• Arrggh! beware the upgrade...

    From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to All on Tue Dec 19 12:52:18 2023
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine upgrade.
    This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and after terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally booted
    again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Bastards. I was up all night rebuilding that Pi..

    --
    If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
    eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
    time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
    and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
    important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
    the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
    truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

    Joseph Goebbels

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Chris Green@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Tue Dec 19 13:35:12 2023
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine upgrade.
    This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and after terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally booted again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Bastards. I was up all night rebuilding that Pi..

    I'm running Bookworm on two Pi4s without any issues.

    --
    Chris Green
    ·

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Chris Green on Tue Dec 19 14:12:26 2023
    On 19/12/2023 13:35, Chris Green wrote:
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine upgrade.
    This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and after
    terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally booted
    again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Bastards. I was up all night rebuilding that Pi..

    I'm running Bookworm on two Pi4s without any issues.

    The point is that about 4 hrs after all this happened the upgrade on the
    new install held back the kernel....upgrade
    So I just got caught. Between a bad upgrade and the powers that be
    blocking it.

    And the latest bookworm image didn't boot either.

    So something rotten in the state of Denmark, to be sure. So take care. I
    am sure it will all be fixed soon


    --
    “It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
    making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
    who pay no price for being wrong.”

    Thomas Sowell

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From druck@3:770/3 to All on Tue Dec 19 21:07:52 2023
    T24gMTkvMTIvMjAyMyAxNTozMCwgRGF2aWQgVGF5bG9yIHdyb3RlOg0KPiBJIGhvcGUgdGhl eSBmaXhlZCB0aGUgbmFzdHkgYnVnIG9mIG1ha2luZyB0aGUgV2ktRmkgaGF2ZSBwb3dlci1z YXZlIA0KPiBlbmFibGVkIGJ5IGRlZmF1bHQuwqAgS2lsbHMgdGhlIG90aGVyd2lzZSBleGNl bGxlbnQgdGltZS1rZWVwaW5nLg0KDQpJIGRvbid0IGtub3cgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGxhdGVzdCBv bmUsIGJ1dCB0aGlzIGlzIHN0YXlpbmcgb24gYWxsIG15IFBpcyANCnVudGlsIEkgZmluZCBv dXQgb3RoZXJ3aXNlLiBUdXJuaW5nIHBvd2VyIHNhdmluZyBvZmYgZ3JlYXRseSByZWR1Y2Vz IHRoZSANCmxhdGVuY3kgb24gYWxsIG15IG1vbml0b3JpbmcgdGFza3MuDQoNCkNyZWF0ZSAv ZXRjL3VkZXYvcnVsZXMuZC83MS13aWZpX3Bvd2VyX3NhdmVfb2ZmLnJ1bGVzIGNvbnRhaW5p bmcgdGhlIA0KZm9sbG93aW5nIHNpbmdsZSBsaW5lOi0NCg0KU1VCU1lTVEVNPT0ibmV0Iiwg QUNUSU9OPT0iYWRkIiwgRFJJVkVSUz09ImJyY21mbWFjIiwgS0VSTkVMPT0id2xhbjAiLCAN ClJVTj0iL3NiaW4vaXcgZGV2IHdsYW4wIHNldCBwb3dlcl9zYXZlIG9mZiINCg0KLS0tZHJ1 Y2sNCg==

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Tue Dec 19 23:29:10 2023
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine
    upgrade. This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and
    after terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally
    booted again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Packages being _held_ back means the local administrator has blocked
    their upgrade with ‘apt-mark hold’ (or equivalent).

    Packages being _kept_ back means that a package can’t be upgraded due to
    a dependency issue (e.g. because the administrator only asked for a
    partial upgrade, but the new version of the package depends on a package
    that isn’t installed).

    Neither reflects any kind of upstream decision to block upgrades.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From David Taylor@3:770/3 to druck on Wed Dec 20 07:23:16 2023
    On 19/12/2023 21:07, druck wrote:
    I don't know about the latest one, but this is staying on all my Pis
    until I find out otherwise. Turning power saving off greatly reduces the latency on all my monitoring tasks.

    Create /etc/udev/rules.d/71-wifi_power_save_off.rules containing the following single line:-

    SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="brcmfmac", KERNEL=="wlan0", RUN="/sbin/iw dev wlan0 set power_save off"

    ---druck

    Yes, it does save power, and reduces the CPU load and temperature, but the penalty is too great. Thanks for posting an alternative method to using Network Manager. I've made a note!

    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: https://www.satsignal.eu

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Wed Dec 20 07:25:56 2023
    On 19/12/2023 23:29, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine
    upgrade. This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and
    after terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally
    booted again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Packages being _held_ back means the local administrator has blocked
    their upgrade with ‘apt-mark hold’ (or equivalent).

    Packages being _kept_ back means that a package can’t be upgraded due to
    a dependency issue (e.g. because the administrator only asked for a
    partial upgrade, but the new version of the package depends on a package
    that isn’t installed).

    Neither reflects any kind of upstream decision to block upgrades.

    I dont think I said that it did, just that the held back packages were
    the ones on the NEW (rolled back) installation that had borlkd the
    previous installation.
    Namely a new kernel.

    And that the NEW downoad of Raspios kernel panicked during boot, and
    wouldnt boot.

    So the course of events were
    - kernel upgrade hangs, machine now unbootable
    - installation of *latest* downloaded image fails, with kernel panic
    - installation of *previous* image succeeds, but upgrading it shows a
    kernel package 'held back'

    The inference being that there was a bad kernel image in the pipeline.

    But with induction, one never knows the truth. It is always speculation.
    At best we can say its reasonable.

    --
    “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

    —Soren Kierkegaard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Deloptes on Wed Dec 20 10:50:54 2023
    On 20/12/2023 08:58, Deloptes wrote:
    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    The point is that about 4 hrs after all this happened the upgrade on the
    new install held back the kernel....upgrade
    So I just got caught.  Between a bad upgrade and the powers that be
    blocking it.

    Not sure if you are aware of the upgrade process
    Usually upgrade should be done update, upgrade followed by dist-upgrade or just update + full-upgrade. This way the base packets get upgraded too.


    I did update / upgrade. Just a normal everyday upgrade.

    --
    For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the
    very definition of slavery.

    Jonathan Swift

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Deloptes on Wed Dec 20 10:49:54 2023
    On 20/12/2023 08:55, Deloptes wrote:
    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    But with induction, one never knows the truth. It is always speculation.

    No speculation in following

    1. you never break an upgrade (problems preprogrammed)
    ??? Sorry...English pliz!

    2. when you break an upgrade you never reboot (even more problems preprogrammed)

    A computer that is bricked is less use than one that cannot be powered
    on unless its has a reinstalled OS.

    you should have solved the issues beforehand and then reboot

    How?

    I am surprised you expected any other outcome. Better think of rescue strategy to avoid such outcomes - i.e. backup/restore or clone to another
    SD and try there first. I do it with borg and for the PI it is diskless anyway.


    My rescue strategy for that unit was what I followed. There was nothing
    I couldn't afford to lose. It is at this point an experimental setup.


    --
    There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
    that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
    emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent renewable energy.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to Deloptes on Wed Dec 20 12:30:28 2023
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 08:55:14 GMT, "Deloptes" <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:

    you should have solved the issues beforehand and then reboot

    There were no problems to be solved. Later, there were. But it was too late by then.

    I am surprised you expected any other outcome.

    You mean, whenever an update/upgrade is done, you expect the computer to be broken afterwards?

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 20 13:00:22 2023
    On 20/12/2023 12:30, TimS wrote:
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 08:55:14 GMT, "Deloptes" <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:

    you should have solved the issues beforehand and then reboot

    There were no problems to be solved. Later, there were. But it was too late by
    then.

    I am surprised you expected any other outcome.

    You mean, whenever an update/upgrade is done, you expect the computer to be broken afterwards?

    LOL! The reason why I didnt is because it is only the second time its
    ever happened with linux, and the first time wasn't critical. The wifi
    stopped working, that's all. Simply went back to previous kernel..

    Linux is generally really really good about upgrades. Way better than
    Apple or Microsoft.


    --
    "Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace, community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
    "What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

    "Jeremy Corbyn?"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Theo@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Wed Dec 20 13:21:32 2023
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    Packages being _held_ back means the local administrator has blocked
    their upgrade with ‘apt-mark hold’ (or equivalent).

    Packages being _kept_ back means that a package can’t be upgraded due to
    a dependency issue (e.g. because the administrator only asked for a
    partial upgrade, but the new version of the package depends on a package
    that isn’t installed).

    Neither reflects any kind of upstream decision to block upgrades.

    Ubuntu is using 'held back' for phased updates: https://ubuntu.com/server/docs/about-apt-upgrade-and-phased-updates

    Are Debian or Raspberry Pi OS also using that mechanism?

    Theo

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Wed Dec 20 13:46:42 2023
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 13:00:23 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"
    <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 20/12/2023 12:30, TimS wrote:
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 08:55:14 GMT, "Deloptes" <deloptes@gmail.com> wrote:

    you should have solved the issues beforehand and then reboot

    There were no problems to be solved. Later, there were. But it was too late by
    then.

    I am surprised you expected any other outcome.

    You mean, whenever an update/upgrade is done, you expect the computer to be >> broken afterwards?

    LOL! The reason why I didnt is because it is only the second time its
    ever happened with linux, and the first time wasn't critical. The wifi stopped working, that's all. Simply went back to previous kernel..

    Linux is generally really really good about upgrades. Way better than
    Apple or Microsoft.

    Microsoft, perhaps, given the posts I've seen here about needing to take a backup first or of Windows erasing the disk first before doing the upgrade.

    Apple stuff, by contrast, just works. I've never bothered doing a backup
    before installing an update, and never had a problem. Further, everything that was there before is there afterwards, including all users, system settings and even any micro-tweaks I might have done. If I've configured an apache startup file, that remains untouched.

    When SWMBO's intel Mini was replaced with a new ARM M1 model, all I had to do was to tell the new Mini to migrate everything from the old one. Which it did and she sat down at the new one and started work. All her old apps worked as before.

    The only exception is if some major feature (such as support for 32-bit apps) is removed, which happened when I installed a newer version of macOS this
    year, so I went from being 5 major versions behind, to 4. I was in any case ready for that.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Jean-Pierre Kuypers@3:770/3 to Philosopher on Wed Dec 20 14:49:52 2023
    In article (Dans l'article) <uluoh7$ibt0$7@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote (écrivait) :

    Linux is generally really really good about upgrades. Way better than
    Apple or Microsoft.

    Do you have experience with this type of material?

    --
    Jean-Pierre Kuypers

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to Theo on Wed Dec 20 14:41:32 2023
    Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    Packages being _held_ back means the local administrator has blocked
    their upgrade with ‘apt-mark hold’ (or equivalent).

    Packages being _kept_ back means that a package can’t be upgraded due to >> a dependency issue (e.g. because the administrator only asked for a
    partial upgrade, but the new version of the package depends on a package
    that isn’t installed).

    Neither reflects any kind of upstream decision to block upgrades.

    Ubuntu is using 'held back' for phased updates: https://ubuntu.com/server/docs/about-apt-upgrade-and-phased-updates

    Are Debian or Raspberry Pi OS also using that mechanism?

    Oh, that’s new. Confusing that they’ve used the same diagnostic. They
    could in principle use it, but none of the packages files I can see
    contain the header for it which suggests they aren’t. But I don’t know where TNP is getting his packages from.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From David Taylor@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 20 15:11:22 2023
    On 20/12/2023 13:46, TimS wrote:
    Microsoft, perhaps, given the posts I've seen here about needing to take a backup first or of Windows erasing the disk first before doing the upgrade.

    As usual, you hear the posts about the problems, nothing from the very many users for whom updates are without issue. Backup up regularly is good practice with any OS.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: https://www.satsignal.eu

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From David Taylor@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Wed Dec 20 15:05:20 2023
    On 20/12/2023 13:00, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Linux is generally really really good about upgrades. Way better than
    Apple or Microsoft.

    Perhaps that's true in general, but not in my experience. I often find that programs need to be recompiled or (with the RPi) the serial port interface changes.

    With Apple (iPad) it seems that support for OpenGL is being dropped, which means that a number of programs I have will cease to work Emerald and Sequoia).
    With Windows I'm pleased to find that backwards compatibility is much better - software I wrote over 20 years ago for Windows XP still runs nicely.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: https://www.satsignal.eu

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From mm0fmf@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Wed Dec 20 16:13:18 2023
    On 19/12/2023 12:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine upgrade.
    This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and after terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally booted again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Bastards. I was up all night rebuilding that Pi..


    Is this just 64bit Raspios stuff? I have 32bit Raspios Lite on a
    PiZeroW and have not had any of these problems. Currently Bookworm 12.1
    and Kernel 6.1.21+

    However, Debian Bookworm has been a bit shitty on some AMD64 things. The
    latest was a recent upgrade to Bookworm 12.4 on the i5 laptop used for
    testing stuff that may break important machines. I did the update a few
    days back and failed to reboot and test it at the time. I did the
    update, finished doing other work and shut it down.

    I booted it this morning and it took me a while to spot it hadn't
    connected to the Wifi here. Looking there were only Ethernet connections
    and Bluetooth PAN connections. I had to dig through dmesg to find the
    line complaining about enable_ini=N was breaking iwlwifi firmware
    loading. Sure I had an iwlwifi.conf file containing "options iwlwifi enable_ini=N" which was not causing a problem till the latest upgrade.
    It was needed in the past... I never put it there, something else did
    during install. The fix was to remove the .conf and Wifi came up as
    normal on the next boot.

    I'm not sure who's at fault here... if something created the file when installing / updating iwlwifi drivers in the past then changing the
    iwlwifi driver should have at least warned about the file on the latest
    update. Perhaps it did and I ignored it. But Debian updates just seem to
    be a little iffy recently which I don't remember from the past. There
    again I'm a Debian newbie only using it since 2002.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.inval on Wed Dec 20 16:08:00 2023
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 15:11:23 GMT, "David Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

    On 20/12/2023 13:46, TimS wrote:
    Microsoft, perhaps, given the posts I've seen here about needing to take a >> backup first or of Windows erasing the disk first before doing the upgrade.

    As usual, you hear the posts about the problems, nothing from the very many users for whom updates are without issue. Backup up regularly is good practice
    with any OS.

    I didn't say I didn't back up regularly. I said I didn't do a special backup just because I'm updating the machine.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Chris Green@3:770/3 to none@invalid.com on Wed Dec 20 17:21:46 2023
    mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> wrote:
    On 19/12/2023 12:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Bookworm: Pi 4B

    Last night in an idle moment I decided to perform a routine upgrade.
    This involved the kernel.

    Unfortunately after ten minutes the upgrade had not installed and after terminating it the whole machine would no longer boot.

