From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: scj@yaccman.com (scj@yaccman.com) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 16:52:33 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] etymology of cron In-Reply-To: <20151224230506.GM14449@eureka.lemis.com> References: <20151223133603.B1BFE440AE@lignose.oclsc.org> <20151224151753.GA11034@mercury.ccil.org> <20151224230506.GM14449@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: <563cf28905c1795afe24eb45fc0cfe49.squirrel@webmail.yaccman.com> This has been a somewhat bizarre and troubling thread, all in all. Would anybody want to discuss the origin of 'ls'? Or 'at'? Steve PS: (that was NOT a serious suggestion!) > On Thursday, 24 December 2015 at 10:17:53 -0500, John Cowan wrote: >> Clem Cole scripsit: >> >>> Rik in his role as the editor of ;login is going to try work with Doug >>> and >>> to get something "published" into the next edition which should satisfy >>> the >>> Wikipedia folks. There is a minor issue is that Rik is technically >>> past >>> the deadline but due to the holiday, there are a few days of grace that >>> the >>> workers putting the issue together have said they will thankfully try >>> to >>> handle. >>> >>> So maybe we can have get this fixed shortly. >> >> I don't think so. Is ;login: a peer-reviewed journal? It doesn't >> look like it to me. > > One of the original references was from the proceedings of an AUUG > conference. From personal experience I can confirm that the level of > review for the conferences fell far short of what USENIX did. > >> Still, the current state says: >> >> The origin of the name cron is from the Greek word for >> time, ???????????? (chronos), according to its author Ken >> Thompson[2][better source needed]. Others have suggested that the >> name comes from the Greek God Chronos[3] or that it is an acronym >> for "Command Run On Notice"[4] or "Commands Run Over Night",[5] >> but the references lack substantiation. >> >> Even if someone is still grumbling on the talk page, that doesn't >> substantially misrepresent anything that I can see. > > Yes, that last sentence was my update. As I mentioned in an earlier > message, I think that it's appropriate that it should stay, if only to > stop people making the claim again in a more forceful manner. > > But it would be nice to be able to remove the [better source needed]. > It seems that there's only one person objecting to the changes. I've > asked him on the talk page what he really wants. > > Greg > -- > Sent from my desktop computer. > Finger grog at FreeBSD.org for PGP public key. > See complete headers for address and phone numbers. > This message is digitally signed. If your Microsoft MUA reports > problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua >