The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [TUHS] [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
@ 2022-11-09 22:01 steve jenkin
  2022-11-09 22:16 ` [TUHS] " Larry McVoy
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: steve jenkin @ 2022-11-09 22:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: TUHS

I’ve only recently stumbled across this paper.

It gives the answer to one question I’ve had:

	Why did Linux become more popular than everything that came before it?

There were surprises.
The “Dot Boom” then “Dot Bust” along with Y2K.

Microsoft developed an architecture, Active Directory, designed to support Enterprise scale deployments.

Everything Good in A.D. is Old (LDAP, Kerberos, DNS)
everything badly done is New (replicated DB’s & ???).

Other surprises is the rise of “Internet Scale” datacentres, Social Media and Smartphones & Tablets.
All of which are dominated by Linux or Unix derived solutions.

And Virtual Machines on Intel.
IA-64 was in the far future :(

And ARM CPU’s made a big comeback.

==========

The Sourceware Operating System Proposal
	9 November 1993 
	Revision: 1.8
	<https://www.landley.net/history/mirror/unix/srcos.html>

==========
--
Steve Jenkin, IT Systems and Design 
0412 786 915 (+61 412 786 915)
PO Box 38, Kippax ACT 2615, AUSTRALIA

mailto:sjenkin@canb.auug.org.au http://members.tip.net.au/~sjenkin


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-09 22:01 [TUHS] [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises? steve jenkin
@ 2022-11-09 22:16 ` Larry McVoy
  2022-11-09 22:24   ` Clem Cole
  2022-11-09 22:51   ` Joseph Holsten
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Larry McVoy @ 2022-11-09 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: steve jenkin; +Cc: TUHS

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 09:01:42AM +1100, steve jenkin wrote:
> I???ve only recently stumbled across this paper.
> 
> It gives the answer to one question I???ve had:
> 
> 	Why did Linux become more popular than everything that came before it?

Yeah, that was a difficult time.  My boss, Ken Okin (SVP of all server
hardware) didn't like the switch from SunOS to SVR4 any more than I did.
He paid me to go argue with the execs for 6 months.  That paper was
the result.

It obviously went nowhere and Linux won.  Big surprise.

The one thing I learned in that 6 months was respect for the execs.
As an engineer, I had the luxury of taking the time to solve a problem and
know that I solved it correctly.  The execs didn't have that.  They had
to make decisions essentially with their gut, they couldn't afford the
time to figure out the right answer, they had to come up with the right
answer on the fly.  I don't think I could do that.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-09 22:16 ` [TUHS] " Larry McVoy
@ 2022-11-09 22:24   ` Clem Cole
  2022-11-09 22:51   ` Joseph Holsten
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Clem Cole @ 2022-11-09 22:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Larry McVoy; +Cc: steve jenkin, TUHS

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 357 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 5:16 PM Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com> wrote:

> Yeah, that was a difficult time.
>
Amen bro ...

Corporate pride -- but you were right.  In the end, it comes down to:
Simple Economics matters more the Sophisticated Engineering but corporate
pride wanted to believe my cool engineering is going to crush the
competition.

ᐧ

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1482 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-09 22:16 ` [TUHS] " Larry McVoy
  2022-11-09 22:24   ` Clem Cole
@ 2022-11-09 22:51   ` Joseph Holsten
  2022-11-10  0:47     ` segaloco via TUHS
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Holsten @ 2022-11-09 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: segaloco


On Wed, Nov 9, 2022, at 14:16, Larry McVoy wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 09:01:42AM +1100, steve jenkin wrote:
>> I???ve only recently stumbled across this paper.
>> 
>> It gives the answer to one question I???ve had:
>> 
>> 	Why did Linux become more popular than everything that came before it?
>
> Yeah, that was a difficult time.  My boss, Ken Okin (SVP of all server
> hardware) didn't like the switch from SunOS to SVR4 any more than I did.
> He paid me to go argue with the execs for 6 months.  That paper was
> the result.
>
> It obviously went nowhere and Linux won.  Big surprise.
>
> The one thing I learned in that 6 months was respect for the execs.
> As an engineer, I had the luxury of taking the time to solve a problem and
> know that I solved it correctly.  The execs didn't have that.  They had
> to make decisions essentially with their gut, they couldn't afford the
> time to figure out the right answer, they had to come up with the right
> answer on the fly.  I don't think I could do that.

