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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,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 e7cfe3af for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:07:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 3ADFB9D785; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:07:03 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A72A9D777; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:06:35 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="A2aEAGZT"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4C7E49D777; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:06:31 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qv1-f48.google.com (mail-qv1-f48.google.com [209.85.219.48]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C1409D698 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:06:29 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qv1-f48.google.com with SMTP id m2so1602024qvu.13 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:06:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lAcUy1u0NaeffEZa6Kxf7eGuvMXY0pLzK8zRXG2lza8=; b=A2aEAGZTPNYq435YiKWDhE5mrG5/Dc9E/Lyn7x7W4Hkve5+XMK2tz6r8tjs8UgimKi IwnfeXAHQqr9xknHsVDKQCUX9ZeAy8v0CS/clyCNOk6gbpPyNeretRMtHP4uXEa5Ga2F S5cFUp877Zcwe6x0+bicHDuc1IZyrghUycz/A= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lAcUy1u0NaeffEZa6Kxf7eGuvMXY0pLzK8zRXG2lza8=; b=sccDv3CiJ8mOjMOWskNfBoZLEC3FwUsFa89dbefAIqpXeNaUZIbbByLbx2ZEq1nDgL uz5wPTzLWjRO5nUOpCnUYn1ZtFxuUCHAI5yNvLrgnOmecM/Fp7yzk/mA23qEzjaaQWo+ gEEHGBFREUHzEatPC6HfdqMOd5LvWVNpAl0fxjJ4Gx3HuaJwnd4Qe3q2RrUg8vzr9iK4 rM2PlW5PDo3dEOzqt67Q4neHfNwlvzykMmlWe1QVjSePt8X726jwVEUHS8TGNv/VriPk fQk0JHSA8srbF1vL/j1gWUpP5685WvLfACPj32+4qxG1sP2vC0TO0k6T98rLkQpD1B1j DQGw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ31W9ht8S/qyCvi1I1AQ1N48YqQa9P+Pt1VrKD7QOGMothrQdKC 7tpnsG2xmV6YbfE/uMdHCl4L5fnYvtdyn3YifTnTpWj5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vt8dple4pE2RpK5CyrdomXIZFpICe6XuGbA0NSRVQHgkdC7B7dWvCRB3ZdZ9BxjSecCxUEYkwSEmfLtu+oN/Mc= X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5222:: with SMTP id r2mr2195331qvq.178.1583528788361; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:06:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8A3F3334-D8C0-4075-B21B-FEAD709C086D@planet.nl> In-Reply-To: <8A3F3334-D8C0-4075-B21B-FEAD709C086D@planet.nl> From: Clem Cole Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ec17c405a03606c1" Subject: Re: [TUHS] First appearance of named pipes 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 main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000ec17c405a03606c1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The first version was from Rand (called "Rand Pipes"). They certainly were available in the mid-70s on Sixth Edition, you have to ask someone like Bruce Borden if they were on Fifth. I think the code is on one of the 'USENIX' tapes in Warren's archives. At this point in time, someone would need to refresh my memory of the details of Rand's implementation compared to what came in the USG systems in the 1980s. For instance, I believe the early versions used mknod(2) to create the "named entity." IIRC early USG did that too, and mkfifo(3) came as part of the POSIX (I have memories of the discussion at a POSIX meeting, but as I say, I've forgotten the details). IIRC there were differences in buffering behavior, flushing, error path between USG's later versions and the original Rand, but I'd have to stare at the code again to remember. On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:42 PM Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > The Luderer paper on distributed Unix has the following paragraph: > > "A new special UNIX interprocess communication mechanism is the fifo, > which provides communication between unrelated processes by associating a > new special file type with a file name. Since remote fifos are legal, the= y > can be used for interprocessor communication between S-UNIX machines or > between an S-UNIX machine and an F-UNIX machine.=E2=80=9D > > The paper is from late 1981. Maybe I=E2=80=99m especially mud-eyed today,= but I > cannot see FIFO=E2=80=99s implemented in V7..V8 or 4.1xBSD. When did FIFO= =E2=80=99s become > a standard Unix feature? > > Paul > > --000000000000ec17c405a03606c1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The first version was from Rand (called "Rand Pipe= s").=C2=A0 =C2=A0They certainly=C2=A0were available=C2=A0in the mid-70= s on Sixth Edition, you have to ask someone like Bruce Borden if they were = on Fifth.=C2=A0 I think the code is on one of the 'USENIX' tapes in= Warren's archives.

At this point in time, someone= would need to refresh my memory of the details=C2=A0of Rand's implemen= tation compared to what came in the USG systems in the 1980s.=C2=A0 =C2=A0F= or instance, I believe the early versions used mknod(2) to create the "= ;named entity."=C2=A0 =C2=A0IIRC early USG did that too, and mkfifo(3)= came as part of the POSIX (I have memories of the discussion at a POSIX me= eting, but as I say, I've forgotten the details).

= IIRC there were differences in buffering behavior, flushing, error path bet= ween USG's later versions and the original Rand, but I'd have to st= are at the code again to remember.

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:42 PM Paul= Ruizendaal <pnr@planet.nl> wrot= e:
The Luderer p= aper on distributed Unix has the following paragraph:

"A new special UNIX interprocess communication mechanism is the fifo, = which provides communication between unrelated processes by associating a n= ew special file type with a file name. Since remote fifos are legal, they c= an be used for interprocessor communication between S-UNIX machines or betw= een an S-UNIX machine and an F-UNIX machine.=E2=80=9D

The paper is from late 1981. Maybe I=E2=80=99m especially mud-eyed today, b= ut I cannot see FIFO=E2=80=99s implemented in V7..V8 or 4.1xBSD. When did F= IFO=E2=80=99s become a standard Unix feature?

Paul

--000000000000ec17c405a03606c1--