    I downloaded the latest image of Raspios, and that booted, but the
    kernel panicked halfway through.

    I went back to the original image, installed that and it finally booted again.

    When I went to upgrade, a lot of packages were 'held back'. I guess
    someone discovered the upgrade was a bricker.

    Bastards. I was up all night rebuilding that Pi..


    Is this just 64bit Raspios stuff? I have 32bit Raspios Lite on a
    PiZeroW and have not had any of these problems. Currently Bookworm 12.1
    and Kernel 6.1.21+

    As I said earlier in this thread I have two Pi 4s runnning as follows:-

    Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm) - Kernel: 6.1.21-v8+ aarch64

    No problems with either.

    --
    Chris Green
    ·

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From David Taylor@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 20 18:33:54 2023
    On 20/12/2023 16:08, TimS wrote:
    I didn't say I didn't back up regularly. I said I didn't do a special backup just because I'm updating the machine.

    Same here, Tim.
    --
    Cheers,
    David
    Web: https://www.satsignal.eu

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 20 21:00:06 2023
    On 2023-12-20, TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 20 Dec 2023 at 15:11:23 GMT, "David Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

    On 20/12/2023 13:46, TimS wrote:

    Microsoft, perhaps, given the posts I've seen here about needing to take a >>> backup first or of Windows erasing the disk first before doing the upgrade. >>
    As usual, you hear the posts about the problems, nothing from the very
    many users for whom updates are without issue. Backup up regularly is
    good practice with any OS.

    I didn't say I didn't back up regularly. I said I didn't do a special backup just because I'm updating the machine.

    I do updates immediately after a regular backup. :-)

    Let's face it, shit happens. It's best to be ready just in case.
    Usually I find that Linux updates go slick as a whistle. But there
    have also been times when things have gone so wrong that it was faster
    to reformat the root partition, install the new release from scratch,
    and restore my backup. That's much less frustrating than losing everything.

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
    / \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From druck@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 20 21:08:30 2023
    On 20/12/2023 16:08, TimS wrote:
    I didn't say I didn't back up regularly. I said I didn't do a special backup just because I'm updating the machine.

    It's a very good idea to do one before updating, as it involves an awful
    lot of writing to the SD card, and if it's getting close to its wear
    level limits, this could push it over into failure.

    ---druck

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Dec 21 06:32:08 2023
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    On 20/12/2023 12:30, TimS wrote:

    You mean, whenever an update/upgrade is done, you expect the computer to be >> broken afterwards?

    LOL! The reason why I didnt is because it is only the second time its
    ever happened with linux, and the first time wasn't critical. The wifi stopped working, that's all. Simply went back to previous kernel..

    With Linux itself I think driver problems are the only issue I've
    had too (although a broken Ethernet driver on a headless system can
    be quite inconvenient), but the trouble usually comes with the
    application software that gets updated at the same time. Often new
    bugs are introduced that can be deal breakers, or even intentional
    changes to behaviour, features, or performance.

    I always do a full backup before a major update, but with things
    that boot from SD cards like the RPis it's easy to clone the card
    and do the upgrade on one card while keeping the other in use until
    I've got all the issues on the new installation ironed out (or
    given up and switched distro entirely).

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From druck@3:770/3 to Theo on Wed Dec 20 21:17:40 2023
    On 20/12/2023 13:21, Theo wrote:
    Ubuntu is using 'held back' for phased updates: https://ubuntu.com/server/docs/about-apt-upgrade-and-phased-updates

    Are Debian or Raspberry Pi OS also using that mechanism?

    I notice they explain how to turn off phased updates so you always get
    the new potentially breaking packages, but I must have missed the bit on
    how to set it up so you never get randomly chosen to install these
    packages.

    ---druck

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to TimS on Thu Dec 21 02:22:30 2023
    On 12/20/23 5:58 PM, TimS wrote:
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 21:08:31 GMT, "druck" <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:

    On 20/12/2023 16:08, TimS wrote:
    I didn't say I didn't back up regularly. I said I didn't do a special backup
    just because I'm updating the machine.

    It's a very good idea to do one before updating, as it involves an awful
    lot of writing to the SD card, and if it's getting close to its wear
    level limits, this could push it over into failure.

    I was responding to a comment that macOS upgrades were sub-optimal, not talking about Pi upgrades.


    "Mac-OS" is, underneath, BSD. As such it gains, or loses,
    from the same issues as mainstream Linux/Unix insofar as
    'packages/upgrades' go.

    ON THE WHOLE I've not suffered much from PI 'upgrades'.
    They mostly follow the Debian lead. Yes, "held back"
    IS annoying ... but then we are also talking an OS in
    constant evolution (devolution maybe considering 'Worm')
    so SOME attention to keeping older apps running MUST
    be considered and 'held back' helps with this.

    Linux/BSD always suffers from the "version curse".
    SO many writers tie their apps to VERY specific
    versions of other apps/code/drivers/etc and will
    REFUSE to work even with the slightest change of
    a library version (even though said libraries
    are almost always super-sets and WOULD support
    the same old stuff).

    This is ONE area where Winders is actually BETTER.
    You can still run relatively ancient apps Without
    Complaint (esp if you have a pre-8/16 ban chip).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to 56g.1183@ztq4.net on Thu Dec 21 08:31:12 2023
    On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 02:22:31 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    "Mac-OS" is, underneath, BSD. As such it gains, or loses,
    from the same issues as mainstream Linux/Unix insofar as
    'packages/upgrades' go.

    Not really MacOS is the Mach kernel, a POSIX userland derived
    mostly from FreeBSD, a proprietary GUI and package system.

    There is a lot of variety among package systems in the unix world.
    They are not all equal.

    Some package systems such as MacOS and FreeBSD use a central build system that ensures consistency across the entire package set. Others take contributed builds that do not.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Jean-Pierre Kuypers on Thu Dec 21 10:15:52 2023
    On 20/12/2023 13:49, Jean-Pierre Kuypers wrote:
    In article (Dans l'article) <uluoh7$ibt0$7@dont-email.me>, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote (écrivait) :

    Linux is generally really really good about upgrades. Way better than
    Apple or Microsoft.

    Do you have experience with this type of material?

    Some.

    I follow the technical press. The occurrence of updates breaking
    machines is common with Windows, and my experience with Apple was less
    than encouraging.

    I think if you stay on the One True Apple path then things are probably
    OK, just don't install any third party apps....

    --
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
    returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

    Mark Twain

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Thu Dec 21 10:29:20 2023
    On 20/12/2023 14:41, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    Packages being _held_ back means the local administrator has blocked
    their upgrade with ‘apt-mark hold’ (or equivalent).

    Packages being _kept_ back means that a package can’t be upgraded due to >>> a dependency issue (e.g. because the administrator only asked for a
    partial upgrade, but the new version of the package depends on a package >>> that isn’t installed).

    Neither reflects any kind of upstream decision to block upgrades.

    Ubuntu is using 'held back' for phased updates:
    https://ubuntu.com/server/docs/about-apt-upgrade-and-phased-updates

    Are Debian or Raspberry Pi OS also using that mechanism?

    Oh, that’s new. Confusing that they’ve used the same diagnostic. They could in principle use it, but none of the packages files I can see
    contain the header for it which suggests they aren’t. But I don’t know where TNP is getting his packages from.

    Well you need to just ask. I get them from whatever is the default PIOS repository.

    Coriolanus:/etc/apt$ more sources.list

    deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
    deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ bookworm-security main
    contrib non-free non-free-firmware
    deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm-updates main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
    # Uncomment deb-src lines below then 'apt-get update' to enable 'apt-get source'
    #deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
    #deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian-security/ bookworm-security main
    contrib n
    on-free non-free-firmware
    #deb-src http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm-updates main contrib
    non-free non
    -free-firmware


    And I downloaded my installations from the official PIOS site.

    https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/operating-systems/#raspberry-pi-os-64-bit

    Where this image

    2023-12-11-raspios-bookworm-arm64-lite.img

    was the one that kernel panicked (twice) on boot.

    But the one I had used before

    2023-10-10-raspios-bookworm-arm64-lite.img

    Installed perfectly again.

    It may all be something to do with this. But you are in a better
    position to judge that than I.

    https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/14/linux_kernel_of_the_beast/

    --
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
    returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

    Mark Twain

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From druck@3:770/3 to TimS on Thu Dec 21 20:31:32 2023
    On 20/12/2023 22:58, TimS wrote:
    On 20 Dec 2023 at 21:08:31 GMT, "druck" <news@druck.org.uk> wrote:

    On 20/12/2023 16:08, TimS wrote:
    I didn't say I didn't back up regularly. I said I didn't do a special backup
    just because I'm updating the machine.

    It's a very good idea to do one before updating, as it involves an awful
    lot of writing to the SD card, and if it's getting close to its wear
    level limits, this could push it over into failure.

    I was responding to a comment that macOS upgrades were sub-optimal, not talking about Pi upgrades.

    Well lets try to keep this discussion on-topic.

    ---druck

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Thu Dec 21 23:49:56 2023
    On 12/21/23 3:31 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 02:22:31 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    "Mac-OS" is, underneath, BSD. As such it gains, or loses,
    from the same issues as mainstream Linux/Unix insofar as
    'packages/upgrades' go.

    Not really MacOS is the Mach kernel, a POSIX userland derived
    mostly from FreeBSD, a proprietary GUI and package system.


    They prettied it up Real Nice ... but it's still BSD underneath.

    There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
    because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they
    can't maintain it or predict interactions. It's why there are
    a bazillion security flaws they can never seem to deal with.


    There is a lot of variety among package systems in the unix world.
    They are not all equal.

    Some package systems such as MacOS and FreeBSD use a central build system that ensures consistency across the entire package set. Others take contributed builds that do not.

    Yea ... but "contributed" isn't necessarily the issue.
    It's "dependencies". They are handled rather badly by
    Linux and also by BSD to a fair extent. Part of the
    problem is the programmers - they link their code to
    VERY VERY specific versions of libs, alas OTHER ones
    also do so - and their needs/requirements are not going
    to be the same all the time. If you don't have lib-XYZ
    version 8.33.04 then they freak. The Unix universe IS a
    bit more boring ... so fewer problems ... but still ....

    The sad bit is that most of those libs are super-sets,
    still support all the old params, just add some new ones.
    They COULD be used as-is ... IF the apps/update system
    was a bit more savvy. I've noted the rise in apps now
    distributed as ".run" images - all the needed code fully
    included in the executable. They're bigger - but they
    work no matter what. No compile/link BS.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to All on Fri Dec 22 14:21:52 2023
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:

      There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
      because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they
      can't maintain it or predict interactions.

    Any links to confirm that ?

    Part of the
      problem is the programmers - they link their code to
      VERY VERY specific versions of libs, alas OTHER ones
      also do so - and their needs/requirements are not going
      to be the same all the time. If you don't have lib-XYZ
      version 8.33.04 then they freak.


    How do you do that in practice ?
    When I link with say PostgreSQL's libpq
    which is the native lib for accessing the database as a client,
    I add '-lpq' to the link command.

    That is it. How do I tie it to a specific version of the lib?



    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@3:770/3 to bnl@nowhere.com on Sat Dec 23 08:52:06 2023
    Bj?rn Lundin <bnl@nowhere.com> wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:
    Part of the
    problem is the programmers - they link their code to
    VERY VERY specific versions of libs, alas OTHER ones
    also do so - and their needs/requirements are not going
    to be the same all the time. If you don't have lib-XYZ
    version 8.33.04 then they freak.

    How do you do that in practice ?
    When I link with say PostgreSQL's libpq
    which is the native lib for accessing the database as a client,
    I add '-lpq' to the link command.

    That is it. How do I tie it to a specific version of the lib?

    As with all the best options, I can't find it documented in the
    GCC manual, but I think it's something like "-l:libxyz.so.1.2.3"
    to specify an explicit shared object file to link against.

    Ah OK, it's mentioned in the ld(1) man page, but not in the GCC
    manual. But gcc will also pass it through to ld, I think.

    The complaint probably wasn't really about that though, rather
    about new versions of libraries changing their ABI and thereby
    forcing users to match library versions to the program they want
    to use. Really it's the fault of the library developers more than
    the application developers, although it might sometimes be fair to
    blame the latter for choosing to use unstable libraries in the
    first place. It's hardly a rare problem though, with OpenSSL being
    a prime example.

    Also the Debian package manager can be unnecessarily picky about
    library versions sometimes, which I think is the trouble that a
    previous incarnation of 56g.1183 complained about at length once
    before.

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to All on Fri Dec 22 23:22:54 2023
    On 12/22/23 8:21 AM, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:

       There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
       because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they
       can't maintain it or predict interactions.

    Any links to confirm that ?

    Not as such ... I just "hear things", 'rumors', as said.
    It'd be a big Top Secret at M$ regardless.

    However I think it's their ONLY sane path. Apple knew
    this some time ago. M$ has been stubborn - but it's
    still an increasing functional/security nightmare and
    SOMETHING needs to be done.

       Part of the
       problem is the programmers - they link their code to
       VERY VERY specific versions of libs, alas OTHER ones
       also do so - and their needs/requirements are not going
       to be the same all the time. If you don't have lib-XYZ
       version 8.33.04 then they freak.


    How do you do that in practice ?

    The crux of the proverbial biscuit lies with the
    practice of re-compiling apps/updates when you go
    to install them. The THEORY is that it makes them
    most compatible with your specific distro/version
    but in PRACTICE it seems to enhance the library curse
    these days. The sheer diversity of distros/sub-distros
    keeps exacerbating the issue. There is a "standard
    Winders", but NO "standard Linux/Unix" at the core.

    As I noted somewhere, I keep seeing more and more apps
    distributed as ".run" style executables. All the libs
    used to compile it are contained within the (fat)
    executable. It doesn't have to dynamically link-to
    anything. HOWEVER - they'll run on almost any kind
    of Linux/Unix - no bitching because lib-XYZ 8.33.04
    is missing, no bitching because installing 8.33.04
    will destroy everything using 8.33.03

    I see this crap ALL the damned time. Use something
    like Synaptic and try to install some slightly
    newer lib - and SEE the gigantic list of progs
    that will be UN-installed because of it - often
    your core stuff.

    Tried to install a newer/better version of ffmpeg
    not so long ago. It was a bottomless rabbit-hole
    of dependencies and dependencies for dependencies
    and can't-get-there-from-here's. FORGET THAT CRAP !

    When I link with say PostgreSQL's libpq
    which is the native lib for accessing the database as a client,
    I add '-lpq' to the link command.

    That is it. How do I tie it to a specific version of the lib?

    As said, when you install/upgrade whatever is compiled
    on your box. The install script contains which libs
    are supposed to be there. If they aren't it will try
    to FIND them - but then that messes with your EXISTING
    progs.

    I've seen this get worse and worse over 20 years. The
    more distros/variants out there the worse it gets.

    Winders, on the other hand, has tremendous backwards
    compatibility. The only thing that kinda broke it was
    the newest requirement for Gen8+ processors, and none
    of them support 8/16 code anymore. However if you
    use something below Win-11 and have a CPU that WILL
    still execute 8/16 code then whatever will WORK without
    complaints. That's just extraordinary.

    I have an old Core-2-Quad board that can run XP. It's
    not such a slouch either. Can still run most .com progs
    I wrote for the original IBM-PCs.

    If Linux is to move forwards it too needs this degree
    of backwards compatibility - and between all distros.
    No more re-compiling everything over and over and
    over again every time there's the slightest tweak.
    Sounded like a good plan - but it's getting less good
    all the time. 'Diversity' in this case becomes a
    liability.

    Been with Linux since Slack and RedHat on 5-1/4 floppies.
    Overall the superior paradigm, but there ARE problems too.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to Computer Nerd Kev on Fri Dec 22 23:48:52 2023
    On 12/22/23 5:52 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
    Bj?rn Lundin <bnl@nowhere.com> wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:
    Part of the
    problem is the programmers - they link their code to
    VERY VERY specific versions of libs, alas OTHER ones
    also do so - and their needs/requirements are not going
    to be the same all the time. If you don't have lib-XYZ
    version 8.33.04 then they freak.

    How do you do that in practice ?
    When I link with say PostgreSQL's libpq
    which is the native lib for accessing the database as a client,
    I add '-lpq' to the link command.

    That is it. How do I tie it to a specific version of the lib?

    As with all the best options, I can't find it documented in the
    GCC manual, but I think it's something like "-l:libxyz.so.1.2.3"
    to specify an explicit shared object file to link against.

    Ah OK, it's mentioned in the ld(1) man page, but not in the GCC
    manual. But gcc will also pass it through to ld, I think.

    The complaint probably wasn't really about that though, rather
    about new versions of libraries changing their ABI and thereby
    forcing users to match library versions to the program they want
    to use. Really it's the fault of the library developers more than
    the application developers, although it might sometimes be fair to
    blame the latter for choosing to use unstable libraries in the
    first place. It's hardly a rare problem though, with OpenSSL being
    a prime example.

    Also the Debian package manager can be unnecessarily picky about
    library versions sometimes, which I think is the trouble that a
    previous incarnation of 56g.1183 complained about at length once
    before.

    You're mostly correct here. The prob is that anytime you apt install
    anything the source of the desired pgm is compiled on YOUR box.
    The dependencies list is part of the info in what you're installing.

    But, if you have to replace xxx-2.3.4 with xxx-2.3.5 then all
    the installers freak out and want to un-install some, or a LOT,
    of what you already have because it's not "compatible".

    This BS is why we see more and more apps distributed as ".run"
    style code - completely self-contained, requiring NO re-compile.
    So long as the Linux kernel doesn't change TOO much they'll
    Just Work. This is not necessarily in the best interests of
    "open source", but it IS in the bests interests of "I will
    run fine almost anywhere".

    I first encountered this with
    "Balena Etcher" but just last week I got the much-larger
    "OpenShot" video-editor ... also a stand-alone executable.
    I think this is the future - a way AROUND the infinitely-
    deep dependencies rabbit-hole.

    With now SUCH diversity in distros/sub-distros the "compile
    from scratch on install" model is NOT helping things.

    Win does NOT have an inbuilt C/C++ compiler. It relies
    on an all-compatible core. You install ready-2-go
    executables and (with a little magic in the background)
    it Just Works. People LIKE that. No spending hours
    or days dealing with microscopic dependencies issues.

    And yes, Deb installers ARE very picky. They are writ
    to try and ensure "solidity" and total compatibility.
    This is most important for BIG concerns ... but most
    of us aren't Bank Of America or the CIA.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to 56g.1183@ztq4.net on Sat Dec 23 05:59:46 2023
    On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:48:53 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    You're mostly correct here. The prob is that anytime you apt install
    anything the source of the desired pgm is compiled on YOUR box.

    It most certainly is NOT!

    Compiling a .deb package is quite complex usually involving a
    docker based build environment, the source package (which is not the same
    as the binary package that is normally used and a degree of understanding
    and patience. We have a number of packages with local source patches so
    this process is very familiar to me.

    It does not happen when you apt install $PACKAGE - that process
    simply installs the various files binaries, libraries, config etc. along
    with the dependencies. You can apt install a package on a system without a compiler.

    The dependencies list is part of the info in what you're installing.

    Yes it is and the install operation will fetch any dependencies
    that you lack and will upgrade anything that is too old. The dependencies
    can specify the dependent package optionally with minimum and maximum or
    even specified versions.

    The problem is that the universe of packages does not form a
    coherent set - this is not a problem with FreeBSD or NetBSD packages
    because they *do* form a coherent set.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to 56g.1183@ztq4.net on Sat Dec 23 09:07:24 2023
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> writes:
    On 12/22/23 8:21 AM, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:
    There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
    because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they can't
    maintain it or predict interactions.
    Any links to confirm that ?

    Not as such ... I just "hear things", 'rumors', as said.
    It'd be a big Top Secret at M$ regardless.

    However I think it's their ONLY sane path. Apple knew
    this some time ago. M$ has been stubborn - but it's
    still an increasing functional/security nightmare and
    SOMETHING needs to be done.

    This idea is detached from reality. Microsoft are committed to backward compatibility with existing application software, and maintaining that
    in such a fundamental rewrite is not possible.
    https://www.hyrumslaw.com/ is relevant here.

    Apple have never had the same compatibility goals, and have regularly
    killed application software backward compatibility.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Sat Dec 23 10:13:28 2023
    Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:
    The crux of the proverbial biscuit lies with the practice of
    re-compiling apps/updates when you go to install them.

    I'll say it again - this does NOT happen. You have thoroughly
    misunderstood the root cause of the problem, which is that there the available packages do not form a coherent set in most (all?) Linux
    distros. Instead it is easy to find yourself installing package A
    which depends on library L < 1.0 and package B which depends on
    library L > 2.0.

    Debian does ensure consistency in this area (at least in stable &
    testing and I think usually in unstable too).

    Trying to mix releases will (obviously) create inconsistency, however,
    as will taking packages from outside Debian, or deliberately taking an incoherent subset of offered upgrades.

    Windows is not immune to this - in that world it is known as DL-Hell.

    AFAICT the Windows response to the problem is generally to co-install
    multiple versions of dependencies. Happens in Linux too - you can easily
    have multiple versions of a runtime library with different sonames, for example.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to 56g.1183@ztq4.net on Sat Dec 23 09:50:46 2023
    On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:22:55 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    The crux of the proverbial biscuit lies with the
    practice of re-compiling apps/updates when you go
    to install them.

    I'll say it again - this does NOT happen. You have thoroughly misunderstood the root cause of the problem, which is that there the
    available packages do not form a coherent set in most (all?) Linux distros. Instead it is easy to find yourself installing package A which depends on library L < 1.0 and package B which depends on library L > 2.0.

    Windows is not immune to this - in that world it is known as
    DL-Hell.

    This does not happen with FreeBSD packages because they are all
    built together as a consistent set. The downside of this approach is that
    the package build takes several days and so the rate of package updates is limited.

    For the record dynamic linking happens at runtime not install time, that's what makes it dynamic.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Sat Dec 23 12:06:56 2023
    On 23/12/2023 09:07, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> writes:
    On 12/22/23 8:21 AM, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:
    There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
    because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they can't
    maintain it or predict interactions.
    Any links to confirm that ?

    Not as such ... I just "hear things", 'rumors', as said.
    It'd be a big Top Secret at M$ regardless.

    However I think it's their ONLY sane path. Apple knew
    this some time ago. M$ has been stubborn - but it's
    still an increasing functional/security nightmare and
    SOMETHING needs to be done.

    This idea is detached from reality. Microsoft are committed to backward compatibility with existing application software, and maintaining that
    in such a fundamental rewrite is not possible.
    https://www.hyrumslaw.com/ is relevant here.

    But that law is regularly broken by Microsoft anyway.

    Apple have never had the same compatibility goals, and have regularly
    killed application software backward compatibility.

    Indeed. Try running Power PC code on an intel platform...

    I think you shouldn't be so dismissive.

    When you look at what Microsoft is *actually* selling it is mostly a *consistent* platform for third part applications to run in domestic
    and industrial contexts. Not necessarily an *unchanging* one.

    Later apps will not run on earlier versions. Developers are quite
    capable of porting apps to a newer platform, if that is what is going to
    sell the most product.

    Look at say Linux Mint. Most casual users would neither know nor care
    that it wasn't some version of windows. It behaves in a very similar way
    at user (rather than admin) levels.

    What is crucial is that its API is completely different to Windows or OS/X.
    But look at say MATE. Built on top of Gnome, which is built on top of X-windows.

    It is not beyond the bounds of credibility for Microsoft to create an
    API with exactly the same calls into it as in Windows, and call that
    Microsoft X Windows or whatever, and *sell* that to run on Linux.
    Programs would need relinking with that library in order to create linux executables, but that wouldn't be a huge issue for most vendors.

    And if that relieves Microsoft of a layer of development they really
    don't want to do, and allows them to concentrate on what brings in the
    money, I don't see why they wouldn't.

    What would be the worst issue is hardware drivers which would inevitably
    have to change as I don't think a compatibility shim would really work.

    Full backwasswards compatibility for .exes is simply down to providing
    e.g. Virtualbox as standard equipped with whatever legacy version of
    windows people wanted. Until Intel chips become obsolete and the whole
    world goes ARM...

    The world is changing, and what looks to be relevant is that ARM based
    hardware is where consumers are going. And you cant have legacy WINTEL
    apps on that anyway.

    The more interesting question is where industrial computing is going.
    Apple still hold sway in the graphics and sound processing areas, but
    when it comes to CAD CAM I don't think windows really has a rival. But
    that is a real chicken and egg situation. People buy the computer for
    the application, and if it only ran on Linux, they would buy Linux (or a computer with it preinstalled). Just as they do with IBM .

    Many other industrial apps are becoming heavily cloud based - an
    interface to a large corporate database is probably better dine by a web browser anyway, and who cares what is underneath.

    The real issue for me if I was in charge of Microsoft, after the failure
    to crack mobile phones or fondleslabs is 'where are we going? What do we
    have that is a unique selling point? And how do we leverage that into
    future sales?'

    Microsoft started out as a BASIC interpreter. Then a character based standardised operating system, where it was clear that the
    standardisation was far more important than the actual performance,
    stability or security.

    If Microsoft decided that the new standard format was going to be a
    Windows look and feel window manager and an API stuck on top of a Linux
    core, I don't think most people would be unhappy about the fact it
    couldn't run legacy .exes. Most of them are still running XP anyway,
    because it was 'more than good enough' . And if wrapped in a sandboxed
    virtual machine, it's also secure enough.

    Basically if existing applications could be rapidly re-linked, or
    recompiled to run on 'Windows on Linux on Intel, with legacy Virtual
    box' or 'Windows on Linux, on ARM' I think the apps guys would be happy.
    The hardware guys would be happy too, as all of their kit would be
    obsolete,so they would just bring out Linux drivers for *new* kit.




    --
    For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the
    very definition of slavery.

    Jonathan Swift

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Sat Dec 23 12:10:26 2023
    On 23/12/2023 09:50, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:22:55 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    The crux of the proverbial biscuit lies with the
    practice of re-compiling apps/updates when you go
    to install them.

    I'll say it again - this does NOT happen.

    It sort of does with kernels ... AIUI the modules are linked at least.
    Though not necessarily compiled, as such.



    --
    New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
    the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
    someone else's pocket.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sat Dec 23 12:42:36 2023
    On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 12:10:27 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 23/12/2023 09:50, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:22:55 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    The crux of the proverbial biscuit lies with the
    practice of re-compiling apps/updates when you go
    to install them.

    I'll say it again - this does NOT happen.

    It sort of does with kernels ... AIUI the modules are linked at least.
    Though not necessarily compiled, as such.

    Definitely not compiled - we build kernels at work with added
    patches, compiling takes a surprisingly long time. Kernel modules are mostly dynamically loaded and I'm pretty sure are not modified in any way during installation.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Sat Dec 23 12:25:48 2023
    On 23 Dec 2023 at 12:06:57 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"
    <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The world is changing, and what looks to be relevant is that ARM based hardware is where consumers are going. And you cant have legacy WINTEL
    apps on that anyway.

    Sure you can - and do. SWMBO has an M1 Mini - which of course has an ARM CPU. All her old intel-based software runs with no issues. Of course that means not just having Rosetta, but also all the libs and frameworks have to be supplied in both intel and ARM binary formats. That means twice as much testing at the dev stage for new OS versions too. Which is why at some point a future OS version will only come with the ARM versions, and all your old apps will
    become history. The alternative would have been to keep frameworks/libs avialable in 32/64 bit versions, and in PowerPC/intel/ARM versions. So, 5 or 6 versions of all libs and frameworks.

    Windows is going to face something similar too, if they really want to push moving to ARM.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sat Dec 23 12:42:52 2023
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
    It is not beyond the bounds of credibility for Microsoft to create an
    API with exactly the same calls into it as in Windows, and call that Microsoft X Windows or whatever, and *sell* that to run on
    Linux. Programs would need relinking with that library in order to
    create linux executables, but that wouldn't be a huge issue for most
    vendors.

    It’d be a crazy thing to do. Huge amounts of effort to maintain compatibility, compared to the much easier strategy of just keeping the existing Windows codebase trundling along. Which is, demonstrably, what they’re actually doing.

    And for what? The end result would be a Windows API implementation on
    top of a kernel designed for a completely different application layer.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Theo@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Sat Dec 23 16:33:04 2023
    Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
    It is not beyond the bounds of credibility for Microsoft to create an
    API with exactly the same calls into it as in Windows, and call that Microsoft X Windows or whatever, and *sell* that to run on
    Linux. Programs would need relinking with that library in order to
    create linux executables, but that wouldn't be a huge issue for most vendors.

    It’d be a crazy thing to do. Huge amounts of effort to maintain compatibility, compared to the much easier strategy of just keeping the existing Windows codebase trundling along. Which is, demonstrably, what they’re actually doing.

    And for what? The end result would be a Windows API implementation on
    top of a kernel designed for a completely different application layer.

    Microsoft did it the other way around for WSL 1: implement the Linux API on
    top of Windows. It worked, but performance was bad because the Windows I/O subsystems just aren't performant enough - doing compiles on top of the
    Windows filesystem API was way slower that doing them on Linux on the same hardware.

    For WSL 2 they junked that approach and just ran a Linux VM in HyperV, with some customisation for Windows-compatible graphics etc. This has much
    better performance. They do the same for Android.

    MS are going further in that direction: the primary Windows system is
    actually another VM on top of HyperV, with secondary VMs for Linux, Android
    and a secure enclave VM to hold keys, check code signing etc.

    So it's up to them how much they want to use Windows, or whether to do the heavy lifting on a different kernel on the same machine. They no longer
    need to care: run Windows when it makes sense, run Linux when it makes
    sense, whatever.

    Theo

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sun Dec 24 08:48:26 2023
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    It is not beyond the bounds of credibility for Microsoft to create an
    API with exactly the same calls into it as in Windows, and call that Microsoft X Windows or whatever, and *sell* that to run on Linux.
    Programs would need relinking with that library in order to create linux executables, but that wouldn't be a huge issue for most vendors.

    And if that relieves Microsoft of a layer of development they really
    don't want to do, and allows them to concentrate on what brings in the
    money, I don't see why they wouldn't.

    Better yet, it's all been done for them already by volunteers and
    released under LGPL so they could bundle it into their own
    proprietary product. It's called Wine, and indeed it's what I used
    to keep running some Windows software when I switched entirely
    away from Windows. I didn't have to pay M$ a cent for it either
    (which probably would be a problem for them, because people would
    just copy the design of a M$-branded Linux+Wine package to make
    free/fake alternatives).

    What would be the worst issue is hardware drivers which would inevitably
    have to change as I don't think a compatibility shim would really work.

    There's NDISwrapper, which I've often been tempted to try but
    always decided it was a better move to find alternative hardware
    with working native Linux drivers.

    Full backwasswards compatibility for .exes is simply down to providing
    e.g. Virtualbox as standard equipped with whatever legacy version of
    windows people wanted. Until Intel chips become obsolete and the whole
    world goes ARM...

    Then you could run individual x86 programs via QEMU, which can run a
    program in emulation on ARM within the same operating environment as
    native code. I don't see why that wouldn't work with Wine too.

    Sure enough, someone's started that for M$ already too: https://sourceforge.net/projects/pi-qemu-wine/

    The more interesting question is where industrial computing is going.
    Apple still hold sway in the graphics and sound processing areas, but
    when it comes to CAD CAM I don't think windows really has a rival.

    Indeed CAD software is some that I've used Wine to run in Windows
    since I switched. I had to pull some original libs from Windows in
    so as to make 3D graphics work, but that wouldn't be an issue for
    M$ themselves like it is for the Wine developers.

    Occasionally you see commercial Windows CAD programs that are
    actually _supported_ for running in Linux via Wine by the software
    company. If that attitude were more universal, Linux might be much
    stronger competition for M$ in the business sector.

    The real issue for me if I was in charge of Microsoft, after the failure
    to crack mobile phones or fondleslabs is 'where are we going? What do we
    have that is a unique selling point? And how do we leverage that into
    future sales?'

    They seem to be preferencing "cloud" stuff that runs on Google's
    OS, ahem, web browser, called Chrome. Very often on top of Android,
    which is a Googlified version of Linux. So in a way they're already
    doing what you propose, by sticking their new products together
    with lots of Google-glue.

    On the cloud, nobody can run old software in the first place.

    Basically if existing applications could be rapidly re-linked, or
    recompiled to run on 'Windows on Linux on Intel, with legacy Virtual
    box' or 'Windows on Linux, on ARM' I think the apps guys would be happy.
    The hardware guys would be happy too, as all of their kit would be obsolete,so they would just bring out Linux drivers for *new* kit.

    Would they really? Tell the hardware guys quick then that it all
    already exists (and has done for decades)!

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to TimS on Mon Dec 25 01:04:16 2023
    On 12/23/23 7:25 AM, TimS wrote:
    On 23 Dec 2023 at 12:06:57 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The world is changing, and what looks to be relevant is that ARM based
    hardware is where consumers are going. And you cant have legacy WINTEL
    apps on that anyway.

    Sure you can - and do. SWMBO has an M1 Mini - which of course has an ARM CPU. All her old intel-based software runs with no issues. Of course that means not
    just having Rosetta, but also all the libs and frameworks have to be supplied in both intel and ARM binary formats. That means twice as much testing at the dev stage for new OS versions too. Which is why at some point a future OS version will only come with the ARM versions, and all your old apps will become history. The alternative would have been to keep frameworks/libs avialable in 32/64 bit versions, and in PowerPC/intel/ARM versions. So, 5 or 6
    versions of all libs and frameworks.

    Windows is going to face something similar too, if they really want to push moving to ARM.


    ARM is very good. However x86 is very good as well, and
    very common. I'd buy an x86 Pi as quickly as an ARM Pi.

    IMHO, M$ will mostly stick with x86 for now, with ARM
    as a side-project.

    What M$ has to deal with is that, well, Winders Just Sucks
    at this point. It's HORRIBLY vulnerable to everything from
    the script-kiddies on up to State-sponsored super-hacks.
    Millions, maybe billions, in damages each year. The CHIP
    isn't the problem, it's Winders.

    Time to legally NEGATE those "I Accept" legal protections
    in Winders. Joe Average, indeed Corp Average, does NOT know
    what it's agreeing to. Individuals/Corps/Govt deserve
    umpteen BILLIONS in compensation for its CRAP system.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Mon Dec 25 00:42:44 2023
    On 12/23/23 4:07 AM, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> writes:
    On 12/22/23 8:21 AM, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:
    There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
    because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they can't
    maintain it or predict interactions.
    Any links to confirm that ?

    Not as such ... I just "hear things", 'rumors', as said.
    It'd be a big Top Secret at M$ regardless.

    However I think it's their ONLY sane path. Apple knew
    this some time ago. M$ has been stubborn - but it's
    still an increasing functional/security nightmare and
    SOMETHING needs to be done.

    This idea is detached from reality. Microsoft are committed to backward compatibility with existing application software, and maintaining that
    in such a fundamental rewrite is not possible.
    https://www.hyrumslaw.com/ is relevant here.

    Apple got away with it. 'Perfect' backward compatibility
    would be very NICE, but the company went with the sane route
    for damned good reasons.

    Apple have never had the same compatibility goals, and have regularly
    killed application software backward compatibility.

    This CAN be ok ... IF you offer some kind of 'fix', a
    re-compiler/port of sorts, to at least get the 'important'
    software to keep working properly. The CORP should do its
    best to get everyone over 'the hump' and can then cruise
    on in serenity.

    In any case, I just don't think M$ really has a realistic
    CHOICE in the short/medium term. Winders is a TOTAL KLUDGE
    at this point and there's NO closing all the security and
    functional gaps.

    Winders has constantly proven itself highly vulnerable to
    a variety of attacks. Govt/health, even large corp interests,
    have been seriously compromised. It's almost become "normal"
    at this point - though it SHOULDN'T be. M$ keeps greasing
    its politicians ... but I'm not sure how long that strategy
    can continue to protect them as this crap escalates out
    of control. The new, fucked, world situation is likely to
    push all this over the edge as more State-funded players
    get involved.

    The US DOD for a long time required all its software to
    be writ in ADA. I've fooled around with ADA, it's a
    HORRIBLY anal-retentive language. Managed to get basic
    list of lists thing to work, but it was NOT clear and easy.
    No wonder the DOD budget was so extreme.

    Maybe Modula-3 ? Strongly-typed, but not so hideously anal.
    I've always liked Pascal (still write apps in it), but M2/3
    is a bit more 'secure'. BTW, can't find ANY good modern
    M2/3 compilers for Linux that can be installed and work
    correctly. The Montreal compiler is best bet, but ...
    well ... it shouldn't be so hard. M2/3 translators,
    that convert everything to GCC, are NOT real. Gimme
    'native' every time.

    In any case, I'm gonna say Winders is DOOMED. It HAS to
    change, or die. Nothing in computerdom is forever.

    No More Winders ? Wouldn't hurt my feelings. It's
    the Ford Pinto of operating systems. Popular, but
    explodes at the slightest tap :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to 56g.1183@ztq4.net on Mon Dec 25 20:02:06 2023
    On 2023-12-25, 56g.1183 <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    Time to legally NEGATE those "I Accept" legal protections
    in Winders. Joe Average, indeed Corp Average, does NOT know
    what it's agreeing to. Individuals/Corps/Govt deserve
    umpteen BILLIONS in compensation for its CRAP system.

    Years ago, just for the heck of it, I read one of those agreements
    end to end. (I think it was for XP.) I found a clause that basically
    said that M$ reserves the right to walk into your machine whenever
    they feel like it, take a look around, and remove anything which,
    in their sole estimation, you should not have. Sounds like a
    back door to me - but then I've always maintained that automatic
    updates are one of the biggest potential security holes.

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
    / \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to Charlie Gibbs on Mon Dec 25 20:45:28 2023
    On Mon, 25 Dec 2023 20:02:07 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    back door to me - but then I've always maintained that automatic
    updates are one of the biggest potential security holes.

    It was, now there's SAaS.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to 56g.1183@ztq4.net on Tue Dec 26 11:21:16 2023
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> writes:
    In any case, I just don't think M$ really has a realistic CHOICE in
    the short/medium term. Winders is a TOTAL KLUDGE at this point and
    there's NO closing all the security and functional gaps.

    Winders has constantly proven itself highly vulnerable to a variety of attacks. Govt/health, even large corp interests, have been seriously compromised. It's almost become "normal" at this point - though it
    SHOULDN'T be. M$ keeps greasing its politicians ... but I'm not sure
    how long that strategy can continue to protect them as this crap
    escalates out of control. The new, fucked, world situation is likely
    to push all this over the edge as more State-funded players get
    involved.

    Linux and macOS also have a steady stream of vulnerabilities, so did the
    other Unix platforms when they were still relevant. Your hypothetical
    rewrite of Windows on a Unix kernel would not solve anyone’s security
    issues, it would just introduce an extra layer of complexity for vulnerabilities and other defects to nest in.

    Widely-discussed estimates in 2019/2020 were that about 70% of
    vulnerabilities were memory safety issues, so a more realistic option
    for improving security is to rewrite key components into memory-safe
    languages. I don’t know what Apple or Microsoft’s (OS-level) response to this is but Linux is experimenting with support for Rust in the kernel,
    which is pretty promising.

    There’s a lot of other OS components than kernels, though, and a lot of vulnerabilities in applications; so don’t expect that 70% figure to fall rapidly even when the kernel situation does start to improve.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Joerg Walther@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Tue Dec 26 12:35:18 2023
    Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

    back door to me - but then I've always maintained that automatic
    updates are one of the biggest potential security holes.

    It was, now there's SAaS.

    That and the fact that W12 or W13 will probably only run from/in the
    cloud is what made me switch to Linux. Best decision in years
    software-wise.

    -jw-

    --

    And now for something completely different...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Wed Dec 27 04:06:04 2023
    On 2023-12-25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On Mon, 25 Dec 2023 20:02:07 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    back door to me - but then I've always maintained that automatic
    updates are one of the biggest potential security holes.

    It was, now there's SAaS.

    Yup. See my .sig below.

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
    / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to Charlie Gibbs on Wed Dec 27 06:11:40 2023
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 04:06:05 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    On 2023-12-25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On Mon, 25 Dec 2023 20:02:07 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    back door to me - but then I've always maintained that automatic
    updates are one of the biggest potential security holes.

    It was, now there's SAaS.

    Yup. See my .sig below.

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them together in VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your downloaded application
    will in fact be a remotely administered hypervisor.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Wed Dec 27 11:11:56 2023
    On 27/12/2023 06:11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 04:06:05 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    On 2023-12-25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On Mon, 25 Dec 2023 20:02:07 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    back door to me - but then I've always maintained that automatic
    updates are one of the biggest potential security holes.

    It was, now there's SAaS.

    Yup. See my .sig below.

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them together in VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your downloaded application will in fact be a remotely administered hypervisor.

    aka a botnet

    --
    Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the
    gospel of envy.

    Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

    Winston Churchill

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Andy Leighton@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Wed Dec 27 12:47:32 2023
    On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 09:50:46 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:22:55 -0500
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> wrote:

    The crux of the proverbial biscuit lies with the
    practice of re-compiling apps/updates when you go
    to install them.

    I'll say it again - this does NOT happen. You have thoroughly misunderstood the root cause of the problem, which is that there the available packages do not form a coherent set in most (all?) Linux distros. Instead it is easy to find yourself installing package A which depends on library L < 1.0 and package B which depends on library L > 2.0.

    Also the above situation might or might not be an issue. I certainly
    have had that work on my boxen at times. But it isn't very common, and
    far less common that it was.

    This does not happen with FreeBSD packages because they are all
    built together as a consistent set. The downside of this approach is that
    the package build takes several days and so the rate of package updates is limited.

    Although presumably you can get into the same situation with external /
    third party / private packages. And with any good package management system
    - I include dpkg (even though that is typically binary based) and portage
    and FreeBSD's ports - not very common at all.

    --
    Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
    "We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
    - Douglas Adams

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 27 16:26:44 2023
    On 27 Dec 2023 11:30:52 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 27 Dec 2023 at 06:11:40 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them
    together in VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your
    downloaded application will in fact be a remotely administered
    hypervisor.

    How do they propose to install that on my machine without anyone noticing?

    You install the cloud application suite, it consists of the
    hypervisor which phones home, adds your resources to the pile and offers
    you all the cloud applications you just signed up for.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to All on Wed Dec 27 17:55:14 2023
    On 2023-12-23 05:48, 56g.1183 wrote:

      You're mostly correct here. The prob is that anytime you apt install
      anything the source of the desired pgm is compiled on YOUR box.

    As others have said - no it is not.
    Your statement is just false.


    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Wed Dec 27 16:22:40 2023
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 11:11:56 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 27/12/2023 06:11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 04:06:05 GMT

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them
    together in VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your
    downloaded application will in fact be a remotely administered
    hypervisor.

    aka a botnet

    Yes but hopefully one with rules that you choose to join rather than one that just takes root in your systems.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Pancho@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Wed Dec 27 16:56:40 2023
    On 27/12/2023 16:22, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 11:11:56 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 27/12/2023 06:11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 04:06:05 GMT

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them
    together in VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your
    downloaded application will in fact be a remotely administered
    hypervisor.

    aka a botnet

    Yes but hopefully one with rules that you choose to join rather than one that just takes root in your systems.


    Like the SETI@home. I think they did it as a screen-saver?

    In the past, some companies used staff's desktop PCs to run compute
    intensive overnight batches. It is quite tricky to set up and manage.
    I'd be surprised if it was economic for most companies, as opposed to
    using Google, Amazon, or Microsoft cloud servers.

    From an IT management viewpoint, it is easier to manage centralised
    servers and smart terminals. I assumed that was the way things had gone
    over the last decade? Cheap, low cost PCs, with serious computations
    done on a server or the cloud..

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to All on Wed Dec 27 17:57:00 2023
    On 2023-12-23 05:22, 56g.1183 wrote:
    On 12/22/23 8:21 AM, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-22 05:49, 56g.1183 wrote:

       There are rumors that Winders is headed in the same direction
       because what-is has become just a total Gordian Knot and they
       can't maintain it or predict interactions.

    Any links to confirm that ?

      Not as such ... I just "hear things", 'rumors', as said.
      It'd be a big Top Secret at M$ regardless.

    So, just rumors and on top of that your speculation?
    I will not bet any money an that happening soon...


    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to Andy Leighton on Wed Dec 27 16:45:56 2023
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 12:47:32 +0000
    Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> wrote:

    On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 09:50:46 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
    <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    This does not happen with FreeBSD packages because they are all
    built together as a consistent set. The downside of this approach is
    that the package build takes several days and so the rate of package updates is limited.

    Although presumably you can get into the same situation with external /
    third party / private packages.

    There are practically none of those - there are a few special
    purpose repos and associated build farms but not very many. It's so much
    easier to create ports and get them added to the ports tree than it is to maintain a separate package set. Port maintenance is generally pretty light work - and the package build and distribution comes for free from the
    project infrastructure.

    The downside is a long cycle time for package updates that gets
    longer as more ports are added and shorter when more hardware is thrown at
    the task.

    There are people who build all their own packages in house (they
    get much shorter cycle times by only building the ones they use and they
    get to set the build optiopns), using the same system as the official
    package builds - they tend not to install from the official repo and of
    course they get consistent sets.

    You can get in a mess but it takes a bit of determination.

    And with any good package management
    system - I include dpkg (even though that is typically binary based) and portage and FreeBSD's ports - not very common at all.

    The trouble I've seen with .deb packages either Ubuntu or Debian sourced is that most of the old versions are available and it is common to
    add external repos so the set of packages available to apt is not a
    consistent one especially if you insist on installing a particular version
    for one or more packages and/or don't update them all every time.

    With FreeBSD packages extra repos and pinned versions are rarities. This tends to mean that if it's not already in the ports and producing a package (some ports don't for licence reasons - some are broken) then you
    are SOL unless you can create a port yourself (which varies from dead easy
    to a nightmare requiring deep skills in several languages and an
    understanding of the application code).

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Wed Dec 27 17:18:22 2023
    On 27 Dec 2023 at 16:26:44 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    You install the cloud application suite

    No I don't. I've not completed iCloud setup on my iPhone or any of my Macs.
    End of.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 27 17:33:12 2023
    On 27 Dec 2023 17:18:22 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 27 Dec 2023 at 16:26:44 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    You install the cloud application suite

    No I don't. I've not completed iCloud setup on my iPhone or any of my
    Macs. End of.

    That's you and me safe then.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 27 18:13:08 2023
    On 2023-12-27, TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 27 Dec 2023 at 06:11:40 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them together in >> VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your downloaded application
    will in fact be a remotely administered hypervisor.

    How do they propose to install that on my machine without anyone noticing?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
    for instance...

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
    / \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to Pancho on Wed Dec 27 17:31:24 2023
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:56:40 +0000
    Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:

    From an IT management viewpoint, it is easier to manage centralised
    servers and smart terminals. I assumed that was the way things had gone
    over the last decade? Cheap, low cost PCs, with serious computations
    done on a server or the cloud..

    Well sort of - except that even the cheap low cost PCs tend to have quite a lot of CPU, RAM and disc and with all the real work happening in
    the cloud it's idle and of course quite a lot get fancy big fast PCs which
    get even less use because they're too far up the greasy pole to actually
    work.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to Charlie Gibbs on Wed Dec 27 19:03:28 2023
    On Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:13:08 GMT
    Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    On 2023-12-27, TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    How do they propose to install that on my machine without anyone
    noticing?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
    for instance...

    Oh they can be much more open about it - after all they're not
    rooting your machine, they're just using it to provide the service you've
    payed for.

    <IANAL - I've just heard too many of them scheme>

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to TimS on Wed Dec 27 19:52:50 2023
    On 27/12/2023 11:30, TimS wrote:
    On 27 Dec 2023 at 06:11:40 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them together in >> VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your downloaded application
    will in fact be a remotely administered hypervisor.

    How do they propose to install that on my machine without anyone noticing?

    They probably already have

    --
    The New Left are the people they warned you about.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Wed Dec 27 19:54:36 2023
    On 27/12/2023 16:26, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On 27 Dec 2023 11:30:52 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 27 Dec 2023 at 06:11:40 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
    wrote:

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them
    together in VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your
    downloaded application will in fact be a remotely administered
    hypervisor.

    How do they propose to install that on my machine without anyone noticing?

    You install the cloud application suite, it consists of the
    hypervisor which phones home, adds your resources to the pile and offers
    you all the cloud applications you just signed up for.

    I actually was trying to watch free sport on my Linux PC and I noticed
    that my OUTGOING data rate was maxed out...some kind of video proxying
    going on via one assumes javascript


    --
    The New Left are the people they warned you about.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Wed Dec 27 22:57:42 2023
    On 27 Dec 2023 at 18:13:08 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    On 2023-12-27, TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 27 Dec 2023 at 06:11:40 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
    wrote:

    Hmm - sooner or later they're going to realise that ...

    a) Data centres are expensive and unpopular
    b) Users have oodles of unused compute and store resources
    c) Many of them have high bandwidth internet connections
    d) Distributed architectures can be very robust

    ... and start parking VMs in customers computers and lacing them together in
    VPNs to provide the services they're selling. Your downloaded application >>> will in fact be a remotely administered hypervisor.

    How do they propose to install that on my machine without anyone noticing?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal

    That's just God's punishment for running Windows.

    --
    "The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place."
    - Douglas Adams

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From 56g.1183@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Thu Dec 28 01:51:32 2023
    On 12/26/23 6:21 AM, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    "56g.1183" <56g.1183@ztq4.net> writes:
    In any case, I just don't think M$ really has a realistic CHOICE in
    the short/medium term. Winders is a TOTAL KLUDGE at this point and
    there's NO closing all the security and functional gaps.

    Winders has constantly proven itself highly vulnerable to a variety of
    attacks. Govt/health, even large corp interests, have been seriously
    compromised. It's almost become "normal" at this point - though it
    SHOULDN'T be. M$ keeps greasing its politicians ... but I'm not sure
    how long that strategy can continue to protect them as this crap
    escalates out of control. The new, fucked, world situation is likely
    to push all this over the edge as more State-funded players get
    involved.

    Linux and macOS also have a steady stream of vulnerabilities, so did the other Unix platforms when they were still relevant. Your hypothetical
    rewrite of Windows on a Unix kernel would not solve anyone’s security issues, it would just introduce an extra layer of complexity for vulnerabilities and other defects to nest in.

    Linux/Unix are NOT "perfect". I don't think anything can be.

    However, properly implemented, they can significantly REDUCE
    the number and scope of problems. Winders just CAN'T. It's
    a total disorganized incomprehensible cluster-fuck.

    Widely-discussed estimates in 2019/2020 were that about 70% of vulnerabilities were memory safety issues, so a more realistic option
    for improving security is to rewrite key components into memory-safe languages. I don’t know what Apple or Microsoft’s (OS-level) response to this is but Linux is experimenting with support for Rust in the kernel,
    which is pretty promising.

    The infamous "buffer overflow" continues to be a major issue.
    Winders is just FULL of bad code that allows overflows to do
    their evil. And no, it won't/can't "just be fixed-up" because
    nobody even knows how it all WORKS anymore. Kludges on top
    of kludges on top of kludges going back into the 80s.

    "Rust" is not a panacea. IMHO it's just another language
    created "because we could". 'C' is still the gold standard.
    I proto in a lot of languages, but the final product always
    winds up being in 'C' or Pascal. If you're REALLY paranoid
    then a native ADA compiler, even though it's a just HATEFUL
    language to use (no wonder Defense projects go 10X over
    budget and are 10X later than promised ......)

    There’s a lot of other OS components than kernels, though, and a lot of vulnerabilities in applications; so don’t expect that 70% figure to fall rapidly even when the kernel situation does start to improve.

    Kernels DO need to be tighter. So far, Linus has been pretty
    sharp this way - enough to put-off a lot of would-be "improvers"
    who would crash lots of other stuff to make a few gee-whiz
    things "easier".

    But Linus isn't young anymore. What then ?

    Unix/BSD are more conservative. This has plusses, and
    minuses. ,

    As is, never expect "perfection". Every system, no matter
    how clever, will always have flaws - and the Evil People
    will eventually FIND them. It's a running battle. However
    solid underlying design will REDUCE the number of exploitable
    flaws.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to All on Thu Dec 28 11:34:22 2023
    On 28/12/2023 06:51, 56g.1183 wrote:
    Winders is just FULL of bad code that allows overflows to do
      their evil. And no, it won't/can't "just be fixed-up" because
      nobody even knows how it all WORKS anymore. Kludges on top
      of kludges on top of kludges going back into the 80s.

    Once upon a time in a far far off country....
    ...I was faced with replacing a rats nest of organically grown disco
    lighting wiring in a biscuit tin and ageing control units with some
    more up to date sequencers and audio responding drivers.

    My boss was puzzled when I asked him for a hacksaw. 'What are you going
    to do?' 'Saw off d all those cables and put them into a documented
    junction box' 'Are you sure? ' 'Watch me'

    And I did. Any wires that connected to no other wires at all, were
    simply tagged 'N/C' and every group of wires that had some sort of ohmic connection were afforded adjacent terminals in the junction box, and
    finally had mains applied very carefully to see what lit up...inside of
    4 hours I had a fully documented junction box to connect the new
    lighting controllers to.

    And then it was so easy to do that lasts part.

    Winders is like that. They need to simply go around and *write down*
    every single call into windows, what it is supposed to do AND what it
    actually *does*, which is probably in itself a dirty man year of work
    for an intern, and then hand that specification over to a team of
    developers to recreate the API. Which could then be ported to any damned
    OS they chose, and by virtue of having been re written with modern tools
    would run like greased weasel shit and could be ported to linux with
    minimal effort.

    IF Windows wants to stay in the commercial desktop arena.
    In terms of computing for the numpties, Apple is the ultimate dumbed
    down consumer product, and they cant compete. Android and chrome also
    for smartphones and cheap laptops for school.
    Microsoft has no niche market anymore. It is trying to recreate itself
    as a cloud service, but I think that is a triumph of marketing over engineering. Its totrally loost out in the server market, and the
    industrial computer...today i'd use a Pi running linux rather than a PC
    running DOS to control some industrial process ... All it has left is
    gamers, and high power commercial and industrial *desktops* .

    Many of the gamers are going STEAM and Linux as well...

    ...and technically, Linux is a better platform for mission critical
    computing *if only the power apps ran on it*...

    Honestly, I am not sure what I would do if I was tech director at
    Microsoft, tasked with moving the company forward. Leave probably.

    Or set up a skunk works of 20 guys and say 'document windows, and
    rewrite it to run on linux, so that any .exe will run on it at full
    native speeds as well as any linux program using (say) gnome graphics
    api instead of Windows'...

    And go flat out to target high end workstations and really secure
    commercial applications like banking and finance.

    And simply dump the numpties...

    IBM reinvented itself as a software and services house when the
    integrated circuit meant any damned fool could build a mainframe or minicomputer.

    IBMs mainframes today are PCS or blades running Linux... but they can
    still run RPG, and COBOL. And all those legacy apps.

    I think Microsoft needs to do similar.

    --
    Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to All on Thu Dec 28 12:07:40 2023
    On 28/12/2023 11:01, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-28 07:51, 56g.1183 wrote:
       If you're REALLY paranoid
       then a native ADA compiler, even though it's a just HATEFUL
       language to use (no wonder Defense projects go 10X over
       budget and are 10X later than promised ......)


    That is hardly because of the language.

    NVIDIA decided to leave C/c++ behind and use Ada/Spark instead (where
    Spark is a subset of Ada with proofs - that is mathematical proof that
    the code meets some criteria as in no runtime errors (given the hardware
    does not break)

    <https://www.adacore.com/uploads/techPapers/222559-adacore-nvidia-case-study-v5.pdf>

    Some nice quotes from the paper

    "Evaluating return on Investment (ROI) based on their
    results, the POC team concluded that the engineering
    costs associated with SPARK ramp-up (training,
    experimentation, discovery of new tools, etc.) were
    offset by gains in application security and verification
    efficiency and thus offered an attractive trade-off."


    I think that is enough to counter your statement above.
    Besides, the Ada mandate was removed in the late 1990ites.
    The cost explosion you refer to is with c/c++. Not with Ada.



    And this is a general feeling you get when using Ada/Spark

    “It’s very nice to know that once you’re done writing
    an app in SPARK—even without doing a lot of testing
    or line-by-line review—things like memory errors,
    off-by-one errors, type mismatches, overflows,
    underflows and stuff like that simply aren’t there,” Xu
    said. “It’s also very nice to see that when we list our
    tables of common errors, like those in MITRE’s CWE
    list, large swaths of them are just crossed out. They’re
    not possible to make using this language.”


    Yes, but in fact a whole swathe of NEW errors become possible, instead :-)

    I certainly think C++ is an abortion that should never have been
    written, (and javaScript).

    C is what it is. Fast way to write portable assembler code and as such
    deserves its cachets. And sufficiently powerful to write whole
    applications in, not just operating systems.

    I am very dubious about languages that claim to solve coding problems. I
    think its always possible to write code that will fool any computer into
    doing the wrong thing at *some* level, and since software today seems to
    be a 'million monkeys randomly typing' ...I am sure they will find ways
    to fuck anything up.


    In my apprenticeship as an electronic engineer, I could not believe how
    thick the design and development techs actually were, The *system* was
    what produced the product quality- random monkeys would 'design' the circuits, and if they didn't meet the spec, the 'engineers' got it
    thrown back and would tinker along until it either worked or the project
    ran out of government funding (military electronics).

    The problem with Microsoft, is that there is no incentive to meet a
    functional spec. Or be tested and upgraded and have bugs fixed. All it
    has to do is *sell*.

    Compared with - say - the avionics industry there is zero quality
    control, in the ISO 9000 meaning of the word.

    Even if they pay lip service to it.

    Now what that means is that Microsoft is only really suitable for a
    consumer market.

    However I digress. In that my thesis is that its not so much the
    language that you use, as the testing and quality control and feedback
    into the design revisions that you implement, that in the end gets the
    bugs down and the quality up, and that is something the Linux community
    is pretty *good* at. Although it has no formal quality control, more a
    culture of 'if its *demonstrably* broken, fix it, as a matter of pride
    and principle'.

    If you look at - say aircraft - as the pinnacle of quality control, with
    every single incident subject to a 'what conditions, what pilots, what training, what maintenance (or lack of them) what design flaw,
    ultimately contributed to this situation' then you can see how the
    ultimate goal - that this situation never happen again. Ever.

    They know there is no 'perfect' but by hammering away at the
    demonstrably *imperfect - be it design, implementation, operational
    procedures, maintenance, pilot training, air traffic training, aircraft performance and safety just keep getting better.

