On 14 Aug 2000, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> > "You"? What does it mean on multi-user OS?
>
> Well, what does it *usually* mean?
>
> Just apply the usual damn access controls. You don't actually think NTFS
> doesn't do that, too, do you? (Or networking under MacOS.)
Umm... Why am I getting this image of programs duhveloped in
assumption that system directories are world-writable? Ah, yes - that's
because the fscking lot of them _is_ duhveloped that way.
> > Trying to force the forks into the OS built on fundamentally
> > different ideas is just plain silly.
>
> Which OS would that be? Not Linux, in any case. NT (or MacOS) copy *so*
> many of the basic Unix ideas (for example, the hierarchical filesystem, or
> the idea of file-is-a-stream) that this claim just won't wash.
file-is-a-stream is bloody opposite to file-is-a-P-list, damnit.
And that's what the forks are.
> > BTW, the desktop crowd would do much better if they would start
> > with making the X objects hierarchy visible as a userland fs.
>
> Userland fs support for the kernel would be *very* useful for quite a
> number of different applications.
Yup. Moreover, there is a couple of variants floating around. But
yes, it needs to be done in clear way.
[snip]
> And I bet that was part of the motivation of having forks in the first
> place. "We need this additional stuff, we already understand files ..."
I suspect that it was rather "how does one make atom's properties
persistent?" On a LISP-based system. In late 70s/early 80s. By folks who
couldn't stand UNIX and would be seriously pissed by your assumption.
Ummm... Wait-a-minute, you said that you bet? I'm sure that in the other
place we can easily find somebody who can confirm/deny our versions.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:00:35 EST