe to try and contact the
folks who are behind that effort and prod them gently about the
research Unix source.

	- Dan C.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[rog]

> and pure boneheaded determinism.

ahhh, the truth comes out. boyd is a deterministic automaton!

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[anothy]

i find myself doing things like this alot:
	ls -l `{du -a . | awk '{print $2}'}
	grep foo `{du -a . | awk '{print $2}'
given how often i do the bit inside the `{} i should
probably script it, but i havn't yet. i've found this to
be quite useful with lots of cases, so i've not gone
the "find" route rog suggested (which would make
it a bit more specific than i like).
-α.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[forsyth]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 28 bytes --]

is it really a rage 128?


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1761 bytes --]

From: pac <cej@cejchan.gli.cas.cz>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 09:27:13 +0200
Message-ID: <cej-1010808092713.A01245@cejchan.gli.cas.cz>

Hi all,

just weanted to say that I've just got an old enough Ati Rage128 card to be able to install Plan9 on my box!
Excellent! The installation process was the smoothest one I've ever seen.  Now I'm trying to learn to think
plan9ish, not unixish....

... how can I do ls -R?

Thanks, regards,
Peter

[9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[pac]

Hi all,

just weanted to say that I've just got an old enough Ati Rage128 card to be able to install Plan9 on my box!
Excellent! The installation process was the smoothest one I've ever seen.  Now I'm trying to learn to think
plan9ish, not unixish....

... how can I do ls -R?

Thanks, regards,
Peter

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Boyd Roberts]

> ... how can I do ls -R?

that revolting system v-ism should never have been there
in the first place.  it never was, until system v.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[pac]

Wow, really? however, any workaround for doing recursive listing
(sorry for a stupid non-programmer's question)
(perhaps once I'll become more imaginative to solve it myself ... but not now, sorry)

Cheers,
Peter

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "pac" <cej@cejchan.gli.cas.cz>

kinda weird how find(1) got deprecated.  like dd(1), the options
were ghastly, but it got the job done.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Dan Cross]

In article <015401c125ad$45ed3cf0$3cf7c6d4@SOMA> you write:
>kinda weird how find(1) got deprecated.  like dd(1), the options
>were ghastly, but it got the job done.

You're joking, right?

There was no find in research Unix, AFAIK, but I never used it directly
(except older PDP-11 versions on emulators).  find(1) is too limited; you
have everything you need with du and the shell.

Hmm...  In terms of Unix, it would be nice if something >7th ed could
make it's way out of Bell Labs.  I think at this point, it'd be more for
historical or academic interest than anything else.  I wonder what SCO
would have to say about the issue?

	- Dan C.

Re: [9fans] Oooops...where is ls -R gone?

[Boyd Roberts]

From: "Dan Cross" <cross@math.psu.edu>
> In article <015401c125ad$45ed3cf0$3cf7c6d4@SOMA> you write:
> >kinda weird how find(1) got deprecated.  like dd(1), the options
> >were ghastly, but it got the job done.
> 
> You're joking, right?

nope, we fixed a smashed /etc with another 11/780, a magtape, a
screwdriver, tape, time, la-120, dd and pure boneheaded determinism.

back in those days you _never_ ran find or du (on anything significant).