[TUHS] history of sbin?

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Jeremy C. Reed]

I have heard the story a few times about sbin split is due to disk 
space, such as told at 
http://www.osnews.com/story/25556/Understanding_the_bin_sbin_usr_bin_usr_sbin_Split/
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html

But I don't see any mention of it in 32V and not in BSD until around 
Net2 (like in 1991 src.README said ``... there has been a major 
reorganization of the file system.  (You may have seen similar 
reorganizations on systems shipped by Sun Microsytems [sic] and Digital 
Equipment Corporation, among others.)  ... /sbin same as /bin, but 
binaries for the root user''. The slides from Feb. 1988 for a BSD BOF at 
USENIX mentioned this sbin reorganization.

Looking at "Unix Text Processing" (1987) and "Life with Unix" (1989) I 
didn't see any use of sbin/. (I didn't look at my other old books.)  
From searching old 1980 usenet archives I only saw a few mentions (like 
/usr/brl/sbin/...).

When did some (non-BSD) systems ship and document /sbin, /usr/sbin?
Is the common story (liked linked above) the right story?

  Jeremy C. Reed

echo uggc://errqzrqvn.arg/obbxf/ofq-uvfgbel/ | \
 tr "noqruvxzabcefgl" "abdehikmnoprsty"

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Random832]

On 1/31/2013 7:06 PM, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> I have heard the story a few times about sbin split is due to disk
> space, such as told at
> http://www.osnews.com/story/25556/Understanding_the_bin_sbin_usr_bin_usr_sbin_Split/
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
>
Well, keeping in mind the stuff in /sbin used to be in /etc, in e.g. v7 
- it's possible the real reason is simply they wanted binaries out of 
/etc and didn't want to put them in /bin where normal users might wonder 
"what is this?".

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Warner Losh]

On Jan 31, 2013, at 6:28 PM, Random832 wrote:

> On 1/31/2013 7:06 PM, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
>> I have heard the story a few times about sbin split is due to disk
>> space, such as told at
>> http://www.osnews.com/story/25556/Understanding_the_bin_sbin_usr_bin_usr_sbin_Split/
>> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
>> 
> Well, keeping in mind the stuff in /sbin used to be in /etc, in e.g. v7 - it's possible the real reason is simply they wanted binaries out of /etc and didn't want to put them in /bin where normal users might wonder "what is this?".

The split was for /usr and slash. Those things in / were local on small disks needed to boot the system just enough to mount a shared /usr remotely or to do some very limited recovery. This is why there's both /usr/bin and /bin.

It doesn't explain the /sbin and /bin split though.

I recall from SunOS 3.x documentation that I no longer have access to that the split was done to improve exec times for normal users. They didn't want the hash list to get too long with all the extra stuff in /sbin and /usr/sbin. the movement of the files from /etc also included movement to /libexec or /usr/libexec for many of the daemons that started out life in /etc. things like ifconfig moved to /sbin where people could more easily run them.  Maybe the original /etc and /bin split was for PATH reasons?

Warner

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Warren Toomey]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:06:15PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html

A few inaccuracies:

    When the operating system grew too big to fit on the first RK05 disk
    pack (their root filesystem) they let it leak into the second one,
    which is where all the user home directories lived (which is why
    the mount was called /usr).  They replicated all the OS directories
    under there (/bin, /sbin, /lib, /tmp...) and wrote files to those
    new directories because their original disk was out of space.
    When they got a third disk, they mounted it on /home and relocated
    all the user directories to there so the OS could consume all the
    space on both disks and grow to THREE WHOLE MEGABYTES (ooooh!).

Research Unix never had /sbin nor /home, and the tale of the third disk
doesn't ring any bells to me.

7th Edition has /usr/dmr and /usr/ken, not /home/dmr nor /usr/home/dmr :)

Cheers,
	Warren

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[ramble1035 @dslextreme.com]

Based on some vague recollections of early days at Sun...  I seem to recall
that one of the main differences between /bin and /sbin was that the /sbin
binaries were all built with static libraries rather than shared.  I heard
/sbin described as "single-user bin"...

I don't know when /sbin first appeared, though.

  -- Chris


On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:06:15PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
>
> A few inaccuracies:
>
>     When the operating system grew too big to fit on the first RK05 disk
>     pack (their root filesystem) they let it leak into the second one,
>     which is where all the user home directories lived (which is why
>     the mount was called /usr).  They replicated all the OS directories
>     under there (/bin, /sbin, /lib, /tmp...) and wrote files to those
>     new directories because their original disk was out of space.
>     When they got a third disk, they mounted it on /home and relocated
>     all the user directories to there so the OS could consume all the
>     space on both disks and grow to THREE WHOLE MEGABYTES (ooooh!).
>
> Research Unix never had /sbin nor /home, and the tale of the third disk
> doesn't ring any bells to me.
>
> 7th Edition has /usr/dmr and /usr/ken, not /home/dmr nor /usr/home/dmr :)
>
> Cheers,
>         Warren
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20130131/efb314c4/attachment.html>

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Larry McVoy]

Exactly.  /sbin on sun was all the statically linked stuff that you could
count on when in single user mode trying to unscramble the mess that was
your disk.  fsdb et al.