It’s painful to look at where (Open)Solaris was when Oracle acquired it and where it is now. SMF, Zones, ZFS, dtrace, mdb. Oracle Cloud doesn’t use Solaris for anything. I can’t recall hearing anyone using dtrace or ZFS around the place.

Meanwhile, illumos derivs have actually done interesting things. Not that NexenStor or SmartOS have made a big dent, but at least they’ve had more recent ideas to copy.

--
Joseph Holsten
http://josephholsten.com
mailto:joseph@josephholsten.com
tel:+1-360-927-7234


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-09 22:51   ` Joseph Holsten
@ 2022-11-10  0:47     ` segaloco via TUHS
  2022-11-10  0:54       ` Joseph Holsten
                         ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: segaloco via TUHS @ 2022-11-10  0:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joseph Holsten; +Cc: segaloco

What I find incredibly interesting any time the concept of fragmentation comes up is how did several versions of UNIX with slightly differing interfaces create such a headache for UNIX vendors and users in the day, but now we've got a Linux/BSD landscape out there with still pretty significant differences between distributions and UNIX's progeny seem to be doing just fine.

Were users looking for different things from their computers in the 90s vs today?  Have folks just gotten more used to variability in computing environments and just accept it as part of the plan?

What comes to mind for me is the different init systems, desktop environments, networking tools, user management tools, and basically that anything that isn't lore in POSIX seems to be up in the air these days.  However, you go back to when SVR4 derivatives were king, they all had the same init, the same useradd, the same /etc/passwd, the same ifconfig.  Maybe some of the snazzier new features were pretty variable, but the most basic stuff like starting your system, creating a user, seeing if you were connected to a network, essential administrative functions, were relatively consistent.

Nowadays I have to wonder if my init system is runlevel based or some systemd monstrosity.  I have to question whether I can rely on useradd or some other tool being present or if I should forgo it all and just edit the /etc files directly.  Heck, I couldn't say which but I seem to recall a distro I played around with in the past year where this actually didn't work, I had to research whatever arcane user management tools they shipped with that one because whatever they chose broke with convention so much.  I have to pray it has ifconfig or else go look up the docs for iproute2 and iw because nobody can make up their mind on what to replace ifconfig with, just that it has to go and replacing it haphazardly and non-universally is better than fixing/modernizing it.

Not looking to start some great debate over which of these components is ideal of course, just remarking at the fact that in the early 90s, if you were on a contemporary UNIX system, you'd probably have no trouble modifying system init, adding users, networks, etc., but today I sit down at an unknown Linux machine and I have no confidence that the particular flavor of system administration that I'm used to will be even remotely represented in the subset of tools that particular distro ships.  Luckily, it's free, so perhaps that is what has made the difference, folks are more willing to deal with variability when they aren't paying for what should be a consistent experience, but regardless, the fragmentation in Linux world today feels like it is much more severe than UNIX was in the past, but that's also looking through a lens upon a time I certainly wasn't cognizant of this stuff in.

Anywho, that was definitely an informative read, thanks for the share.  As someone who is constantly trying to dial in my own personal Linux distro, the questions of standardization and uniformity feature in my mind often.

- Matt G.

------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, November 9th, 2022 at 2:51 PM, Joseph Holsten <joseph@josephholsten.com> wrote:


> On Wed, Nov 9, 2022, at 14:16, Larry McVoy wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 09:01:42AM +1100, steve jenkin wrote:
> > 
> > > I???ve only recently stumbled across this paper.
> > > 
> > > It gives the answer to one question I???ve had:
> > > 
> > > Why did Linux become more popular than everything that came before it?
> > 
> > Yeah, that was a difficult time. My boss, Ken Okin (SVP of all server
> > hardware) didn't like the switch from SunOS to SVR4 any more than I did.
> > He paid me to go argue with the execs for 6 months. That paper was
> > the result.
> > 
> > It obviously went nowhere and Linux won. Big surprise.
> > 
> > The one thing I learned in that 6 months was respect for the execs.
> > As an engineer, I had the luxury of taking the time to solve a problem and
> > know that I solved it correctly. The execs didn't have that. They had
> > to make decisions essentially with their gut, they couldn't afford the
> > time to figure out the right answer, they had to come up with the right
> > answer on the fly. I don't think I could do that.
> 
> 
> It’s painful to look at where (Open)Solaris was when Oracle acquired it and where it is now. SMF, Zones, ZFS, dtrace, mdb. Oracle Cloud doesn’t use Solaris for anything. I can’t recall hearing anyone using dtrace or ZFS around the place.
> 
> Meanwhile, illumos derivs have actually done interesting things. Not that NexenStor or SmartOS have made a big dent, but at least they’ve had more recent ideas to copy.
> 
> --
> Joseph Holsten
> http://josephholsten.com
> mailto:joseph@josephholsten.com
> tel:+1-360-927-7234

