From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no 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 627a05cf for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 15:37:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7574FA2175; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 01:37:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB275A22EB; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 01:37:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id EE0D5A2152; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 00:42:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f41.google.com (mail-wr1-f41.google.com [209.85.221.41]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64A98A214E for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2018 00:42:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f41.google.com with SMTP id z3-v6so1481303wru.4 for ; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 07:42:21 -0700 (PDT) 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=19dxH9umK6lx0GAeZ1VfdGI5kUBnDK+rDz1cwp3Rv2o=; b=YfcaVUKkMlemVBwVv50PdzlBrKbAam7LOa4PFK18Pa5O/75jhF+femJ2OZetJgIRhN G356TOk5FphmgREfEgy0wK7EIMBy5+5GGCyvi+YYyeNtm54Wd1FcxMiUrU5MFE6x6QdV Ac5f0rf4yZ1NMERRMpMvUrAkhQoMW6VGz6YDU= 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=19dxH9umK6lx0GAeZ1VfdGI5kUBnDK+rDz1cwp3Rv2o=; b=nCbItWVfOAet2mDaDkgaNPlfYndXtSse/MDJzM24+kSubLmnju40WDZu222skMqDEz bi+agm/B1TqXRB5byCGC5Y68DsUKIqqXa3k7QdJYA8b6t1DZIR8nw+7G7iEPVwLMHWZb aR9IeXJOXgn5NqNV2ui9l85qqyMaPC0ZZxSSXf10BENpZ+b10CS/hzu68sheUe79wB+S bwbtgb4w0M8MrxUWRxrL60RKXwcScS6dUyralUkRSQWJNqD+E6u/GEphAR6uw1wzPLQp 7FMw6UKg6IP2W0LFuZKbc2wNni/iDlVuEe3fX+RndRQg/UN3qXoxyd4E1AclyhbSmYrf n0QA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLUV1G21I37DtsBjPQZf3aFRCEd8+RA36H+grtqCQJjuMcxh7K2 CoRZZOoVDO01V1hpgYAPBxpb0TYCdpIOflxFncdl3w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5eM4gBI0M6fa4FiSmmYRXwOCDiUTFVLNUzzdwz5ygoXUPKdxX6ASlXUzO1CisBupPL4UbuwdBxBvpVez4EQ9+E= X-Received: by 2002:adf:9d4a:: with SMTP id o10-v6mr4066050wre.94.1541083339784; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 07:42:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181031043810.GA10775@minnie.tuhs.org> <20181101074231.GA4844@vagabond> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 10:41:53 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ron Minnich Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000009cf2705799b6d1c" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Unix APIs: elegant or not? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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" --00000000000009cf2705799b6d1c Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:20 AM ron minnich wrote: > In my view, what went wrong with Unix networking 40 years ago is that it > broke from the Unix model, i.e. that resources are accessed via path > names, and went with binary descriptors as paths. > Agreed. And I think somthing else where P9 differed from UNIX was dealing with OOB (control) information (*i.e.* ioctl(2) was a terrible misstake). Dennis and Ken created ioctl(2) with v7 as a generalization of stty/gtty from the TTY handler. At the time, it seemed like a reasonable way to handle those 'small things that need to be tweeked - like baud rate or canonicalization; but ioctl(2) quickly got abused as the universal end-around, and those things caused also sorts of issues (also being a binary interface only made it worse, although on the PDP-11 it made sense for size reasons). Creating a seperate interface from the 'file' to orchestrate/control the I/O and controlling that as a set of strings not binaries, seems like a mor= e sane idea. =E1=90=A7 --00000000000009cf2705799b6d1c Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:20 AM ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
In my view, what went wrong with Unix networking 40 years ago= is that it broke from the Unix model, i.e. that resources are a= ccessed via path names, and went with binary descriptors as path= s.=C2=A0
Agreed.=C2=A0

And I think somthing else where P9 differed from UNIX w= as dealing with OOB (control) information (i.e. ioctl(2) was a terri= ble misstake).=C2=A0 =C2=A0Dennis and Ken created ioctl(2) with v7 as a gen= eralization of stty/gtty from the TTY handler.=C2=A0 At the time, it seemed= like a reasonable way to handle those 'small things that need to be tw= eeked - like baud rate or canonicalization; but ioctl(2) quickly=C2=A0got abused as = the universal end-around, and those things=C2=A0caused also sorts of= issues (also being a binary interface only made it worse, although on = the PDP-11 it made sense for size reasons).=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0Creating a s= eperate interface from the 'file' to orchestrate/control the I/O and controlling that as a set of strings not binaries, seems like= =C2=A0a more sane idea.
3D""=E1=90=A7
--00000000000009cf2705799b6d1c--