From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: crossd@gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 19:49:58 -0400 Subject: [TUHS] BSD/v8 TCP/IP In-Reply-To: <57d723e9.8xNcmlVDu6NtFK0V%schily@schily.net> References: <201609122139.u8CLdkQc043283@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> <57d723e9.8xNcmlVDu6NtFK0V%schily@schily.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Doug McIlroy wrote: > > > > Interesting, but then nobody did run a modern shell on one of these > machines or > > > everybody did type slowly, so the character lossage problem did not > occur. > > > > I'm afraid I don't get the point, apparently something about the > > relative performance of stream- and non-stream tty drivers. How > > do shells get into the act? And didn't uucp, which was certainly > > not a slow typist, appear like any dial-up connection and thus > > use /dev/ttyxx? (I cannot recollect, though, when dial-up uucp > > finally ceased.) > > In 1982, I created a conceptional implementation and in 1984, I integrated > a > cursor editable history into my shell. > > As a result, this shell needed to switch the tty between raw and cooked > mode. > With the traditional UNIX tty driver, this was no problem, but with the > unfixed > AT&T strams based tty driver, this causes character loss. > > With such a shell, the conceptional bug in the original AT&T streams caused > character loss when you type fast while the last command is going to > terminate > and the shell takes the input while switching the tty into raw mode. > > With the fix from Sun from around 1989, there is a new streams message that > informs the lower side of the stream about how many characters re going to > be > read in raw mode. This permits to keep the other caracters in the edit > buffer > and avoids the character loss seen with the original AT&T streams driver > concept. > AT&T STREAMS and research streams (note difference in case and specificity of origin) were two separate things. v8 would have had the latter; you are presumably referring to systems using the former. It is unsurprising that bugs in the two would, in many cases, be disjoint: that is, the bug you are referring to in AT&T STREAMS quite possibly wasn't in the research streams. All modern shells use such an integrated history editor.... > There is considerable difference on the meaning of "modern" with respect to this facility in recent shells, but this isn't the place for a holy war. - Dan C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: