From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 15570 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2022 23:02:33 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 3 Jan 2022 23:02:33 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C88919499F; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:02:27 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AA7B93FD1; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:02:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7EEDA93FD1; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:02:10 +1000 (AEST) X-Greylist: delayed 305 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at minnie.tuhs.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:02:09 AEST Received: from mail.ultimate.com (mail.ultimate.com [104.225.1.121]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 317C393FCC for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 09:02:09 +1000 (AEST) Received: from ultimate.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ultimate.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 203Mv1jF000748 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Jan 2022 17:57:01 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from phil@ultimate.com) Received: (from phil@localhost) by ultimate.com (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 203Mv0UM000747; Mon, 3 Jan 2022 17:57:00 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from phil) From: Phil Budne Message-Id: <202201032257.203Mv0UM000747@ultimate.com> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 17:57:00 -0500 To: tytso@mit.edu, crossd@gmail.com References: <97f563fa-5a17-424b-acc6-07cf127f496d@localhost> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Heirloom mailx 12.4 7/29/08 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [TUHS] moving directories in svr2 X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: tuhs@tuhs.org Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Well, take a look at the ip-route man page. The BSD route command > assumes fundamentally there is a single routing table that you can > update. In Linux, there are multiple routing tables --- to support > NAT, VRF (virtual routing and forwarding), etc. Non-exhaustive research (didn't look at NetBSD, OpenBSD or Dragonfly): Looks like the FreeBSD route got the -fib argument in November 2012, the setfib command (execute a command with an alternate routing table) appeared in 2008. Looks like the ip command appeared in Linux 2.2 (end of 1999), so it doesn't look like there was a lead to follow. Now don't get me wrong, I have no lost love for the BSD route command, it almost always takes me at least four tries; one for a syntax error, one to add a bad route, and another to remove the bad route! BUT, as someone who has been using BSD based systems since 4.2, it's hard not to feel like GNU and Linux folks have evidenced a pride that they're better than Un*x (I remember at a Usenix (Boston in '94?) overhearing a VA Linux employee boasting how their goal was to beat out commercial Un*x vendors. Too bad they weren't aiming at the Windows desktop...) and missed the boat on "Unix philosophy", but I'm well aware that what I remember with fondness as simpler times was contemporaneously viewed by others as "beginning to smell really bad". Finally, I'm new here, but I can't help feeling that both complaining and boasting about Linux aren't within the realm of "Unix Heritage"? But discussion of lessons learned by Bell Research post 7th Edition, are of greater interest to me. Keeping ".." working is certainly a major pain in the a**, and I can understand wanting to throw it in the ditch, but I came from the DEC 36-bit world (TOPS-10/20 and ITS) which didn't present a single, uniform file name space (full paths started with "DEVICE:", and different device handlers could treat the following name space differently), and I've never been convinced that the Unix single namespace hasn't brought just as much pain as benefit. ITS in particular had device handlers that were dynamically loaded into another process and commuinicated thru a special device handler handler (the JOB device) that translated system calls to messages. Listing the directory of a spooled print device would show the queue, and there was also network file access to other ITS machines). The DEC systems had system and user defined "logical devices", which I do remember fondly as causing less pain than symlinks. ITS may have had both symlink and logical device-like things...