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  0:47     ` segaloco via TUHS
@ 2022-11-10  0:54       ` Joseph Holsten
  2022-11-10  1:28       ` David Arnold
  2022-11-10  1:42       ` Larry McVoy
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Holsten @ 2022-11-10  0:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: segaloco; +Cc: segaloco

On Wed, Nov 9, 2022, at 16:47, segaloco wrote:
> Nowadays I have to wonder if my init system is runlevel based or some 
> systemd monstrosity. 

Ah, the good old days when we just got annoyed at sysvinit vs bsdinit.
--
Joseph Holsten
http://josephholsten.com
mailto:joseph@josephholsten.com
tel:+1-360-927-7234

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  0:47     ` segaloco via TUHS
  2022-11-10  0:54       ` Joseph Holsten
@ 2022-11-10  1:28       ` David Arnold
  2022-11-10  6:14         ` Theodore Ts'o
  2022-11-10  1:42       ` Larry McVoy
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Arnold @ 2022-11-10  1:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: segaloco; +Cc: Joseph Holsten, segaloco

> On 10 Nov 2022, at 11:47, segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
> 
> What I find incredibly interesting any time the concept of fragmentation comes up is how did several versions of UNIX with slightly differing interfaces create such a headache for UNIX vendors and users in the day, but now we've got a Linux/BSD landscape out there with still pretty significant differences between distributions and UNIX's progeny seem to be doing just fine.
> 
> Were users looking for different things from their computers in the 90s vs today?  Have folks just gotten more used to variability in computing environments and just accept it as part of the plan?

Two things, I think:
a) Today most identifiably Unix software is “sourceware”, and so the differences between Linuxes, *BSD, and macOS are fairly easily taken care of (eg. with autotools).
b) A lot of Unix software is now distributed (more or less) by the OS vendor.  Packaging has hidden the portability problem from the end user.

> What comes to mind for me is the different init systems, desktop environments, networking tools, user management tools, and basically that anything that isn't lore in POSIX seems to be up in the air these days.  However, you go back to when SVR4 derivatives were king, they all had the same init, the same useradd, the same /etc/passwd, the same ifconfig.  Maybe some of the snazzier new features were pretty variable, but the most basic stuff like starting your system, creating a user, seeing if you were connected to a network, essential administrative functions, were relatively consistent.
> 
> Nowadays I have to wonder if my init system is runlevel based or some systemd monstrosity.  I have to question whether I can rely on useradd or some other tool being present or if I should forgo it all and just edit the /etc files directly.  Heck, I couldn't say which but I seem to recall a distro I played around with in the past year where this actually didn't work, I had to research whatever arcane user management tools they shipped with that one because whatever they chose broke with convention so much.  I have to pray it has ifconfig or else go look up the docs for iproute2 and iw because nobody can make up their mind on what to replace ifconfig with, just that it has to go and replacing it haphazardly and non-universally is better than fixing/modernizing it.
> 
> Not looking to start some great debate over which of these components is ideal of course, just remarking at the fact that in the early 90s, if you were on a contemporary UNIX system, you'd probably have no trouble modifying system init, adding users, networks, etc., but today I sit down at an unknown Linux machine and I have no confidence that the particular flavor of system administration that I'm used to will be even remotely represented in the subset of tools that particular distro ships.  Luckily, it's free, so perhaps that is what has made the difference, folks are more willing to deal with variability when they aren't paying for what should be a consistent experience, but regardless, the fragmentation in Linux world today feels like it is much more severe than UNIX was in the past, but that's also looking through a lens upon a time I certainly wasn't cognizant of this stuff in.

iOS and Android are the most popular end-user Unix systems.  None of these concerns matter there — they’ve got two completely incompatible layered APIs that hide the fact they’re Unix from applications and users.