    I see this as a dichotomy between 'we will sell lots of kit, because its
    bloody well designed' or 'we will sell lots of kit, because we will rush
    it to market, and spend all the money on chrome and tailfins, and other marketing, and the numpties will just buy it, because they are numpties'.

    It's perfectly *possible* to write bug free programs in C. As the help I
    got here with my daemons memory leak demonstrated. Provided you test
    the code and analyse the problems that result.

    Writing in some 'foolproof' language is no substitute for a proper
    testing and modification feedback loop to consistently test and improve
    the product, and the danger is that people will think that it is.


    --
    “The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that
    the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."

    - Bertrand Russell

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Thu Dec 28 12:12:52 2023
    On 28 Dec 2023 at 11:34:22 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"
    <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    IBM reinvented itself as a software and services house when the
    integrated circuit meant any damned fool could build a mainframe or minicomputer.

    IBMs mainframes today are PCS or blades running Linux... but they can
    still run RPG, and COBOL. And all those legacy apps.

    I think Microsoft needs to do similar.

    But they had that with Windows NT; perhaps they still have. Written by Dave Cutler of VAX/VMS fame, IIRC. But then they had to cripple it with the drive letter shit and a file system that doesn't allow an open file to be moved or deleted. So even if they gave it Linux underpinnings, the user experience
    would still be dreadful. After all, it's their mindset. Look at the ribbon in Office apps, whose contents simply vanish if you make a window narrower. And you do have to make a window narrower if, like most actual users, you only
    have one screen.



    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Pancho@3:770/3 to All on Thu Dec 28 12:55:50 2023
    On 28/12/2023 11:01, Björn Lundin wrote:
    On 2023-12-28 07:51, 56g.1183 wrote:
       If you're REALLY paranoid
       then a native ADA compiler, even though it's a just HATEFUL
       language to use (no wonder Defense projects go 10X over
       budget and are 10X later than promised ......)


    That is hardly because of the language.

    NVIDIA decided to leave C/c++ behind and use Ada/Spark instead (where
    Spark is a subset of Ada with proofs - that is mathematical proof that
    the code meets some criteria as in no runtime errors (given the hardware
    does not break)


    I've heard the idea of mathematical proofs of program correctness
    throughout my career, and never had any idea what it meant. I understand
    where it can't be done, like the halting problem, Godel etc, but not how
    it could be done.

    I can write both programs and mathematical proofs. I don't know how to
    do either without flaws/bugs. Often I don't really understand the
    difference between a program and constructive mathematical proof. At the
    end of the day, it always seemed to me that once you got to a level of complexity, you couldn't really prove anything, couldn't be sure. All
    you could do is follow good practice, to minimise potential problems,
    and test, test and test again.

    Automating programming, delegating complexity to the programming tools,
    memory management etc, always seemed to me the best way to avoid errors.
    Maybe also isolating complexity in standard components, standard
    patterns. Why people still use C is a mystery to me.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Pancho@3:770/3 to TimS on Thu Dec 28 13:41:20 2023
    On 28/12/2023 12:12, TimS wrote:
    On 28 Dec 2023 at 11:34:22 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    IBM reinvented itself as a software and services house when the
    integrated circuit meant any damned fool could build a mainframe or
    minicomputer.

    IBMs mainframes today are PCS or blades running Linux... but they can
    still run RPG, and COBOL. And all those legacy apps.

    I think Microsoft needs to do similar.

    But they had that with Windows NT; perhaps they still have. Written by Dave Cutler of VAX/VMS fame, IIRC. But then they had to cripple it with the drive letter shit and a file system that doesn't allow an open file to be moved or deleted.

    Those seem to be characteristics of the file system. I think the main
    crippling was done in NT 4.0 when they moved third party graphics
    drivers into the Kernel layer (whatever that protected level is called
    in Windows NT).

    Although looking at support issues for the Arm Mali 610 on Linux, there
    is talk about userland (userspace?) hacks, which suggests the debate
    about where graphics drivers should live exists in Linux too.

    So even if they gave it Linux underpinnings, the user experience
    would still be dreadful. After all, it's their mindset. Look at the ribbon in Office apps, whose contents simply vanish if you make a window narrower. And you do have to make a window narrower if, like most actual users, you only have one screen.


    I thought Windows NT was pretty good. You seem to be picking on GUI
    ergonomics as if that is a measure of OS quality. The noticeable
    difference between Windows NT and Linux for me was always driver
    support, in particular GPU drivers.

    FWIW, Gnome Desktop + Pi OS on the rPi5 feels pretty solid, reminiscent
    of Windows quality.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to TimS on Thu Dec 28 15:27:18 2023
    On 28/12/2023 12:12, TimS wrote:
    On 28 Dec 2023 at 11:34:22 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher" <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    IBM reinvented itself as a software and services house when the
    integrated circuit meant any damned fool could build a mainframe or
    minicomputer.

    IBMs mainframes today are PCS or blades running Linux... but they can
    still run RPG, and COBOL. And all those legacy apps.

    I think Microsoft needs to do similar.

    But they had that with Windows NT; perhaps they still have. Written by Dave Cutler of VAX/VMS fame, IIRC. But then they had to cripple it with the drive letter shit and a file system that doesn't allow an open file to be moved or deleted. So even if they gave it Linux underpinnings, the user experience would still be dreadful. After all, it's their mindset. Look at the ribbon in Office apps, whose contents simply vanish if you make a window narrower. And you do have to make a window narrower if, like most actual users, you only have one screen.




    I think you are concatenating three aspects of windows: The user
    interface of what Linux would call the 'window manager', the suite of
    admin programs it comes with, and the ability to provide a program
    launcher for .EXE style code.

    Whether you call the file system '/' or 'C:\' is really not an issue.
    You can map any amount of compatibility drive letters to Linux
    directories and volumes via a simple piece of shim code.

    In my Windows VM. /home/me is mapped to a drive letter that windows
    programs understand. It works perfectly

    I am not sure that anyone would bother to recreate the windows UI
    exactly, since it is as you say, utter shit, and if all you want is a
    similar look and feel, then Mint MATE already has it, complete with
    control panels and file finders and a lot more.

    I think, and this is a personal perspective you are free to disagree
    with, (and RK certainly does) that Microsoft's USP (unique selling
    point) always was that they provided a consistent API for manufacturers
    of third party code, not that Microsoft's code like Word/Excel/Internet Explode. control panel, registry and so on, or the way its window
    manager worked, was somehow superior.

    And so, from a commercial perspective, that is what they want to
    continue with. And one of the possible ways to do that, its to write a
    pretty big shim that can take a .exe and make it work inside a linux
    window manager. On top of a modified linux operating system. (so that
    calls to e.g. D:\My Bollox maps to /home/My Bollox and so on)
    If they then want to write a shit window manager themselves that has a
    unique MS look and feel they can also do that, but that is a separate
    issue. As is the provision of all the admin code that provides a pretty
    gui interface to set up and configuration.

    Again from my perspective, Linux Mint MATE can be tarted up to look and
    feel massively similar to the last Windows I used - XP - (it does
    everything that XP does, better)

    And unless you are deep in the hoopla of microsoft specific features of
    Word or Excel, then Libre Office and Firefox and Thunderbird are
    perfectly acceptable alternatives to the standard MS offerings

    There is no reason not to duplicate the sheer turdity of The Registry,
    with a text file, and some API tools to access it. If your third party
    programs need it. Or the quirks of windows file sharing via a SAMBA shim.

    The real question is whether or not that sort of thinking is happening
    in Microsoft at all. For far too long the assumption that 'if it's
    Microsoft (or INTEL), it will dominate the market ' has held sway and
    that arrogance has stopped any real innovation.
    Personally I think they have to change, or they will go the way of e.g.
    CP/M.

    YMMV


    --
    "I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
    puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Thu Dec 28 15:29:44 2023
    On 28/12/2023 12:24, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:34:22 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    Winders is like that. They need to simply go around and *write down*
    every single call into windows, what it is supposed to do AND what it
    actually *does*, which is probably in itself a dirty man year of work
    for an intern, and then hand that specification over to a team of
    developers to recreate the API.

    In order to do that it would have to stand still for a year, I
    suspect that's not a possibility. AIUI the API changes to support
    application development. The organisational challenges would be minimising the API freeze period and a smooth cut over.

    IF Windows wants to stay in the commercial desktop arena.
    In terms of computing for the numpties, Apple is the ultimate dumbed
    down consumer product, and they cant compete.

    Yet Apple is also the choice of many software developers when
    corporate compliance/commercial compatibility is on the requirements list.


    Yes, because its a reasonable supported system, not because it has a
    great look and feel.

    Remember that what an app developer wants is a stable supported program launcher ONLY.

    But your point is good. Microsoft even faces competition in its core market


    --
    Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
    guns, why should we let them have ideas?

    Josef Stalin

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Dec 28 15:38:40 2023
    On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:29:44 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 28/12/2023 12:24, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:34:22 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    IF Windows wants to stay in the commercial desktop arena.
    In terms of computing for the numpties, Apple is the ultimate dumbed
    down consumer product, and they cant compete.

    Yet Apple is also the choice of many software developers when
    corporate compliance/commercial compatibility is on the requirements
    list.


    Yes, because its a reasonable supported system, not because it has a
    great look and feel.

    Yep doing both was a clever move on Apple's part. Admittedly it did take them a while to get round to putting a solid base under their pretty
    face but when they did they did it properly, unlike some.

    Remember that what an app developer wants is a stable supported program launcher ONLY.

    Yep I know why I like them, but I still like a unix workstation
    better.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From moi@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Dec 28 16:13:36 2023
    On 28/12/2023 12:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    Writing in some 'foolproof' language  is no substitute for a proper
    testing and modification feedback loop to consistently test and improve
    the product, and the danger is that people will think that it is.

    Absolutely no Ada programmer imagines for a nanosecond that it is
    "foolproof", or any kind of panacea.
    It is, however, a superb tool for writing reliable software,
    as is attested by a great deal of practical experience.

    BTW, my KDF9 emulator, *available for the RPi*, is written in Ada 2012.
    See <http://www.findlayw.plus.com/KDF9/emulation/>.

    --
    Bill F.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Dec 28 19:12:48 2023
    On 2023-12-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The problem with Microsoft, is that there is no incentive to meet
    a functional spec. Or be tested and upgraded and have bugs fixed.
    All it has to do is *sell*.

    Hear, hear.

    Compared with - say - the avionics industry there is zero quality
    control, in the ISO 9000 meaning of the word.

    Quality is irrelevant. Sales is everything.

    Even if they pay lip service to it.

    That's called marketing, innit?

    Now what that means is that Microsoft is only really suitable for a
    consumer market.

    That's like that fellow who was asked why he robs banks.
    His answer: "That's where the money is."

    However I digress. In that my thesis is that its not so much the
    language that you use, as the testing and quality control and feedback
    into the design revisions that you implement, that in the end gets the
    bugs down and the quality up, and that is something the Linux community
    is pretty *good* at. Although it has no formal quality control, more a culture of 'if its *demonstrably* broken, fix it, as a matter of pride
    and principle'.

    Microsoft has no pride or principles. Only money.

    If you look at - say aircraft - as the pinnacle of quality control, with every single incident subject to a 'what conditions, what pilots, what training, what maintenance (or lack of them) what design flaw,
    ultimately contributed to this situation' then you can see how the
    ultimate goal - that this situation never happen again. Ever.

    They know there is no 'perfect' but by hammering away at the
    demonstrably *imperfect - be it design, implementation, operational procedures, maintenance, pilot training, air traffic training,
    aircraft performance and safety just keep getting better.

    Plus changes are made to make things safer, and as such are relatively infrequent and thoroughly thought out. They're not made just to keep up
    with the latest fad.

    I see this as a dichotomy between 'we will sell lots of kit, because its bloody well designed' or 'we will sell lots of kit, because we will rush
    it to market, and spend all the money on chrome and tailfins, and other marketing, and the numpties will just buy it, because they are numpties'.

    M$ vict^H^H^H^Husers must shoulder a lot of the blame. They're the ones
    who react to chrome and tailfins the way Homer Simpson reacts to donuts.

    It's perfectly *possible* to write bug free programs in C. As the help I
    got here with my daemons memory leak demonstrated. Provided you test
    the code and analyse the problems that result.

    Writing in some 'foolproof' language is no substitute for a proper
    testing and modification feedback loop to consistently test and improve
    the product, and the danger is that people will think that it is.

    Someone once pointed out that it's possible to write FORTRAN in any
    language.

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
    / \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Chris Elvidge@3:770/3 to Pancho on Thu Dec 28 20:29:08 2023
    On 28/12/2023 13:41, Pancho wrote:
    On 28/12/2023 12:12, TimS wrote:
    On 28 Dec 2023 at 11:34:22 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"
    <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    IBM reinvented itself as a software and services house when the
    integrated circuit meant any damned fool could build a mainframe or
    minicomputer.

    IBMs mainframes today are PCS or blades running Linux... but they can
    still run RPG, and COBOL. And all those legacy apps.

    I think Microsoft needs to do similar.

    But they had that with Windows NT; perhaps they still have. Written by
    Dave
    Cutler of VAX/VMS fame, IIRC. But then they had to cripple it with the
    drive
    letter shit and a file system that doesn't allow an open file to be
    moved or
    deleted.

    Those seem to be characteristics of the file system. I think the main crippling was done in NT 4.0 when they moved third party graphics
    drivers into the Kernel layer (whatever that protected level is called
    in Windows NT).

    Although looking at support issues for the Arm Mali 610 on Linux, there
    is talk about userland (userspace?) hacks, which suggests the debate
    about where graphics drivers should live exists in Linux too.

    So even if they gave it Linux underpinnings, the user experience
    would still be dreadful. After all, it's their mindset. Look at the
    ribbon in
    Office apps, whose contents simply vanish if you make a window
    narrower. And
    you do have to make a window narrower if, like most actual users, you
    only
    have one screen.


    I thought Windows NT was pretty good. You seem to be picking on GUI ergonomics as if that is a measure of OS quality. The noticeable
    difference between Windows NT and Linux for me was always driver
    support, in particular GPU drivers.

    FWIW, Gnome Desktop + Pi OS on the rPi5 feels pretty solid, reminiscent
    of Windows quality.

    "Windows" and "quality" in the same sentence?



    --
    Chris Elvidge, England
    NEXT TIME IT COULD BE ME ON THE SCAFFOLDING

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From moi@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Dec 28 23:31:20 2023
    On 28/12/2023 16:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 28/12/2023 16:13, moi wrote:
    On 28/12/2023 12:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    Writing in some 'foolproof' language  is no substitute for a proper
    testing and modification feedback loop to consistently test and
    improve the product, and the danger is that people will think that it
    is.

