Subj : Re: linux permissions issue
To   : scarface
From : tenser
Date : Sat Sep 06 2025 02:03:01

On 05 Sep 2025 at 02:40p, scarface pondered and said...
 
 sc>  pF> I loved the UNIX idea that everything is a file, like routing the out
 sc>  pF> of a tar command to /dev/tape. With BASH, you could kit together lots
 sc>  pF> tools to get what you needed to get done.
 sc> 
 sc> I love the power of bash/readline. I also like the quick and dirty raw
 sc> power but not quite as raw as C you get with scripting. definately aimed
 sc> towards a certain style of application chaining. bash, like most other
 sc> things, I always find new things out all the time. Sometimes I haven't
 sc> even learnt it before then forgot :D

The bash/readline thing does not come from Unix, though.  That has
its roots in DEC systems on 36-bit machines; specifically, TENEX/TOPS-20
(I guess TENEX was BBN, not DEC, but the point remains) and ITS (MIT).
The original erase character was '#', and "line kill" was '@', as on
Multics over a teletype; DEL for erase came from DEC terminals, and ^U/^W
and word-kill came from TENEX.

Command-line editing was not seen as a useful feature at Bell Labs; it
went against the ethos of the system, which prized simplicity over that
kind of interactive functionality.  Unix was almost simplistic, and
certainly seen as austere.

In Plan 9, this was retained; the shell (`rc`) does not support command
line editing.  But, critically, the window system (which also provides
windows running the shell) _does_: all text is editable, and one can
easily highlight and copy ("snarf") and "paste" text; so to edit a command,
simply type it and use the window system to edit it before sending it to
the shell.

The window system also provided a "Hold" mode in which the user could
enter multi-line text.  In a pinch, `cat` and hold mode in a window
made a serviceable text editor.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.