Even if you restrict the discussion to non-mobile systems, macOS and ChromeOS probably top the list for end-user systems.  Again, none of these concerns matter.  I mention this to make the point that “Unix” is not what it once was, both in technical terms, and in commercial success.




d

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  0:47     ` segaloco via TUHS
  2022-11-10  0:54       ` Joseph Holsten
  2022-11-10  1:28       ` David Arnold
@ 2022-11-10  1:42       ` Larry McVoy
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Larry McVoy @ 2022-11-10  1:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: segaloco; +Cc: Joseph Holsten, segaloco

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 12:47:37AM +0000, segaloco via TUHS wrote:
> What comes to mind for me is the different init systems, desktop
> environments, networking tools, user management tools, and basically that
> anything that isn't lore in POSIX seems to be up in the air these days.
> However, you go back to when SVR4 derivatives were king, they all had the
> same init, the same useradd, the same /etc/passwd, the same ifconfig.
> Maybe some of the snazzier new features were pretty variable, but the
> most basic stuff like starting your system, creating a user, seeing if
> you were connected to a network, essential administrative functions,
> were relatively consistent.

This is sooooo not true.  I was supporting BitKeeper on all Unix
variations as well as MacOS and Windows from about 2000 to 2018ish.
At the very least you had BSD based systems and Sys5 based systems but
the Sys5 systems had all diverged.  AIX had smit for admin, other systems
would let you edit the /etc files but they were in different locations.
ifconfig was most definitely not compatible across all the systems, nor
was ps.  There were tons and tons of differences.  We ended up pulling in
NetBSDs libc so we at least had one libc (we didn't use the native libc,
yep, you read that right, even that was incompatible).

Even /etc/passwd wasn't consist, some places had /etc/shadow that had the
passwords (I think, it's all getting blurry), and I think there was one,
probably AIX, that had /etc/shadow but not in /etc/shadow.

The best way I can explain all of this is a lack of a dictator over
all the versions.  You need someone who is pushing back on changes and
is making everything consistent.  That's hard to do within a single
organization and impossible over multiple organizations.  POSIX tried
but it wasn't enough.  It helped a little.  If it had worked, we wouldn't
have needed to ship our own libc.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  1:28       ` David Arnold
@ 2022-11-10  6:14         ` Theodore Ts'o
  2022-11-10  9:12           ` David Arnold
  2022-11-10 15:33           ` Clem Cole
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2022-11-10  6:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Arnold; +Cc: segaloco, Joseph Holsten, segaloco

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 12:28:49PM +1100, David Arnold wrote:
> > On 10 Nov 2022, at 11:47, segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
> > 
> > What I find incredibly interesting any time the concept of
> > fragmentation comes up is how did several versions of UNIX with
> > slightly differing interfaces create such a headache for UNIX
> > vendors and users in the day, but now we've got a Linux/BSD
> > landscape out there with still pretty significant differences
> > between distributions and UNIX's progeny seem to be doing just
> > fine.
> > 
> > Were users looking for different things from their computers in
> > the 90s vs today?  Have folks just gotten more used to variability
> > in computing environments and just accept it as part of the plan?
> 
> Two things, I think:
> 
> a) Today most identifiably Unix software is “sourceware”, and so the
> > differences between Linuxes, *BSD, and macOS are fairly easily
> > taken care of (eg. with autotools).

I'd also argue that (a) the differences between the Linuxes aren't as
big some people would make it out to be --- especially compared to the
differences between AIX and Solaris and HPUX, and (b) *BSD and macOS
has their ports and homebrew systems which also ease any pai that
isn't handled by autoconf and friends.

> b) A lot of Unix software is now distributed (more or less) by the
> OS vendor.  Packaging has hidden the portability problem from the
> end user.

In addition to that, a lot of user-desired functionality is made
available via dynamic web "appliances" (e.g., GMail, Concur for those
people who need to submit travel reports) as opposed to compiled
binaries.  I'm talking about pure web applications, of course, not
Java web apps.

My horror store from when I was working at IBM was that their expense
reporting tool was written in Java, but it only worked with the Sun
JRE.  But if you needed to use to configure an IBM Bladeserver, that
only worked with the IBM JRE.  So if I needed to submit an expense
report, I had to kill the browser, set the environment variables to
point at the Sun JRE, and then restart the browser and do the travel
report.  And then when I needed to go back to messing with a Blade
Server chasis, I had to kill the browser, and reset the environment
variables, and then restart the browser.

