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 fab301cd for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:11:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2F44B9D787; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:11:25 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073B69D778; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:11:03 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="sPuV6Qc3"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 820179D778; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:11:02 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f177.google.com (mail-qk1-f177.google.com [209.85.222.177]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F1FC9D777 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 07:11:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id j7so3704146qkd.5 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:11:01 -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=4SFk+Lsgb4aRzWiKWc40g5yJjgJZla1ko9bnda4s4JY=; b=sPuV6Qc3ey3GyDi+hurE0YlVBeC+Pd7f5oyGC03F0tSnsDD921P8mC9HhL49TsQVp+ sQqBMabzR8PuPU31q2BUrN8zRfdP+mRFlCw8agPKCixYvwSr/yjJthHchniLV7YDcQiK kamNSH/vrXs4un5C/dcKKjWBp/AxMbNQkRzrE= 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=4SFk+Lsgb4aRzWiKWc40g5yJjgJZla1ko9bnda4s4JY=; b=n6D1vuFj25BCGaylFRT5hotfjRewxJRzbAxasSAs/63GK5FFv+Al5f7zZwsbpnzugG ATVa5POpPPaqpattDDJK7tyBoQhi0qy+OGxbQ9bSgQV3ZYifwm5wTq6neKW5+OF+Oced 4IEzdUf6cxLHiE3QN/moxVg6YnMv8c1mKzGYIQrWS66tRiTJOlItO53aROHM9nrD4x8g MznW840WQp6uRn1nZcG1uFfQKuGJvk3HJsx0SZRKgNmvyTrglq8ZFGgvi9vElqWucRO+ 4u4u6ZgBbXaIEbpqS7PEjujUMJCEBQ28t1N4Tyn2zhyYXIleHUwN0ClghVlFYvsfu+nN ix7w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0EvAZgfiWh7V+1MEvIgQyc/qbg5fD8IOzT6oowwWC/Q+ufHFYn 0gScbvhyWCufYXwpOUaZdpKCQWdsie0OSVFV5rlKXQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vswzEKcm0QucKEKGAZq8oT+Uvo+alYFA4FtOIzwksCLo6eF5e+4H24aVzJLRAyexS0/syCWljF4joDeo5pv7z4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:698:: with SMTP id f24mr4873541qkh.476.1583529060216; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:11:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8A3F3334-D8C0-4075-B21B-FEAD709C086D@planet.nl> In-Reply-To: From: Clem Cole Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 16:10:34 -0500 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000020537d05a036178f" 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" --00000000000020537d05a036178f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BTW: My memory is that Joy did not like them for some reason, probably because they were not as sexy as some of the stuff Accent could do (but that's a guess -- I've forgotten). So with 4.2, Joy created Unix domain sockets. BTW: a slow cache refresh is occurring in my brain ... I remember one of the things that there was a lot of arguing/moaning about at the time was the directionality of such a feature. Bruce's hack from the mid-70s was unidirectional and you needed two pipes to go both ways. On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 4:06 PM Clem Cole wrote: > 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, th= ey >> 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 FIF= O=E2=80=99s become >> a standard Unix feature? >> >> Paul >> >> --00000000000020537d05a036178f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BTW:=C2=A0 My memory is that Joy did not like them for = some reason, probably=C2=A0because they were not as sexy as some of the stu= ff Accent could do (but that's a guess -- I've forgotten).=C2=A0 So= with 4.2, Joy created Unix domain sockets.

BTW: a slo= w cache refresh is occurring in my brain ... I remember one of the things t= hat there was a lot of arguing/moaning about at the time was the directiona= lity of such a feature.=C2=A0 Bruce's hack from the mid-70s was unidire= ctional and you needed two pipes to go both ways.

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 = at 4:06 PM Clem Cole <clemc@ccc.com= > wrote:
The first version was from Rand (called "Rand Pipes&qu= ot;).=C2=A0 =C2=A0They certainly=C2=A0were available=C2=A0in the mid-70s on= Sixth Edition, you have to ask someone like Bruce Borden if they were on F= ifth.=C2=A0 I think the code is on one of the 'USENIX' tapes in War= ren's archives.

At this point in time, someone wou= ld need to refresh my memory of the details=C2=A0of Rand's implementati= on compared to what came in the USG systems in the 1980s.=C2=A0 =C2=A0For i= nstance, I believe the early versions used mknod(2) to create the "nam= ed entity."=C2=A0 =C2=A0IIRC early USG did that too, and mkfifo(3) cam= e as part of the POSIX (I have memories of the discussion at a POSIX meetin= g, 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 Rui= zendaal <pnr@planet.n= l> 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 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

--00000000000020537d05a036178f--