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 05:53:16PM -0800, ramble1035 @dslextreme.com wrote:
> Based on some vague recollections of early days at Sun...  I seem to recall
> that one of the main differences between /bin and /sbin was that the /sbin
> binaries were all built with static libraries rather than shared.  I heard
> /sbin described as "single-user bin"...
> 
> I don't know when /sbin first appeared, though.
> 
>   -- Chris
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:06:15PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
> >
> > A few inaccuracies:
> >
> >     When the operating system grew too big to fit on the first RK05 disk
> >     pack (their root filesystem) they let it leak into the second one,
> >     which is where all the user home directories lived (which is why
> >     the mount was called /usr).  They replicated all the OS directories
> >     under there (/bin, /sbin, /lib, /tmp...) and wrote files to those
> >     new directories because their original disk was out of space.
> >     When they got a third disk, they mounted it on /home and relocated
> >     all the user directories to there so the OS could consume all the
> >     space on both disks and grow to THREE WHOLE MEGABYTES (ooooh!).
> >
> > Research Unix never had /sbin nor /home, and the tale of the third disk
> > doesn't ring any bells to me.
> >
> > 7th Edition has /usr/dmr and /usr/ken, not /home/dmr nor /usr/home/dmr :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >         Warren
> > _______________________________________________
> > TUHS mailing list
> > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> >

> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs


-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Armando Stettner]

This all reminds me of UNIX-gurus on Usenet....  :)

  decvax!aps


Begin forwarded message:

> From: "ramble1035 @dslextreme.com" <ramble1035 at dslextreme.com>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] history of sbin?
> Date: January 31, 2013 8:53:16 PM EST
> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
> 
> Based on some vague recollections of early days at Sun...  I seem to recall that one of the main differences between /bin and /sbin was that the /sbin binaries were all built with static libraries rather than shared.  I heard /sbin described as "single-user bin"...
> 
> I don't know when /sbin first appeared, though.
> 
>   -- Chris
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:06:15PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
> 
> A few inaccuracies:
> 
>     When the operating system grew too big to fit on the first RK05 disk
>     pack (their root filesystem) they let it leak into the second one,
>     which is where all the user home directories lived (which is why
>     the mount was called /usr).  They replicated all the OS directories
>     under there (/bin, /sbin, /lib, /tmp...) and wrote files to those
>     new directories because their original disk was out of space.
>     When they got a third disk, they mounted it on /home and relocated
>     all the user directories to there so the OS could consume all the
>     space on both disks and grow to THREE WHOLE MEGABYTES (ooooh!).
> 
> Research Unix never had /sbin nor /home, and the tale of the third disk
> doesn't ring any bells to me.
> 
> 7th Edition has /usr/dmr and /usr/ken, not /home/dmr nor /usr/home/dmr :)
> 
> Cheers,
>         Warren
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20130131/6714cde0/attachment.html>

[TUHS] 1974 CACM Paper, was Re: history of sbin?

[Warren Toomey]

Does anybody have a PDF of the 1974 Unix CACM paper, I seem to have
misplaced my copy.

The 6th Edition update to the CACM paper says:

	Our PDP-11 has a 1M byte fixed-head disk, used for file system
	storage and swapping, four moving-head disk drives which each
	provide 2.5M bytes on removable disk cartridges, and a single
	moving-head disk drive which uses removable 40M byte disk packs.

The 7th Edition update says:

	Our own PDP-11 has two 200-Mb moving-head disks for file system
	storage and swapping.

Thanks,
	Warren

[TUHS] 1974 CACM Paper, was Re: history of sbin?

[Warren Toomey]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1391 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 12:03:32PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> The 6th Edition update to the CACM paper says:
> 
> 	Our PDP-11 has a 1M byte fixed-head disk, used for file system
> 	storage and swapping, four moving-head disk drives which each
> 	provide 2.5M bytes on removable disk cartridges, and a single
> 	moving-head disk drive which uses removable 40M byte disk packs.
> 
> The 7th Edition update says:
> 
> 	Our own PDP-11 has two 200-Mb moving-head disks for file system
> 	storage and swapping.

And Dennis' paper on the Evolution of Unix says:

	During the last half of 1971, we supported three typists from
	the Patent department, who spent the day busily typing, editing,
	and formatting patent applications, and meanwhile tried to carry
	on our own work. Unix has a reputation for supplying interesting
	services on modest hardware, and this period may mark a high
	point in the benefit/equipment ratio; on a machine with no memory
	protection and a single .5 MB disk, every test of a new program
	required care and boldness, because it could easily crash the
	system, and every few hours’ work by the typists meant pushing
	out more information onto DECtape, because of the very small disk.