Ah, Java.... write once, debug everywhere.  :-)

						- Ted

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  6:14         ` Theodore Ts'o
@ 2022-11-10  9:12           ` David Arnold
  2022-11-10 13:27             ` Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via TUHS
  2022-11-10 15:33           ` Clem Cole
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Arnold @ 2022-11-10  9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Theodore Ts'o; +Cc: segaloco, Joseph Holsten, segaloco

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1659 bytes --]

> On 10 Nov 2022, at 17:14, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 12:28:49PM +1100, David Arnold wrote:

>> a) Today most identifiably Unix software is “sourceware”, and so the
>> differences between Linuxes, *BSD, and macOS are fairly easily
>> taken care of (eg. with autotools).
> 
> I'd also argue that (a) the differences between the Linuxes aren't as
> big some people would make it out to be --- especially compared to the
> differences between AIX and Solaris and HPUX, and (b) *BSD and macOS
> has their ports and homebrew systems which also ease any pai that
> isn't handled by autoconf and friends.

I agree.

The differences between desktop/server Linux distributions are largely invisible to application code.  THe most obvious exceptions are locations for files. I’ve found it’s basically easier to deal with that dynamically (in the application code), rather than doing an autoconf-based distro switch.  Init script vs. units, etc, are minor issues too.

Sometimes I’ve found a particular platform doesn’t have a package for eg. the right SSL library, or the right version of something, but that’s fairly rare, and mostly able to be worked around by being conservative in dependency choices.

Alpine’s use of musl rather than glibc was a bigger problem, but musl is increasingly glibc compatible.  Other libc versions used by embedded platforms, create more problems, but then those applications tend to be fairly narrowly targeted anyway.

But all that said … it’s a heap easier than making source code compile across every common Unix in the mid-to-late 90’s.




d


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7428 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  9:12           ` David Arnold
@ 2022-11-10 13:27             ` Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via TUHS
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via TUHS @ 2022-11-10 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Arnold; +Cc: tuhs

David Arnold <davida@pobox.com> writes:

> But all that said … it’s a heap easier than making source code compile
> across every common Unix in the mid-to-late 90’s.

"Congratulations! You're not running Eunice."  :)

-tih
-- 
Most people who graduate with CS degrees don't understand the significance
of Lisp.  Lisp is the most important idea in computer science.  --Alan Kay

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

* [TUHS] Re: [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises?
  2022-11-10  6:14         ` Theodore Ts'o
  2022-11-10  9:12           ` David Arnold
@ 2022-11-10 15:33           ` Clem Cole
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Clem Cole @ 2022-11-10 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Theodore Ts'o; +Cc: segaloco, Joseph Holsten, segaloco

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1919 bytes --]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 1:14 AM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

> I'd also argue that (a) the differences between the Linuxes aren't as big
> some people would make it out to be
>
It's all a matter of degree and what things bite you.   This is why we had
to develop the cluster checker because Linux is all over the place
>>still<< -- one famous ISV had 144 possible differences between 'standard'
Linux cluster configurations they needed to test.   BTW:  that had been a
developer during the UNIX wars and pure Fortran on VMS/IBM etc days.   I
suspect they would claim it was not much better for them.

Is it better in some areas? Sure, in another no.  It depends if it's
something that bites you and you care about.  Things like the "systemd
wars" did not help which I would contend was not much less glorious that
the Unix wars -- just different players.   In the end, it's all about who
is making the call of what is different/what is changing.  I'm too old to
get too religious about this.

The 'sameness' is because of UNIX not because of Linux.   Ken and Dennis's
core ideas created an industry and set of systems that are all 'close
enough that we all can get work done.   In the end, at any given time, one
group or any other will have the incentive to have their way lead the
market - and the hard part for many of us to accept is that the incentive
is most often *economic not technical*.

Larry's old paper nailed the basic issue.   It was use the core ideas of
Ken and Dennis - (call it anything you want) - and make it freely available
to remove the economic barriers.   This is what Linux exploited, and that
is what made it successful.   I'm pleased to say, that Larry's 'Sourceware'
came about --> today its in the form of Linux.  But the ideas (the core IP)
is called UNIX.  And yes there are specific differences.  But in general;
they are close enough.

ᐧ

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4292 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-11-10 15:34 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-11-09 22:01 [TUHS] [OT?] 1993 'Sourceware' paper anniversary. What was right & any surprises? steve jenkin
2022-11-09 22:16 ` [TUHS] " Larry McVoy
2022-11-09 22:24   ` Clem Cole
2022-11-09 22:51   ` Joseph Holsten
2022-11-10  0:47     ` segaloco via TUHS
2022-11-10  0:54       ` Joseph Holsten
2022-11-10  1:28       ` David Arnold
2022-11-10  6:14         ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-10  9:12           ` David Arnold
2022-11-10 13:27             ` Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via TUHS
2022-11-10 15:33           ` Clem Cole
2022-11-10  1:42       ` Larry McVoy

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).