From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id dbbfdf0d for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 23:19:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 6D8C69B7FB; Sat, 13 Jul 2019 09:19:10 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A76469B729; Sat, 13 Jul 2019 09:18:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id D893C9B729; Sat, 13 Jul 2019 09:18:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp3.cs.Stanford.EDU (smtp3.cs.stanford.edu [171.64.64.27]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0EC594BBA for ; Sat, 13 Jul 2019 09:18:52 +1000 (AEST) Received: from solarpost.stanford.edu ([171.64.103.115]:36479) by smtp3.cs.Stanford.EDU with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hm4oW-00060N-P9; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 16:18:52 -0700 Received: from [107.135.30.30] (helo=MacBook-Air-4.lan) by solarpost.Stanford.EDU with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1hm4oU-00027D-Nj; Fri, 12 Jul 2019 16:18:51 -0700 To: Clem Cole References: <27f401d53834$51101140$f33033c0$@ronnatalie.com> <07dffb4b-d9d7-c33d-d0e6-5c26fa0ce6e5@solar.stanford.edu> <3f4400b9-a243-d86a-11a6-473f0e93adea@solar.stanford.edu> From: Deborah Scherrer Organization: Stanford University Message-ID: <36ef656e-a1ce-1eba-f330-aeba4103d6d9@solar.stanford.edu> Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 16:18:52 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------82BA28570962FE8880987060" X-Scan-Signature: 1a4cd7935245e7f84af030f069fa5aea Subject: Re: [TUHS] Interactive Systems (was Pcc for 386) 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@minnie.tuhs.org Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------82BA28570962FE8880987060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe you are right. That was a typical implementation method. Deborah On 7/12/19 3:45 PM, Clem Cole wrote: > If I recall this was one of the implementations that wrote to a file > and then forked the next process after it got to eof. > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 2:44 PM Deborah Scherrer > > > wrote: > > I didn't do this port, so don't know the details. But it was done in > the late 70s (I think) and had broad distribution. When I collected > various Software Tools versions, I was not able to find the VMS > one. Sorry. > Deborah > > On 7/12/19 1:45 PM, Paul Winalski wrote: > > On 7/12/19, Deborah Scherrer > wrote: > >> There was also an extensive port of the Software Tools to VMS, > done by > >> Joe Sventek at LBNL. Included at the key tools, the shell, pipes, > >> everything. Felt completely like Unix. > > How did the LBNL Software Tools for VMS implement pipes? I'm > curious > > because DEC itself did a product in the mid-1980s called DEC Shell > > that was a VMS port of the Bourne shell and associated utilities. I > > wrote a VMS device driver that implemented pipes as a true VMS > > pseudo-device, similar to VMS mailboxes but with true Unix pipe > > semantics. > > > > -Paul W. > > -- > Sent from a handheld expect more typos than usual --------------82BA28570962FE8880987060 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I believe you are right.  That was a typical implementation method.
Deborah

On 7/12/19 3:45 PM, Clem Cole wrote:
If I recall this was one of the implementations that wrote to a file and then forked the next process after it got to eof.    

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 2:44 PM Deborah Scherrer <dscherrer@solar.stanford.edu> wrote:
I didn't do this port, so don't know the details.  But it was done in
the late 70s (I think) and had broad distribution.  When I collected
various Software Tools versions, I was not able to find the VMS one. Sorry.
Deborah

On 7/12/19 1:45 PM, Paul Winalski wrote:
> On 7/12/19, Deborah Scherrer <dscherrer@solar.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> There was also an extensive port of the Software Tools to VMS, done by
>> Joe Sventek at LBNL.   Included at the key tools, the shell, pipes,
>> everything.   Felt completely like Unix.
> How did the LBNL Software Tools for VMS implement pipes?  I'm curious
> because DEC itself did a product in the mid-1980s called DEC Shell
> that was a VMS port of the Bourne shell and associated utilities.  I
> wrote a VMS device driver that implemented pipes as a true VMS
> pseudo-device, similar to VMS mailboxes but with true Unix pipe
> semantics.
>
> -Paul W.

--
Sent from a handheld expect more typos than usual

--------------82BA28570962FE8880987060--