Any guesses as to the hardware?

0.5MB: RF11-A/RS11
1.0MB: RS04/EJS04
2.5MB: RK05/RK11-D
40MB:  RP03/RP11-C
200MB: My peripherals handbooks only go up to 1975.

Cheers,
	Warren

[TUHS] 1974 CACM Paper

[Warren Toomey]

On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 12:03:32PM +1000, Warren Toomey wrote:
> Does anybody have a PDF of the 1974 Unix CACM paper, I seem to have
> misplaced my copy.

I found it online: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=361061. Says the
same thing as the 6th Ed version: 1M byte fixed-head disk, four 2.5M
disks and a removable 40M byte disk pack.

Cheers,
	Warren

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Warren Toomey]

And finally (I'll shut up now), the 2nd Edition kernel had hard-coded
drivers for RF-11 and RK03 disks.

Cheers,
	Warren

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Larry McVoy]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:02:06PM -0500, Armando Stettner wrote:
> This all reminds me of UNIX-gurus on Usenet....  :)
> 
>   decvax!aps

...!uwvax!lm

Though it took me a while, for a long time I was

...!uwvax!geowhiz!lm

Which was OK.
-- 
---
Larry McVoy                lm at bitmover.com           http://www.bitkeeper.com

[TUHS] history of sbin?

[Armando Stettner]

I stand corrected: UNIX-wizards....

Thanks, Ron.  :)


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Armando Stettner <aps at ieee.org>
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] history of sbin?
> Date: January 31, 2013 9:02:06 PM EST
> To: "ramble1035 @dslextreme.com" <ramble1035 at dslextreme.com>
> Cc: tuhs at tuhs.org
> 
> This all reminds me of UNIX-gurus on Usenet....  :)
> 
>   decvax!aps
> 
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: "ramble1035 @dslextreme.com" <ramble1035 at dslextreme.com>
>> Subject: Re: [TUHS] history of sbin?
>> Date: January 31, 2013 8:53:16 PM EST
>> To: tuhs at tuhs.org
>> 
>> Based on some vague recollections of early days at Sun...  I seem to recall that one of the main differences between /bin and /sbin was that the /sbin binaries were all built with static libraries rather than shared.  I heard /sbin described as "single-user bin"...
>> 
>> I don't know when /sbin first appeared, though.
>> 
>>   -- Chris
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Warren Toomey <wkt at tuhs.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:06:15PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
>> > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
>> 
>> A few inaccuracies:
>> 
>>     When the operating system grew too big to fit on the first RK05 disk
>>     pack (their root filesystem) they let it leak into the second one,
>>     which is where all the user home directories lived (which is why
>>     the mount was called /usr).  They replicated all the OS directories
>>     under there (/bin, /sbin, /lib, /tmp...) and wrote files to those
>>     new directories because their original disk was out of space.
>>     When they got a third disk, they mounted it on /home and relocated
>>     all the user directories to there so the OS could consume all the
>>     space on both disks and grow to THREE WHOLE MEGABYTES (ooooh!).
>> 
>> Research Unix never had /sbin nor /home, and the tale of the third disk
>> doesn't ring any bells to me.
>> 
>> 7th Edition has /usr/dmr and /usr/ken, not /home/dmr nor /usr/home/dmr :)
>> 
>> Cheers,
>>         Warren
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20130131/0aed610f/attachment.html>

[TUHS] 1974 CACM Paper, was Re: history of sbin?

[Cyrille Lefevre]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 570 bytes --]

Le 01/02/2013 03:20, Norman Wilson a écrit :
> Herr Doctor Wkt:
>
>    Does anybody have a PDF of the 1974 Unix CACM paper, I seem to have
>    misplaced my copy.
>
> =======
>
> It appears to be generally available via the ACM Digital Library,
> of all places.  (No, I'm not so smart: Google pointed me there.)
>
> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=361061

yet another place :

The UNIX Time-Sharing System: july 1978
http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol57-1978/bstj-vol57-issue06.html


Regards,

Cyrille Lefevre
-- 
mailto:Cyrille.Lefevre-lists at laposte.net

[TUHS] 1974 CACM Paper, was Re: history of sbin?

[Norman Wilson]

Herr Doctor Wkt:

  Does anybody have a PDF of the 1974 Unix CACM paper, I seem to have
  misplaced my copy.

=======

It appears to be generally available via the ACM Digital Library,
of all places.  (No, I'm not so smart: Google pointed me there.)

http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=361061

It appears to be the genuine 1974 version, though my paper copy
of that issue of CACM is buried behind too many boxes right now
for me to dig it out and check.  Disk storage for `The PDP-11/45
on which our UNIX installation is implemented' is as Warren
describes for the 6th Edition update: 1MB fixed-head disk,
four 2.5MB removable-cartridge drives, and a single 40MB
removable-pack drive.

Norman Wilson
Toronto ON