6 ms·

Unix (eunuchs), the castrated Multics. No, really: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix

egdod 7y ago
Never heard the “eunuchs” reference before. I always just thought it was a play on being simpler (uni vs multi).
- mixmastamyk 7y ago
  Yes, believe that is more correct.
- rbanffy 7y ago
  I think they used "UNiplexed Information and Computing Service"
Isamu 7y ago
Not sure why you are downvoted but this is correct, the name Unix is a joke about Multics, which they felt was a bit unwieldy. Unix is a reaction to what they felt was over-wrought operating system design. Plan 9 is obviously a joke name too.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  > Plan 9 is obviously a joke name too. Bell Labs replacing the Outer Space in Plan 9 From Outer Space, a schlocky 1959 sci-fi horror film. The subtitle is UNSPEAKABLE HORRORS FROM OUTER SPACE PARALYZE THE LIVING AND RESURRECT THE DEAD.
- PaulHoule 7y ago
  In Multics you always mmap'ed files -- that seems crazy to me now that I write asyncio systems inspired by the old mainframe transaction processing systems such as CICS. There is nothing more synchronous, blocking, and dependent on expensive MMU operations than mmap.
  - ncmncm 7y ago
    MMU operations are a lot more expensive now than they once were. In particular, one of the most expensive things about mmap today is actually munmap, that trashes the translation lookaside buffer ("TLB"), the cache of memory map lookups, on all the other cores that run threads in the same process. When you had only the one core, that didn't need to happen. NetBSD used to have "UVM", where they played memory mapping tricks to get "zero-copy" networking. They had to give it up when they went to multiple cores.
  - rbanffy 7y ago
    Synchronous and blocking is not that bad in timesharing systems, as the computer always has something else to do while it waits for the IO to complete. As for the expensive MMU operations, as someone pointed out before, they were not always as expensive as we currently have to make them when we need to guard against leaks between processes and multiple CPUs sharing unified memories and caches.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    Varnish seems to get good mileage out of that strategy.
- emmelaich 7y ago
  And riffing off the fact that the previous Bell Labs Unix was version 8.
  - LukeShu 7y ago
    Do you have a source for that? Bell Labs Unix had version 9 in 1986 and version 10 in 1989. I suppose it's possible that these happened after Plan 9 was named; but as best as I can tell, work on Plan 9 started in 1987[1]; after V9 Unix had been released. [1]: http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/designing_plan_9 http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/designing_plan_9
    - smorrow 7y ago
      Earliest reference to Plan 9 is 1984: http://doc.cat-v.org/unix/unix-before-berkeley/ http://doc.cat-v.org/unix/unix-before-berkeley/
      - LukeShu 7y ago
        That 1984 year doesn't seem to be entirely accurate; at a minimum, the article has had additions since 1984 (including the 1998 death of John Lions). The abstract notes that it was published in DaemonNews in 1999. I tracked down the DaemonNews publication: https://web.archive.org/web/20000819035036/http://www.daemonnews.org/199903/history.html https://web.archive.org/web/20000819035036/http://www.daemon... The copy in DaemonNews includes citations that were elided from the copies on cat-v.org and darwinsys.com. Notably, we see that line change from > (More recently, much of this work has been consolidated into an operating system called Plan 9 From Bell Laboratories.) to > (More recently, much of this work has been consolidated into an operating system called Plan 9 From Bell Laboratories.)[Pike1990a, Pike1995a]
    - emmelaich 7y ago
      Unfortunately no. I may be wrong. However I think plan9 started as a skunkworks project well before Unix v9 was released. [edit - wikipedia maybe supports me ] > Plan 9 from Bell Labs was originally developed, starting in the mid-1980s,
microcolonel 7y ago
Probably some people are not pleased with your comment because it reminded them of genitals, and we aren't to be reminded of genitals in public anymore, apparently.

egdod 7y ago

Never heard the “eunuchs” reference before. I always just thought it was a play on being simpler (uni vs multi).

mixmastamyk 7y ago
Yes, believe that is more correct.
rbanffy 7y ago
I think they used "UNiplexed Information and Computing Service"

Isamu 7y ago

Not sure why you are downvoted but this is correct, the name Unix is a joke about Multics, which they felt was a bit unwieldy. Unix is a reaction to what they felt was over-wrought operating system design. Plan 9 is obviously a joke name too.

microcolonel 7y ago
> Plan 9 is obviously a joke name too. Bell Labs replacing the Outer Space in Plan 9 From Outer Space, a schlocky 1959 sci-fi horror film. The subtitle is UNSPEAKABLE HORRORS FROM OUTER SPACE PARALYZE THE LIVING AND RESURRECT THE DEAD.
PaulHoule 7y ago
In Multics you always mmap'ed files -- that seems crazy to me now that I write asyncio systems inspired by the old mainframe transaction processing systems such as CICS. There is nothing more synchronous, blocking, and dependent on expensive MMU operations than mmap.
- ncmncm 7y ago
  MMU operations are a lot more expensive now than they once were. In particular, one of the most expensive things about mmap today is actually munmap, that trashes the translation lookaside buffer ("TLB"), the cache of memory map lookups, on all the other cores that run threads in the same process. When you had only the one core, that didn't need to happen. NetBSD used to have "UVM", where they played memory mapping tricks to get "zero-copy" networking. They had to give it up when they went to multiple cores.
- rbanffy 7y ago
  Synchronous and blocking is not that bad in timesharing systems, as the computer always has something else to do while it waits for the IO to complete. As for the expensive MMU operations, as someone pointed out before, they were not always as expensive as we currently have to make them when we need to guard against leaks between processes and multiple CPUs sharing unified memories and caches.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  Varnish seems to get good mileage out of that strategy.
emmelaich 7y ago
And riffing off the fact that the previous Bell Labs Unix was version 8.
- LukeShu 7y ago
  Do you have a source for that? Bell Labs Unix had version 9 in 1986 and version 10 in 1989. I suppose it's possible that these happened after Plan 9 was named; but as best as I can tell, work on Plan 9 started in 1987[1]; after V9 Unix had been released. [1]: http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/designing_plan_9 http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/designing_plan_9
  - smorrow 7y ago
    Earliest reference to Plan 9 is 1984: http://doc.cat-v.org/unix/unix-before-berkeley/ http://doc.cat-v.org/unix/unix-before-berkeley/
    - LukeShu 7y ago
      That 1984 year doesn't seem to be entirely accurate; at a minimum, the article has had additions since 1984 (including the 1998 death of John Lions). The abstract notes that it was published in DaemonNews in 1999. I tracked down the DaemonNews publication: https://web.archive.org/web/20000819035036/http://www.daemonnews.org/199903/history.html https://web.archive.org/web/20000819035036/http://www.daemon... The copy in DaemonNews includes citations that were elided from the copies on cat-v.org and darwinsys.com. Notably, we see that line change from > (More recently, much of this work has been consolidated into an operating system called Plan 9 From Bell Laboratories.) to > (More recently, much of this work has been consolidated into an operating system called Plan 9 From Bell Laboratories.)[Pike1990a, Pike1995a]
  - emmelaich 7y ago
    Unfortunately no. I may be wrong. However I think plan9 started as a skunkworks project well before Unix v9 was released. [edit - wikipedia maybe supports me ] > Plan 9 from Bell Labs was originally developed, starting in the mid-1980s,

microcolonel 7y ago

Probably some people are not pleased with your comment because it reminded them of genitals, and we aren't to be reminded of genitals in public anymore, apparently.