The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
@ 2023-01-28 21:16 Douglas McIlroy
  2023-01-30  6:13 ` Phil Budne
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Douglas McIlroy @ 2023-01-28 21:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: TUHS main list

> * What do I really mean by workstation? Ex.gr. If an installation had a
> PDP-11 with a single terminal and operator, is it not a workstation? Is it
> the integration of display into the system that differentiates?

Certainly integration is critical. The display should be integral to the
terminal, not simply an available device.

Without that stipulation Ken's original single-user PDP-7 system would
count (unless, perhaps, the system had not yet been christened "Unix").

Doug

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS]  Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-28 21:16 [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations? Douglas McIlroy
@ 2023-01-30  6:13 ` Phil Budne
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Phil Budne @ 2023-01-30  6:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: tuhs

Douglas McIlroy wrote:
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 16:16:56 -0500
>
> > * What do I really mean by workstation? Ex.gr. If an installation had a
> > PDP-11 with a single terminal and operator, is it not a workstation? Is it
> > the integration of display into the system that differentiates?
>
> Certainly integration is critical. The display should be integral to the
> terminal, not simply an available device.
>
> Without that stipulation Ken's original single-user PDP-7 system would
> count (unless, perhaps, the system had not yet been christened "Unix").

Tho perhaps the EXACT same PDP-7 (in its original use as a prototype
for the PDP-9 based Graphic-2 circuit design/simulation system) would
qualify as a workstation?

Here's a 1965 video of the earlier (PDP-5 based?) Graphic-1 system in use:
https://techchannel.att.com/playvideo/2012/09/07/AT&T-Archives-Graphic-1

Both Graphic-1 and Graphic-2 were display "workstations" that fronted
for mainframes.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-27  1:28                 ` David Arnold
@ 2023-01-27  1:35                   ` Warner Losh
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Warner Losh @ 2023-01-27  1:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Arnold
  Cc: segaloco, Joseph Holsten, Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2026 bytes --]

I've moved to markdown or asciidoc for things like this. So many things can
import them and they are easier to write than roff or TeX.

Warner

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023, 6:29 PM David Arnold <davida@pobox.com> wrote:

> fwiw, Pandoc (https://pandoc.org) claims to be able to translate between
> MediaWiki and both man and ms roff macros.
>
>
>
>
> d
>
>
> > On 27 Jan 2023, at 11:54, segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
> >
> > You just got my head all abuzz on whether a *roff<->MediaWiki
> transpiler would be: 1. Possible and 2. Beneficial.
> >
> > We use a MediaWiki at work for aggregating random tidbits from people
> that they think might get lost in project noise.  There's times I'd love to
> have some way to *roff-ize the materials for white papers, the printouts
> from MediaWiki are uuuuugly.  Benefits on the flip-side would be rapidly
> getting all sorts of documentation into Wiki format pretty quickly.
> >
> > Of course, for an actual documentation project, there would need to be a
> master as diverse edits in different places wouldn't track with one
> another.  In this case, the *roff sources would probably make a better
> master for diff reasons.
> >
> > - Matt G.
> >
> > ------- Original Message -------
> >> On Thursday, January 26th, 2023 at 4:36 PM, G. Branden Robinson <
> g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Joseph,
> >> At 2023-01-26T14:41:50-0800, Joseph Holsten wrote:
> >>> And if I’m writing in troff, is there a preferred macro set for
> >>> articles these days? A decade ago I wrote manuals in mdoc but papers
> >>> in LaTeX; these days I just lean on pandoc to translate. I’ll need to
> >>> knock my rust off.
> >> There's always ms. It's pretty easy to acquire, and will produce
> >> authentic looking traditional Unix papers with little effort. Here's a
> >> manual that Larry Kollar and I wrote, in source and PDF forms. It's
> >> gotten positive feedback from the groff mailing list.
> >> Regards,
> >> Branden
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2774 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-27  0:53               ` segaloco via TUHS
@ 2023-01-27  1:28                 ` David Arnold
  2023-01-27  1:35                   ` Warner Losh
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Arnold @ 2023-01-27  1:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: segaloco; +Cc: Joseph Holsten, Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians

fwiw, Pandoc (https://pandoc.org) claims to be able to translate between MediaWiki and both man and ms roff macros. 