    Absolutely no Ada programmer imagines for a nanosecond that it is
    "foolproof", or any kind of panacea.
    It is, however, a superb tool for writing reliable software,
    as is attested by a great deal of practical experience.

    Or is it that the people who uses it also care deeply about reliable software, and have quality control systems in place and actually test
    their software?

    It is, of course, both.

    --
    Bill F.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to Chris Elvidge on Fri Dec 29 01:00:26 2023
    On 2023-12-28, Chris Elvidge <chris@mshome.net> wrote:

    On 28/12/2023 13:41, Pancho wrote:

    FWIW, Gnome Desktop + Pi OS on the rPi5 feels pretty solid, reminiscent
    of Windows quality.

    "Windows" and "quality" in the same sentence?

    Sure, like "People's Democratic Republic".

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
    / \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to Pancho on Fri Dec 29 15:42:36 2023
    Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes:
    Automating programming, delegating complexity to the programming
    tools, memory management etc, always seemed to me the best way to
    avoid errors. Maybe also isolating complexity in standard components, standard patterns. Why people still use C is a mystery to me.

    Multiple reasons:
    - practical difficulty of migrating a large codebase to a new language
    - commercial difficulty of migrating to a new language
    - resistance to change
    - ignorance of C’s deficiencies

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Deloptes on Fri Dec 29 17:15:32 2023
    On 29/12/2023 17:01, Deloptes wrote:
    Richard Kettlewell wrote:

    Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> writes:
    Automating programming, delegating complexity to the programming
    tools, memory management etc, always seemed to me the best way to
    avoid errors. Maybe also isolating complexity in standard components,
    standard patterns. Why people still use C is a mystery to me.

    Multiple reasons:
    - practical difficulty of migrating a large codebase to a new language
    - commercial difficulty of migrating to a new language
    - resistance to change
    - ignorance of C’s deficiencies

    Some people like Linus Torvalds do not like object oriented programming. I
    am pretty sure he will never change his mind on that. On top of this there
    is historically a theoretical divide between functional and object oriented approach. Especially for hardware the functional approach seems to be rectified, however for GUI stuff etc. - it is masohistic thing (IMO).

    The point is that it is perfectly possible to use the lexical
    constraints of C to write 'object oriented' code.

    But it isn't forced on you as it somewhat is in C++.


    Regarding "C’s deficiencies" I do not agree. It is rather the lack of programmers experience and complexity of the code that leads to such deficiencies.

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven. All
    of the power of assembler but with a neat logical way to express the
    more usual constructs. And local variables on the stack! Wow! clever
    stuff. Obviously you had to worry about not overwriting the stack return addresses though.

    We didn't expect to have our bottoms wiped for us by the language. We
    were just happy to be able to write code 5 times as fast (the writing,
    not the code) as assembler.


    --
    Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From moi@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Fri Dec 29 17:34:50 2023
    On 29/12/2023 17:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven. All
    of the power of assembler but with a neat logical way to express the
    more usual constructs. And local variables on the stack! Wow! clever
    stuff. Obviously you had to worry about not overwriting the stack return addresses though.

    We didn't expect to have our bottoms wiped for us by the language.

    Gosh, how macho! I bet you are really butch.

    --
    Bill F.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to moi on Fri Dec 29 17:55:30 2023
    On 29/12/2023 17:34, moi wrote:
    On 29/12/2023 17:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven. All
    of the power of assembler but with a neat logical way to express the
    more usual constructs. And local variables on the stack! Wow! clever
    stuff. Obviously you had to worry about not overwriting the stack
    return addresses though.

    We didn't expect to have our bottoms wiped for us by the language.

    Gosh, how macho! I bet you are really butch.

    Are you all right?

    You sound a little other planetary.

    Perhaps an aspirin and some warm Ovaltine?

    --
    "Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

    ― Confucius

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to Pancho on Fri Dec 29 18:41:34 2023
    On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 12:55:51 +0000
    Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:

    Maybe also isolating complexity in standard components, standard
    patterns. Why people still use C is a mystery to me.

    It depends what for - there are certainly many areas where it used
    to be common for which it is now a bad choice but sometimes you really do
    need the efficiency of a power tool with no blade guard or cutoff - at
    these times you should take extreme care.

    I'm coming to rather like python for many purposes, but it does
    require discipline. It's generally easy to write nice clean, clear,
    intentional code BUT it is also very easy to tinker with the backstage
    workings in pretty much arbitrary ways - there's no protection you can
    change the methods of any class at runtime, just assign to them. This sort
    of malarky comes in very handy when writing test harnesses, injecting mocks
    and so forth but it would be a very bad idea in production code and needs
    to be documented very clearly.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From moi@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Fri Dec 29 23:27:24 2023
    On 29/12/2023 17:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 29/12/2023 17:34, moi wrote:
    On 29/12/2023 17:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven.
    All of the power of assembler but with a neat logical way to express
    the more usual constructs. And local variables on the stack! Wow!
    clever stuff. Obviously you had to worry about not overwriting the
    stack return addresses though.

    We didn't expect to have our bottoms wiped for us by the language.

    Gosh, how macho! I bet you are really butch.

    Are you all right?

    You sound a little other planetary.

    Perhaps an aspirin and some warm Ovaltine?


    Is that best a big strong guy who wipes his own bottom can do?

    --
    Bill F.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to moi on Sat Dec 30 09:40:06 2023
    On 29/12/2023 23:27, moi wrote:
    On 29/12/2023 17:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    On 29/12/2023 17:34, moi wrote:
    On 29/12/2023 17:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven.
    All of the power of assembler but with a neat logical way to express
    the more usual constructs. And local variables on the stack! Wow!
    clever stuff. Obviously you had to worry about not overwriting the
    stack return addresses though.

    We didn't expect to have our bottoms wiped for us by the language.

    Gosh, how macho! I bet you are really butch.

    Are you all right?

    You sound a little other planetary.

    Perhaps an aspirin and some warm Ovaltine?


    Is that best a big strong guy who wipes his own bottom can do?


    I don't understand what this 'best' is all about.
    Are you fighting some sort of imaginary war?

    I think you need help.


    --
    “I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most
    obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which
    they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.”

    ― Leo Tolstoy

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sat Dec 30 16:31:40 2023
    On 2023-12-28 13:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Yes, but in fact a whole swathe of NEW errors become possible, instead :-)

    Interinsting - what new error do you have in mind?


    I am very dubious about languages that claim to solve coding problems.

    If you refer to Ada/Spark, then they do not claim they solve cding problems. What they do is they provide tools to write a program with
    higher probability to be correct, according to spec.

    If you have no spec, then of course nothing or everything is correct.

    It is not about the fool-proof language. It is about
    to *make it easy to do it right*

    It should be easy to do it right. It should be hard to do it wrong.

    These tools/languagees helps extremly much to make it right.
    Once the code passes the compiler - the hard part - then it usually
    works as intended. Of ourse not always, but mots of the times.
    I've never had that feeling with other languaes. Ever.
    They compile, and bail out on SIGSEGV of SIGABORT or even worse,
    they rather thrashes that crashes.

    I am sure they will find ways
    to fuck anything up.

    of course. But it should be hard to fuck up.

    The problem with Microsoft

    Where did MS come into the picture?


    Compared with - say - the avionics industry there is zero quality
    control, in the ISO 9000 meaning of the word.

    Ok, It thought DO178-B was that
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178B>
    Most military or avionics guys talks about that



    It's perfectly *possible* to write bug free programs in C.

    Yes - but hard. Had you written it in Spark, your journey would have
    been shorter - If you's be proficient in spark.


    As the help I
    got here with my daemons memory leak demonstrated.  Provided you test
    the code and analyse the problems that result.


    Writing in some 'foolproof' language  is no substitute for a proper
    testing and modification feedback loop to consistently test and improve
    the product, and the danger is that people will think that it is.


    Of course. no-one said that these languages are a substitute for
    testing. But testing WLL be shorter, because most bugs will be caught at compile time.

    And the 'many-eyes' mantra is no good either - as Heart Bleed
    demonstrated. The faulty code was there for years without being detected.


    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sat Dec 30 16:35:40 2023
    On 2023-12-29 18:15, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven.

    And the intention of the language. To be portable assembler.
    Now, I wonder why people - 50 years after that - still want to use it.
    It's like riding a bicycle on the back wheel only. Possible, but there
    are simpler ways to ride a bike


    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to bnl@nowhere.com on Sat Dec 30 20:19:16 2023
    Björn Lundin <bnl@nowhere.com> writes:
    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven.

    And the intention of the language. To be portable assembler.

    I’m not sure that’s born out by the history (e.g. [1]). In DMR’s account the original goal was to be an implementation language for Unix. The
    interest in portability is several years later and (in the same article)
    the only reference to ‘portable assembler’ references C’s use as an intermediate language in compilers for other languages, hardly a
    recommendation for general-purpose use (the same description could be
    applied to LLVM IR just as easily).

    [1] https://www.bell-labs.com/usr/dmr/www/chist.html

    I don’t think ‘portable assembler’ is a remotely good description of C
    in any case. In assembler, almost every operation has a very
    well-defined meaning, defined purely in terms of the bit patterns of the operands to an instruction, and perhaps the CPU state etc, but with no reference to value type or provenance. In contrast in C the rules are
    much more complicated, and getting it wrong leads to programs behaving
    in rather strange and unpredictable ways.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Sat Dec 30 22:02:22 2023
    On 2023-12-30 21:19, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    Björn Lundin <bnl@nowhere.com> writes:
    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    To people like me who migrated from assembler to C, it was heaven.

    And the intention of the language. To be portable assembler.

    I’m not sure that’s born out by the history (e.g. [1]).

    Hmm, me surprised and some googling later, I see that.
    I've heard a lot of times about c was created because
    they (K&R) wanted to write a portable OS to one of
    the early PDPs, instead of rewriting it in assembler for that particular
    CPU. But it seems to be an urban legend.
    I stand corrected


    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sun Dec 31 09:59:26 2023
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 08:28:28 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The problem was really that C was *so* good, that people did start to
    write hugely complex stuff in it, and using people who wouldn't know a register or a stack pointer if it poked them in the eye or how DMA worked...to write them.

    There were two other factors in the rise of C. You could get a C compiler for just about anything, importantly there were several for CP/M. There weren't many decent languages that were that widely available. Also almost every university CS course used it from very early on (Cambridge
    being the notable exception because Martin Richards was there) so from
    around 1980 there were a *lot* of people trained in C.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sun Dec 31 09:24:38 2023
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
    I think stdlib was all we got. String handling mainly. And possibly
    floating point but on a 6809? Seriously?

    Sure, why not, it was routine on 8-bit micros. The Dragon 32 is an
    example that used the 6809 specifically.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to Pancho on Sun Dec 31 11:52:34 2023
    On 31 Dec 2023 at 11:35:35 GMT, "Pancho" <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:

    On 31/12/2023 09:59, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 08:28:28 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The problem was really that C was *so* good, that people did start to
    write hugely complex stuff in it, and using people who wouldn't know a
    register or a stack pointer if it poked them in the eye or how DMA
    worked...to write them.

    There were two other factors in the rise of C. You could get a C
    compiler for just about anything, importantly there were several for CP/M. >> There weren't many decent languages that were that widely available. Also
    almost every university CS course used it from very early on (Cambridge
    being the notable exception because Martin Richards was there) so from
    around 1980 there were a *lot* of people trained in C.


    I thought university CS courses of the era avoided C and preferred more academic, pedagogical languages: Pascal, Prolog, Smalltalk, ML, Lisp.

    My postgrad CS course was 1967/68 and we had a small (but ample) exposure to Lisp, and also some flavour of Algol on the department's IBM 7094. There was some clumsiness about using the Algol implementation that is now lost in the mists of time - a character set limitation, perhaps.

    I was taught both OO and functional programming before I ever met C at
    work, which may be why I was positive about OO-Design, C++ when it came along.

    To this day I still prefer my brackets (C, C++, C#) in Pascal style
    rather than K&R, which I begrudgingly use with Java.

    Whitesmith's for me.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Pancho@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Sun Dec 31 11:35:34 2023
    On 31/12/2023 09:59, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 08:28:28 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The problem was really that C was *so* good, that people did start to
    write hugely complex stuff in it, and using people who wouldn't know a
    register or a stack pointer if it poked them in the eye or how DMA
    worked...to write them.

    There were two other factors in the rise of C. You could get a C compiler for just about anything, importantly there were several for CP/M. There weren't many decent languages that were that widely available. Also almost every university CS course used it from very early on (Cambridge
    being the notable exception because Martin Richards was there) so from
    around 1980 there were a *lot* of people trained in C.


    I thought university CS courses of the era avoided C and preferred more academic, pedagogical languages: Pascal, Prolog, Smalltalk, ML, Lisp.

    The benefit of C was that it was closer to assembler and suited the low
    power CPUs of the time, when programmers needed to think close to the
    metal in order to achieve acceptable performance.

    On the job, C was easy to learn and the 'C Programming Language' was a
    very good manual.

    I was taught both OO and functional programming before I ever met C at
    work, which may be why I was positive about OO-Design, C++ when it came
    along.

    To this day I still prefer my brackets (C, C++, C#) in Pascal style
    rather than K&R, which I begrudgingly use with Java.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Richard Kettlewell on Sun Dec 31 12:06:24 2023
    On 31/12/2023 09:24, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
    I think stdlib was all we got. String handling mainly. And possibly
    floating point but on a 6809? Seriously?

    Sure, why not, it was routine on 8-bit micros. The Dragon 32 is an
    example that used the 6809 specifically.

    This was later than that. we had 16 bit micros by then for that sort of
    stuff. Actually in that job we had some sort of DSP chip to do floating
    point on. You shoved the command in one memory location and the numbers
    in two others, and eventually it spat out the answers.

    --
    The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to
    rule.
    – H. L. Mencken, American journalist, 1880-1956

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From The Natural Philosopher@3:770/3 to Pancho on Sun Dec 31 12:09:10 2023
    On 31/12/2023 11:35, Pancho wrote:
    On 31/12/2023 09:59, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 08:28:28 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The problem was really that C was *so* good, that people did start to
    write hugely complex stuff in it, and using people who wouldn't know a
    register or a stack pointer if it poked them in the eye or how DMA
    worked...to write them.

        There were two other factors in the rise of C. You could get a C
    compiler for just about anything, importantly there were several for
    CP/M.
    There weren't many decent languages that were that widely available. Also
    almost every university CS course used it from very early on (Cambridge
    being the notable exception because Martin Richards was there) so from
    around 1980 there were a *lot* of people trained in C.


    I thought university CS courses of the era avoided C and preferred more academic, pedagogical languages: Pascal, Prolog, Smalltalk, ML, Lisp.

    Compscis had their head in the clouds and their noses stuck up their
    arses. We learnt how to code without any 'courses'

    The benefit of C was that it was closer to assembler and suited the low
    power CPUs of the time, when programmers needed to think close to the
    metal in order to achieve acceptable performance.

