From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 27206 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2020 15:01:57 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (minnie.tuhs.org: domain of minnie.tuhs.org designates 45.79.103.53 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=45.79.103.53 envelope-from= Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 6 Apr 2020 15:01:57 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id EB8E49449B; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 01:01:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4621794483; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 01:01:38 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=mxes.net header.i=@mxes.net header.b="SPRcKfuI"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 8529594483; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 01:01:35 +1000 (AEST) Received: from fbo-4.mxes.net (fbo-4.mxes.net [198.205.123.79]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DDD493D06 for ; Tue, 7 Apr 2020 01:01:35 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp-out-3.mxes.net (smtp-out-3.mxes.net [198.205.123.68]) by fbi-4.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AE3175967 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:54:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from squirrelmail.mxes.net (squirrelmail.mxes.net [198.205.123.113]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1A207595B; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:54:08 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mxes.net; s=mta; t=1586184849; bh=tk9MD3yDj7Z9LNBKqmnD2s/oKZQU5xWdAQER8QhNw0Q=; h=Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Subject:From:To: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=SPRcKfuIBwL+KlfvZ/5LK8BBvBUthqG1aGv6xRVDbiiEDo68A6D8IjIW/tQ7G64p0 tTSLeIw2zenWnuTAKkRvp9Gio8wa8iVaUh3qOwkiwd3buH3+Da8LCX+eCH3pRO5Bfq BuuPXhiNrb1Q7gOMBqt/PZc5EfjJlxzcnS+Ou7qs= Received: from squirrelmail.tuffmail.net (squirrelmail.mxes.net [198.205.123.113]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by squirrelmail.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C42E75AF1; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:54:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <99b6fa9e3fb3396864916117033c2799.squirrel@squirrelmail.tuffmail.net> In-Reply-To: References: <1jKkMQ-2hN-00@marmaro.de> <854f7b58-9ba0-476f-a7e6-8579f4a8048d@localhost> <1jKlvG-4JB-00@marmaro.de> <3A36FF0A-7617-4B26-B4F3-FC183BF9A7FC@ronnatalie.com> Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:54:08 -0400 From: ron@ronnatalie.com To: "Dave Horsfall" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.23 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Sent-To: Subject: Re: [TUHS] First book on Unix for general readership 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: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" > On Sun, 5 Apr 2020, Ronald Natalie wrote: > >> The Lions book wasn=E2=80=99t really published back in the day. It wa= s only >> targetted at his students in Australia (though copies leaked out). > > Leaked out? Apparently it's the most photocopied book in the world! I > had the originals but sadly lost them in a house move (along with all > issues of AUUGN). I have one of the Xeroxes. It's a second generation copy. I remember when I got a hold of someone else's copy me and five of my coworkers spli= t up and went to different copiers around the company and each made six copies of their section and then we collated it together. We didn't dare take it to the company copy center. > >> The manuals aren=E2=80=99t really a book (and again, they weren=E2=80=99= t really >> published as a book) and most of the prose on UNIX was more in the for= m >> of articles than an entire book. > > I still reckon that the manpage format is perfect at what it does: tell= ing Agreed, but neither the manpages nor the BSTJ articles or the few non-manpage UNIX documents were "books."