d


> On 27 Jan 2023, at 11:54, segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
> 
> You just got my head all abuzz on whether a *roff<->MediaWiki transpiler would be: 1. Possible and 2. Beneficial.
> 
> We use a MediaWiki at work for aggregating random tidbits from people that they think might get lost in project noise.  There's times I'd love to have some way to *roff-ize the materials for white papers, the printouts from MediaWiki are uuuuugly.  Benefits on the flip-side would be rapidly getting all sorts of documentation into Wiki format pretty quickly.
> 
> Of course, for an actual documentation project, there would need to be a master as diverse edits in different places wouldn't track with one another.  In this case, the *roff sources would probably make a better master for diff reasons.
> 
> - Matt G.
> 
> ------- Original Message -------
>> On Thursday, January 26th, 2023 at 4:36 PM, G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Joseph,
>> At 2023-01-26T14:41:50-0800, Joseph Holsten wrote:
>>> And if I’m writing in troff, is there a preferred macro set for
>>> articles these days? A decade ago I wrote manuals in mdoc but papers
>>> in LaTeX; these days I just lean on pandoc to translate. I’ll need to
>>> knock my rust off.
>> There's always ms. It's pretty easy to acquire, and will produce
>> authentic looking traditional Unix papers with little effort. Here's a
>> manual that Larry Kollar and I wrote, in source and PDF forms. It's
>> gotten positive feedback from the groff mailing list.
>> Regards,
>> Branden


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-27  0:36             ` G. Branden Robinson
@ 2023-01-27  0:53               ` segaloco via TUHS
  2023-01-27  1:28                 ` David Arnold
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: segaloco via TUHS @ 2023-01-27  0:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: G. Branden Robinson
  Cc: Joseph Holsten, Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians

You just got my head all abuzz on whether a *roff<->MediaWiki transpiler would be: 1. Possible and 2. Beneficial.

We use a MediaWiki at work for aggregating random tidbits from people that they think might get lost in project noise.  There's times I'd love to have some way to *roff-ize the materials for white papers, the printouts from MediaWiki are uuuuugly.  Benefits on the flip-side would be rapidly getting all sorts of documentation into Wiki format pretty quickly.

Of course, for an actual documentation project, there would need to be a master as diverse edits in different places wouldn't track with one another.  In this case, the *roff sources would probably make a better master for diff reasons.

- Matt G.

------- Original Message -------
On Thursday, January 26th, 2023 at 4:36 PM, G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:


> Hi Joseph,
> 
> At 2023-01-26T14:41:50-0800, Joseph Holsten wrote:
> 
> > And if I’m writing in troff, is there a preferred macro set for
> > articles these days? A decade ago I wrote manuals in mdoc but papers
> > in LaTeX; these days I just lean on pandoc to translate. I’ll need to
> > knock my rust off.
> 
> 
> There's always ms. It's pretty easy to acquire, and will produce
> authentic looking traditional Unix papers with little effort. Here's a
> manual that Larry Kollar and I wrote, in source and PDF forms. It's
> gotten positive feedback from the groff mailing list.
> 
> Regards,
> Branden

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS]  Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-26 22:41           ` Joseph Holsten
  2023-01-27  0:34             ` segaloco via TUHS
@ 2023-01-27  0:36             ` G. Branden Robinson
  2023-01-27  0:53               ` segaloco via TUHS
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: G. Branden Robinson @ 2023-01-27  0:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joseph Holsten; +Cc: Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 592 bytes --]

Hi Joseph,

At 2023-01-26T14:41:50-0800, Joseph Holsten wrote:
> And if I’m writing in troff, is there a preferred macro set for
> articles these days? A decade ago I wrote manuals in mdoc but papers
> in LaTeX; these days I just lean on pandoc to translate. I’ll need to
> knock my rust off.

There's always ms.  It's pretty easy to acquire, and will produce
authentic looking traditional Unix papers with little effort.  Here's a
manual that Larry Kollar and I wrote, in source and PDF forms.  It's
gotten positive feedback from the groff mailing list.

