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=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, 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 80256cd2 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 20:08:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id DD5569BDB8; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 06:08:08 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08ED89BD79; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 06:07:56 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="uEIgMcnH"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 010279BD79; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 06:07:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-lf1-f41.google.com (mail-lf1-f41.google.com [209.85.167.41]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 291C69BD3C for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2019 06:07:53 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lf1-f41.google.com with SMTP id u13so570150lfm.9 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 13:07:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ww+/rY6K0kcdKJpLUZZEVgot37EMys8YxJLlUhUC8Hg=; b=uEIgMcnHA3B3Nj445vOeIR08Dt04ICcUks8PcZS4S2eB/qjGoTIyF/XSNQuZTxfgv6 rihJpBAVzjR/rtKvavjfeCwHn8XR5K/z08+Ul8QRMxiWGbSF13zzs82m39uGhYib7CgY pqJjjQwTCILCM4xNTy56B3/ZIIlicKmxcMs94e5cstoprT/f9f24MquypFGt28gAEdt1 VP50nm9aygRpMuFJnfRzQdf4s39G40s7BSNt2BLAbCXnOEaLQGHcelnpLgdm8p3r47Rb gVwwdlIK8rZY7qOxmT8Qgff4KukPlIWDxKNba2emo7oVVNme3f0GbIbvHsSIeCC6g28m nZtA== 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=ww+/rY6K0kcdKJpLUZZEVgot37EMys8YxJLlUhUC8Hg=; b=q0dstrU2VmBB2ImQKWLDY+bBi5MBpZpnOLxcx42s66IG+mSPLXj7QTnpko5OFAG8BC 7OnkZHLOL5HcHkvc48+JhtVftRHqCA6Rym5x5rBWmFSpQQq21Ck0HmqWUgoBk2XtBJWp uZqhEyrkiJhRafWPiqnAFVR4ynbEAHO9/Q5OV6b22Rxe1+5x4/42RDjEXIczpNZCNsyM pZxaAEihDT05sFDI/hJCbzW1/YS+d1dSa6wjLYViZVkaGV82wPUOkz6v1h2QsyGEKwR7 MUV6d9XhELl6Jl/0OVKURVjI1luAleuTHcOGWaXzP6oMsUtR3XNsOn3HJPKGIQQ96x81 c0Gw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUIrjkLb9czHXuB8QuyJAeXtzo63muRAsSKtbshjJ/iyOEFdKBT 3MDYwNir2oOfgRi3hwIKTPQGF7jRXJbXyEW7pJpIlUqO X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqycsPAuKiqgX01V66KLM5B+uuzfL+SVOimIIm426c3O5ds8DUEm35eDK3OcEuMcZq0GFjR+43M5LVQmKmcxiQQ= X-Received: by 2002:a19:9104:: with SMTP id t4mr3545105lfd.179.1567022871443; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 13:07:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <13c5c36e-c84d-e020-d09e-51c8c502dc6d@kilonet.net> In-Reply-To: <13c5c36e-c84d-e020-d09e-51c8c502dc6d@kilonet.net> From: Christopher Browne Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 16:07:39 -0400 Message-ID: To: Arthur Krewat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009b7dba059132f10a" Subject: Re: [TUHS] If not Linux, then what? 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" --0000000000009b7dba059132f10a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 19:14, Arthur Krewat wrote: > > https://linux.slashdot.org/story/19/08/26/0051234/celebrating-the-28th-anniversary-of-the-linux-kernel > > Leaving licensing and copyright issues out of this mental exercise, what > would we have now if it wasn't for Linux? Not what you'd WANT it to be, > although that can add to the discussion, but what WOULD it be? > > I'm not asking as a proponent of Linux. If anything, I was dragged > kicking and screaming into the current day and have begrudgingly ceded > my server space to Linux. > > But if not for Linux, would it be BSD? A System V variant? Or (the > horror) Windows NT? > I can make a firm "dunno" sound :-) Some facts can come together to point away from a number of possibilities... - If you look at the number of hobbyist "Unix homages" that emerged at around that time, it's clear that there was a sizable community of interested folk willing to build their own thing, and that weren't interested in Windows NT. (Nay, one should put that more strongly... That had their minds set on something NOT from Microsoft.) So I think we can cross Windows NT off the list. - OS/2 should briefly come on the list. It was likable in many ways, if only IBM had actually supported it... But it suffers from something of the same problem as Windows NT; there were a lot of folk that were only slightly less despising of IBM at the time than of Microsoft. - Hurd was imagined to be the next thing... To borrow from my cookie file... "Of course 5 years from now that will be different, but 5 years from now everyone will be running free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5." -- Andrew Tanenbaum, 1992. % "You'll be rid of most of us when BSD-detox or GNU comes out, which should happen in the next few months (yeah, right)." -- Richard Tobin, 1992. [BSD did follow within a year] % "I am aware of the benefits of a micro kernel approach. However, the fact remains that Linux is here, and GNU isn't --- and people have been working on Hurd for a lot longer than Linus has been working on Linux." -- Ted T'so, 1992. Ted has been on this thread, and should be amused (and slightly disturbed!) that his old statements are being held here and there, ready to trot out :-). In the absence of Linux, perhaps hackers would have flocked to Hurd, but there was enough going on that there was plenty of room for them to have done so anyways. I'm not sure what to blame on whatever happened post-1992, though I'd put some on Microsoft Research having taken the wind out of Mach's sails by hiring off a bunch of the relevant folk. In order for Hurd to "make it," Mach has to "make it," too, and it looked like they were depending on CMU to be behind that. (I'm not sure I'm right about that; happy to hear a better story.) Anyway, Hurd *might* have been a "next thing," and I don't think the popularity of Linux was enough to have completely taken wind out of its sails, given that there's the dozens of "Unix homages" out there. - I'd like to imagine Plan 9 being an alternative, but it was "properly commercial" for a goodly long time (hence not amenable to attaching waves of hackers to it to add their favorite device drivers), and was never taken as a serious answer. Many of us had admired it from afar via the Dr Dobbs Journal issue (when was that? mid or late '90s?) but only from afar. - FreeBSD is the single best answer I can throw up as a possibility, as it was the one actively targeting 80386 hardware. And that had the big risk of the AT&T lawsuit lurking over it, so had that gone in a different direction, then that is a branch sadly easily trimmed. If we lop both Linux and FreeBSD off the list of possibilities, I don't imagine Windows NT or OS/2 bubble to the top, instead, a critical mass would have stood behind ... something else, I'd think. I don't know which to suggest. -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" --0000000000009b7dba059132f10a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 19:14, Arthur Krew= at <krewat@kilon= et.net> wrote:
https://linux.slashdot.org/story/19/08/2= 6/0051234/celebrating-the-28th-anniversary-of-the-linux-kernel

