From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: usotsuki@buric.co (Steve Nickolas)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 07:19:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [TUHS] Happy birthday, Dennis Ritchie!
In-Reply-To: <20170909110441.GD24413@77AD38E6D9044456A84A3BC0CB091E44>
References: <20170908210450.C0FA618C08E@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
 <alpine.BSF.2.02.1709081827550.8382@frieza.hoshinet.org>
 <20170909110441.GD24413@77AD38E6D9044456A84A3BC0CB091E44>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.02.1709090716590.53132@frieza.hoshinet.org>

On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Michael Kjörling wrote:

> On 8 Sep 2017 18:28 -0400, from usotsuki at buric.co (Steve Nickolas):
>> Heck, even MS-DOS 2 as we knew it would not have been what it was,
>> were it not for Unix.
>
> Wasn't it MS-DOS 2 that introduced such advanced features as
> directories, pipes and general console I/O redirection?

For varying degrees of "pipes"; it implemented them with a temp file.  But 
yes, and that's exactly what I was referring to - it took those features 
from Xenix.  The API is pretty much as Unixlike as you could get on top of 
the INT21 interface and on a single-tasking system, I think.

> Of course most software that ran on top of DOS broke much of the
> redirection niceness by addressing the console directly via video
> memory access...

Of course.  But those kinds of programs often weren't the kind you'd want 
to redirect anyway.

-uso.