Regards,
Branden

[-- Attachment #1.2: ms.ms --]
[-- Type: application/x-troff-ms, Size: 79601 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #1.3: ms.2023-01-26.pdf --]
[-- Type: application/pdf, Size: 135713 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-26 22:41           ` Joseph Holsten
@ 2023-01-27  0:34             ` segaloco via TUHS
  2023-01-27  0:36             ` G. Branden Robinson
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: segaloco via TUHS @ 2023-01-27  0:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joseph Holsten; +Cc: Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians

> Ah, I meant to ask: is there an existing wiki or repository? Or am I starting one?

https://wiki.tuhs.org/

I've discussed writing a few articles with Warren and it sounds like he's all for more folks producing content.  Ultimately it's Warren's call on that one, but I'm very interested in starting to produce some content.

> An appropriate way for us to do this sort of thing would be to create
> a repository where we can contribute to documents written in troff.

I've considered this exact thing save not for this project, but just as a way to approach collaborative writing.  I wouldn't have the attention span to admin such a repository, but would more than happily contribute to one, I love exposition and free access to knowledge.

- Matt G.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-26 21:38         ` [TUHS] " Jon Steinhart
@ 2023-01-26 22:41           ` Joseph Holsten
  2023-01-27  0:34             ` segaloco via TUHS
  2023-01-27  0:36             ` G. Branden Robinson
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Holsten @ 2023-01-26 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians

On Thu, Jan 26, 2023, at 13:38, Jon Steinhart wrote:
> Joseph Holsten writes:
>> I love how I can fire off a query and get so much info. But I wonder: does
>> TUHS have any way of consolidating these threads into easily digestible
>> documents? What would be preferred, a wiki? or a source control repo with
>> “articles”?
>>
>> I’m mostly wanting summarize this kind of thread and include links to
>> mailing list messages and other resources.  But also, I’m lazy and I am
>> not committing to editing a journal.
>
> Seems like you already know the answer and just don't like it.
> The only way to get coheret articles is to write the.  Wikis
> suck for this sort of thing.
>
> An appropriate way for us to do this sort of thing would be to create
> a repository where we can contribute to documents written in troff.

Ah, I meant to ask: is there an existing wiki or repository? Or am I starting one?

And if I’m writing in troff, is there a preferred macro set for articles these days? A decade ago I wrote manuals in mdoc but papers in LaTeX; these days I just lean on pandoc to translate. I’ll need to knock my rust off.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* [TUHS]  Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations?
  2023-01-26 21:29       ` [TUHS] Collecting notes for future “historians” was: " Joseph Holsten
@ 2023-01-26 21:38         ` Jon Steinhart
  2023-01-26 22:41           ` Joseph Holsten
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jon Steinhart @ 2023-01-26 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tautological Eunuch Horticultural Scythians

Joseph Holsten writes:
> I love how I can fire off a query and get so much info. But I wonder: does
> TUHS have any way of consolidating these threads into easily digestible
> documents? What would be preferred, a wiki? or a source control repo with
> “articles”?
>
> I’m mostly wanting summarize this kind of thread and include links to
> mailing list messages and other resources.  But also, I’m lazy and I am
> not committing to editing a journal.

Seems like you already know the answer and just don't like it.
The only way to get coheret articles is to write the.  Wikis
suck for this sort of thing.

An appropriate way for us to do this sort of thing would be to create
a repository where we can contribute to documents written in troff.

Jon

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2023-01-30  6:14 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-01-28 21:16 [TUHS] Re: Collecting notes for future “historians” was: Earliest UNIX Workstations? Douglas McIlroy
2023-01-30  6:13 ` Phil Budne
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-01-26  0:31 [TUHS] " Joseph Holsten
2023-01-26  1:47 ` [TUHS] " Chris Hanson
2023-01-26  7:20   ` John Cowan
2023-01-26 18:04     ` Jon Steinhart
2023-01-26 21:29       ` [TUHS] Collecting notes for future “historians” was: " Joseph Holsten
2023-01-26 21:38         ` [TUHS] " Jon Steinhart
2023-01-26 22:41           ` Joseph Holsten
2023-01-27  0:34             ` segaloco via TUHS
2023-01-27  0:36             ` G. Branden Robinson
2023-01-27  0:53               ` segaloco via TUHS
2023-01-27  1:28                 ` David Arnold
2023-01-27  1:35                   ` Warner Losh

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).