Leaving licensing and copyright issues out of this mental exercise, what would we have now if it wasn't for Linux? Not what you'd WANT it to= be,
although that can add to the discussion, but what WOULD it be?

I'm not asking as a proponent of Linux. If anything, I was dragged
kicking and screaming into the current day and have begrudgingly ceded
my server space to Linux.

But if not for Linux, would it be BSD? A System V variant? Or (the
horror) Windows NT?

I can make a firm &= quot;dunno" sound :-)

Some facts can come tog= ether to point away from a number of possibilities...

<= div>- If you look at the number of hobbyist "Unix homages" that e= merged at around that time, it's clear that there was a sizable communi= ty of interested folk willing to build their own thing, and that weren'= t interested in Windows NT.=C2=A0 (Nay, one should put that more strongly..= .=C2=A0 That had their minds set on something NOT from Microsoft.)=C2=A0 So= I think we can cross Windows NT off the list.

- O= S/2 should briefly come on the list.=C2=A0 It was likable in many ways, if = only IBM had actually supported it...=C2=A0 But it suffers from something o= f the same problem as Windows NT; there were a lot of folk that were only s= lightly less despising of IBM at the time than of Microsoft.

=
- Hurd was imagined to be the next thing...

=
To borrow from my cookie file...

"Of cou= rse 5 =C2=A0years from now that will be different, =C2=A0but 5 years fromnow =C2=A0everyone =C2=A0will =C2=A0be =C2=A0running =C2=A0free =C2=A0GNU= on =C2=A0their =C2=A0200 =C2=A0MIPS, =C2=A064M
SPARCstation-5." = =C2=A0-- Andrew Tanenbaum, 1992.
%
"You&= #39;ll be =C2=A0rid of most of us =C2=A0when BSD-detox or GNU =C2=A0comes o= ut, which
should happen in the next few months (yeah, right)." -- R= ichard Tobin,
1992. [BSD did follow within a year]
%
"I am aw= are of the benefits =C2=A0of a micro kernel approach.=C2=A0 However, thefact remains =C2=A0that Linux is =C2=A0here, and GNU =C2=A0isn't --- a= nd =C2=A0people have
been working on Hurd for a lot longer than Linus ha= s been working on
Linux." -- Ted T'so, 1992.

Ted has been on this thread, and should be amused (and slightly dist= urbed!) that his old statements are being held here and there, ready to tro= t out :-).

In the absence of Linux, perhaps hacker= s would have flocked to Hurd, but there was enough going on that there was = plenty of room for them to have done so anyways.

I= 'm not sure what to blame on whatever happened post-1992, though I'= d put some on Microsoft Research having taken the wind out of Mach's sa= ils by hiring off a bunch of the relevant folk.=C2=A0 In order for Hurd to = "make it," Mach has to "make it," too, and it looked li= ke they were depending on CMU to be behind that.=C2=A0 (I'm not sure I&= #39;m right about that; happy to hear a better story.)

An= yway, Hurd *might* have been a "next thing," and I don't thin= k the popularity of Linux was enough to have completely taken wind out of i= ts sails, given that there's the dozens of "Unix homages" out= there.

- I'd like to imagine Plan 9 being an = alternative, but it was "properly commercial" for a goodly long t= ime (hence not amenable to attaching waves of hackers to it to add their fa= vorite device drivers), and was never taken as a serious answer.=C2=A0 Many= of us had admired it from afar via the Dr Dobbs Journal issue (when was th= at?=C2=A0 mid or late '90s?) but only from afar.

- FreeBSD is the single best answer I can throw up as a possibility,= as it was the one actively targeting 80386 hardware.=C2=A0 And that had th= e big risk of the AT&T lawsuit lurking over it, so had that gone in a d= ifferent direction, then that is a branch sadly easily trimmed.
<= br>
If we lop both Linux and FreeBSD off the list of possibilitie= s, I don't imagine Windows NT or OS/2 bubble to the top, instead, a cri= tical mass would have stood behind ... something else, I'd think.=C2=A0= I don't know which to suggest.
--
When confronted by a difficult pr= oblem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone= Ranger handle this?"
--0000000000009b7dba059132f10a--