    On the job, C was easy to learn and the 'C Programming Language' was a
    very good manual.

    all that

    I was taught both OO and functional programming before I ever met C at
    work, which may be why I was positive about OO-Design, C++ when it came along.

    To this day I still prefer my brackets (C, C++, C#) in Pascal style
    rather than K&R, which I begrudgingly use with Java.

    I think I do too.

    Did pascal have curlies?

    I had a friend with an Apple II and he said he couldnt code in C because
    it had no curlies...on the kee bored

    --
    The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to
    rule.
    – H. L. Mencken, American journalist, 1880-1956

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From mm0fmf@3:770/3 to All on Sun Dec 31 14:07:52 2023

    To this day I still prefer my brackets (C, C++, C#) in Pascal style
    rather than K&R, which I begrudgingly use with Java.

    Whitesmith's for me.


    You're a sick man and you need therapy.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Andy Burns@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Sun Dec 31 14:22:56 2023
    The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    I discovered I use Whitesmith style too.
    To me it makes a block look like a block.

    Absolutely.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Andy Leighton@3:770/3 to Pancho on Sun Dec 31 16:24:08 2023
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 11:35:35 +0000, Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:
    On 31/12/2023 09:59, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 08:28:28 +0000
    The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    The problem was really that C was *so* good, that people did start to
    write hugely complex stuff in it, and using people who wouldn't know a
    register or a stack pointer if it poked them in the eye or how DMA
    worked...to write them.

    There were two other factors in the rise of C. You could get a C
    compiler for just about anything, importantly there were several for CP/M. >> There weren't many decent languages that were that widely available. Also
    almost every university CS course used it from very early on (Cambridge
    being the notable exception because Martin Richards was there) so from
    around 1980 there were a *lot* of people trained in C.


    I thought university CS courses of the era avoided C and preferred more academic, pedagogical languages: Pascal, Prolog, Smalltalk, ML, Lisp.

    My course in the mid 80s had Modula 2 and ML (it wasn't SML at the time)
    as the main high level languages taught.

    A bigger influence was that the main machines we used ran 4.2BSD (and
    later Ultrix). So those of us who were keen, used C (and the odd
    shell script) to write useful programs.

    --
    Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
    "We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
    - Douglas Adams

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From druck@3:770/3 to All on Sun Dec 31 21:12:20 2023
    T24gMzEvMTIvMjAyMyAxMjoyNCwgUGFuY2hvIHdyb3RlOg0KPiBUaW1TIHVzZWQgdGhlIGlu ZGVudGF0aW9uIHN0eWxlIG5hbWUsICJXaGl0ZXNtaXRoIiwgd2hpY2ggSSdkIG5ldmVyIA0K PiBoZWFyZCBiZWZvcmUsIHNvIEkgbG9va2VkIGl0IHVwLiBXaGVuIEkgbG9vayBiYWNrIHRv IHRoZW4sIGNvbXBhcmVkIHRvIA0KPiBub3csIHRoZSBiaWdnZXN0IGRpZmZlcmVuY2UgZm9y IG1lIGlzIHRoYXQgSSBjYW4ganVzdCBsb29rIHN0dWZmIHVwLiBJIA0KPiBoYWQgbm8gaWRl YSB3aGF0IFdoaXRlc21pdGggbWVhbnQsIGJ1dCBhIG1pbnV0ZSBsYXRlciBJIGtub3cuIEJh Y2sgdGhlbiwgDQo+IEkgd291bGQgaGF2ZSB0byBzcGVuZCBhZ2VzIHRyeWluZyB0byBmaW5k IG91dCwgc2NvdXIgbXVsdGlwbGUgYm9va3MsIG9yIA0KPiBsaXZlIGluIGlnbm9yYW5jZS4N Cj4gDQo+IEFwcGFyZW50bHksIG15IOKAnFBhc2NhbCBTdHlsZeKAnSBpcyBjYWxsZWQgQWxs bWFuLg0KPiANCj4gPGh0dHBzOi8vZW4ud2lraXBlZGlhLm9yZy93aWtpL0luZGVudGF0aW9u X3N0eWxlI0FsbG1hbl9zdHlsZT4NCg0KU2ltcGx5IHRoZSBiZXN0Lg0KDQotLS1kcnVjaw0K
    DQo=

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to TimS on Sun Dec 31 21:36:24 2023
    On 2023-12-31, TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 at 11:35:35 GMT, "Pancho" <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> wrote:

    I thought university CS courses of the era avoided C and preferred more
    academic, pedagogical languages: Pascal, Prolog, Smalltalk, ML, Lisp.

    During my abortive university CS period (1968-1971) there was a course
    whose purpose was to expose you to as many programming languages as
    possible, hitting you with a new one every two weeks. Algol 60,
    Algol 68, Algol W, LISP, UMIST, SNOBOL4... Fortunately I dropped
    out before having to take that one.

    My postgrad CS course was 1967/68 and we had a small (but ample) exposure to Lisp, and also some flavour of Algol on the department's IBM 7094. There was some clumsiness about using the Algol implementation that is now lost in the mists of time - a character set limitation, perhaps.

    I remember that. It had something to do with enclosing all keywords
    in apostrophes in place of the bold-faced type in the reference books.
    It was nasty both in appearance and typing.

    We started off with FORTRAN and moved to IBM 360 assembly language,
    then on to other languages like PL/I. I decided I liked assembly
    language because there was no snooty compiler slapping my wrist and
    telling me I couldn't do something.

    In one term project we were divided into three-person groups. The
    other two wanted to use PL/I while I insisted on assembly language;
    we compromised by having them do the theoretical processing in PL/I
    while I wrote the I/O processor in assembly language. Interfacing
    the two was a bear.

    In another term project where we worked individually, I wrote my program
    in assembly language. During the review my prof (also the CS department
    head and one of the creators of Algol 68) would repeatedly look at me with
    a pained expression and ask, "Why did you do it in assembly language?"

    However, all ended well. I left the CS types in their ivory tower and
    found a job in the Real World [tm], writing code in assembly language
    and RPG. (The machines I worked on were too small to handle COBOL.)

    Then along came C - it was a godsend, and I use it to this day.

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
    / \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Mon Jan 1 10:31:04 2024
    On 01 Jan 2024 at 05:45:08 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 22:50:01 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 at 21:36:25 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
    wrote:

    I remember that. It had something to do with enclosing all keywords
    in apostrophes in place of the bold-faced type in the reference books.
    It was nasty both in appearance and typing.

    Yes, yes !! That was it. Quite why we had to do that was a mystery.

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables. The
    idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either by CASE
    or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of there being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable names.

    Yebbut that was never going to work, given the technology of the day. I think
    I wrote one program in it and didn't bother after that.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to TimS on Mon Jan 1 12:06:22 2024
    On 1 Jan 2024 10:31:05 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 01 Jan 2024 at 05:45:08 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables. The idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either by
    CASE or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of there
    being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable names.

    Yebbut that was never going to work, given the technology of the day. I
    think I wrote one program in it and didn't bother after that.

    But it *did* work - you could even type the code stropped with
    quotes or UPPER CASE and print it stropped with bold face or italic.

    I quite liked Algol 60, and Algol W was OK as teaching languages go
    but I really didn't get on with Algol 68C - nasty over-complex mess of a language - meeting it at the same time as BCPL only emphasised the
    impression.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Mon Jan 1 14:22:36 2024
    On 01 Jan 2024 at 12:06:22 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 1 Jan 2024 10:31:05 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 01 Jan 2024 at 05:45:08 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net>
    wrote:

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables. The >>> idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either by
    CASE or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of there
    being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable names.

    Yebbut that was never going to work, given the technology of the day. I
    think I wrote one program in it and didn't bother after that.

    But it *did* work - you could even type the code stropped with
    quotes or UPPER CASE and print it stropped with bold face or italic.

    Not on standard line printers of the day which IIRC didn't even have lower case. And the quotes were just a pain.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Kees Nuyt@3:770/3 to tnp@invalid.invalid on Mon Jan 1 16:57:40 2024
    On Sun, 31 Dec 2023 12:09:10 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    Did pascal have curlies?

    No:
    {
    ...
    }
    is written as
    BEGIN
    ...
    END

    Sweet memories of Borland Turbo Pascal with Turbo Vision ...
    --
    Regards,
    Kees Nuyt

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to TimS on Mon Jan 1 15:01:32 2024
    On 1 Jan 2024 14:22:36 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 01 Jan 2024 at 12:06:22 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 1 Jan 2024 10:31:05 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 01 Jan 2024 at 05:45:08 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot"
    <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables.
    The idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either
    by CASE or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of
    there being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable
    names.

    Yebbut that was never going to work, given the technology of the day. I
    think I wrote one program in it and didn't bother after that.

    But it *did* work - you could even type the code stropped with
    quotes or UPPER CASE and print it stropped with bold face or italic.

    Not on standard line printers of the day which IIRC didn't even have lower case. And the quotes were just a pain.

    No on those it would have to print quote stropping, even if it was typed in with case or bold stropping on some fancy terminal.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Mon Jan 1 19:08:40 2024
    On 01 Jan 2024 at 19:04:13 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    On 2024-01-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 22:50:01 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 at 21:36:25 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> >>> wrote:

    I remember that. It had something to do with enclosing all keywords
    in apostrophes in place of the bold-faced type in the reference books. >>>> It was nasty both in appearance and typing.

    Yes, yes !! That was it. Quite why we had to do that was a mystery.

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables. The
    idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either by CASE
    or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of there being a set >> of keywords that could not be used as variable names.

    That makes sense. Remember COBOL reserved words?

    What SQLite does is sort of the opposite. If you want to define a column or table with what is in fact a reserved word, then you have to put double-quotes around it in your definition. If you avoid reserved words then nothing (except strings) needs quoting. Much better than what Algol did. Really off-putting,
    it was.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Charlie Gibbs@3:770/3 to Ahem A Rivet's Shot on Mon Jan 1 19:04:12 2024
    On 2024-01-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 22:50:01 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 at 21:36:25 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
    wrote:

    I remember that. It had something to do with enclosing all keywords
    in apostrophes in place of the bold-faced type in the reference books.
    It was nasty both in appearance and typing.

    Yes, yes !! That was it. Quite why we had to do that was a mystery.

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables. The
    idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either by CASE
    or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of there being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable names.

    That makes sense. Remember COBOL reserved words?

    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
    / \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Ahem A Rivet's Shot@3:770/3 to TimS on Mon Jan 1 20:05:56 2024
    On 1 Jan 2024 19:08:40 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 01 Jan 2024 at 19:04:13 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    On 2024-01-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 22:50:01 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 at 21:36:25 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs"
    <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    I remember that. It had something to do with enclosing all keywords >>>> in apostrophes in place of the bold-faced type in the reference
    books. It was nasty both in appearance and typing.

    Yes, yes !! That was it. Quite why we had to do that was a mystery.

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables.
    The idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either
    by CASE or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of
    there being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable names.

    That makes sense. Remember COBOL reserved words?

    What SQLite does is sort of the opposite. If you want to define a column
    or table with what is in fact a reserved word, then you have to put double-quotes around it in your definition. If you avoid reserved words
    then nothing (except strings) needs quoting. Much better than what Algol
    did. Really off-putting, it was.

    That does not achieve what the Algol stropping achieves, which is
    to ensure that code does not need to be changed when the language is
    extended. If a new keyword is added to Algol it doesn't matter if code uses that word as a variable, it will still compile correctly and do what it
    ever did.

    --
    Steve O'Hara-Smith
    Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
    Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
    Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Mon Jan 1 21:50:26 2024
    On 01 Jan 2024 at 20:05:56 GMT, "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 1 Jan 2024 19:08:40 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 01 Jan 2024 at 19:04:13 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
    wrote:

    On 2024-01-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 22:50:01 GMT
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

    On 31 Dec 2023 at 21:36:25 GMT, "Charlie Gibbs"
    <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

    I remember that. It had something to do with enclosing all keywords >>>>>> in apostrophes in place of the bold-faced type in the reference
    books. It was nasty both in appearance and typing.

    Yes, yes !! That was it. Quite why we had to do that was a mystery.

    It was so that the set of keywords in the language could be
    extended without any risk of them ever being mistaken for variables.
    The idea was that keywords were picked out by "stropping" them either
    by CASE or with 'quotes' or by typeface (bold usually) instead of
    there being a set of keywords that could not be used as variable names. >>>
    That makes sense. Remember COBOL reserved words?

    What SQLite does is sort of the opposite. If you want to define a column
    or table with what is in fact a reserved word, then you have to put
    double-quotes around it in your definition. If you avoid reserved words
    then nothing (except strings) needs quoting. Much better than what Algol
    did. Really off-putting, it was.

    That does not achieve what the Algol stropping achieves, which is
    to ensure that code does not need to be changed when the language is extended. If a new keyword is added to Algol it doesn't matter if code uses that word as a variable, it will still compile correctly and do what it
    ever did.

    Funny how no other language I've come across in the intervening 55 or more years has found it necessary to do that.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From TimS@3:770/3 to All on Tue Jan 2 09:17:36 2024
    On 02 Jan 2024 at 08:20:47 GMT, "Richard Kettlewell" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> writes:
    "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
    That does not achieve what the Algol stropping achieves, which is to
    ensure that code does not need to be changed when the language is
    extended. If a new keyword is added to Algol it doesn't matter if
    code uses that word as a variable, it will still compile correctly
    and do what it ever did.

    Funny how no other language I've come across in the intervening 55 or
    more years has found it necessary to do that.

    The problem still exists, other languages just don’t attempt to solve
    it. All the impacted users get to modify their code to work around the
    damage instead.

    Much the best approach. And you don't actually have to do anything unless you are making a new version.

    --
    Tim

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Richard Kettlewell@3:770/3 to TimS on Tue Jan 2 08:20:46 2024
    TimS <tim@streater.me.uk> writes:
    "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
    That does not achieve what the Algol stropping achieves, which is to
    ensure that code does not need to be changed when the language is
    extended. If a new keyword is added to Algol it doesn't matter if
    code uses that word as a variable, it will still compile correctly
    and do what it ever did.

    Funny how no other language I've come across in the intervening 55 or
    more years has found it necessary to do that.

    The problem still exists, other languages just don’t attempt to solve
    it. All the impacted users get to modify their code to work around the
    damage instead.

    The case of ‘export’ in C++ was particularly grating, since almost no implementations ever supported the functionality, but some of them still
    error when encountering the new keyword.

    --
    https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lundin?=@3:770/3 to The Natural Philosopher on Thu Jan 4 19:21:36 2024
    On 2023-12-31 13:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


    Did pascal have curlies?

    Yes, but in another context

    { this is a comment in pascal }


    The first time I saw C, I wondered why it was so much comments ...


    --
    /Björn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)