🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Article #11834

Re: Unix V7 functionality under (or along with) AmigaDOS? (*LONG*)

#11834
From: Deven Corzine
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 1989 21:31
52 lines
3313 bytes
In article <6278@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes:
 >In article <1292@dukeac.UUCP> rsb@dukeac.UUCP (R. Scott Bartlett) writes:
 >>In article <6237@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes:
 >>>	Agreed, it is too few.  This may change.
 >> 
 >>What about setting the CLI proc number to 0?  Will some cli things choke on
 >>this?  Lattice's forkv() uses proc number 0. (What do workbench programs do?)

 >        Not normally a good idea.  It removes the ability to Break the
 >program, or to have Status return anything reasonable.  Isn't really too
 >dangerous, though.

Wouldn't Status simply ignore any process that has a CLI process
number of 0?  (Strangely, sometimes Status will show a process number
as being in the billions or so (many digits anyhow) after something
crashes...  very incongrous.)

 >>Let me know how you want to eliminate the BCPL stuff.  I plan on
 >>writing a ROOT: to allow other filesystems to be mounted onto it.  It
 >>would be a great place to eliminate some BCPL garbage (or at least
 >>hide it from those that are in the know).

 >        Talk to Bill Hawes.  He wrote a PATH: that does similar sorts
 >of things.  Warning: packet-forwarding can get tricky.

I still gotta track down that PATH: device sometime.  Yeah, I could
see packet-forwarding getting tricky...  Any particular caveats you
have in mind?

 >>>	I've seen it done.  Check the arp programmers docs.
 >>
 >>Please use the magic number.  I think using the file protection bits
 >>is a BIG kludge.  If we go ahead and implement magic numbers, programs
 >>that depend on the MMU for different memory setups, etc. can be
 >>identified and dealt with accordingly.  For instance programs that are
 >>very time sensitive can be labled

 >        Well, I don't really approve too much of magic number headers.
 >This really is exactly what the "protection" bits were designed for.
 >There are even 16 user-defined bits you could use.

Be that as it may, it remains a fact that protection bits are easily
lost in distribution and simple copying.  What are these 16
user-defined bits?  I assume the upper 16 bits, but I've never seen
mention of them...

Deven
--
------- shadow@pawl.rpi.edu ------- Deven Thomas Corzine ---------------------
Cogito  shadow@acm.rpi.edu          2346 15th Street            Pi-Rho America
ergo    userfxb6@rpitsmts.bitnet    Troy, NY 12180-2306         (518) 272-5847
sum...     In the immortal words of Socrates:  "I drank what?"     ...I think.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <DEVEN.89Mar15163112@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!rpi.edu!deven
References: <DEVEN.89Mar6082649@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu> <6157@cbmvax.UUCP> <6185@cbmvax.UUCP> <DEVEN.89Mar9113018@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu> <6237@cbmvax.UUCP> <1292@dukeac.UUCP> <6278@cbmvax.UUCP>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!rpi.edu!deven
From: deven@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Corzine)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Unix V7 functionality under (or along with) AmigaDOS?  (*LONG*)
Message-ID: <DEVEN.89Mar15163112@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 89 21:31:12 GMT
References: <DEVEN.89Mar6082649@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu> <6157@cbmvax.UUCP> <6185@cbmvax.UUCP> <DEVEN.89Mar9113018@daniel.pawl.rpi.edu> <6237@cbmvax.UUCP> <1292@dukeac.UUCP> <6278@cbmvax.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@rpi.edu
Reply-To: shadow@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Thomas Corzine)
Distribution: comp
Organization: RPI Public Access Workstation Lab, Troy NY
Lines: 52
In-reply-to: jesup@cbmvax.UUCP's message of 15 Mar 89 04:00:05 GMT