13 ms·
> but largely (functionally) indistinguishable from a UNIX machine when accessing it via teletype (glass or otherwise). I disagree. I first sat down at a VMS t
by madhadron 6y ago
> but largely (functionally) indistinguishable from a UNIX machine when accessing it via teletype (glass or otherwise).
I disagree. I first sat down at a VMS terminal in a library in North Carolina when the OPAC broke and dropped me back to a prompt. I knew Linux passably well at that point but had never used VMS before.
I typed ls, tried dir, that worked, and finally tried help. In half an hour I was investigating the university's network. It was a remarkably easy system to get oriented on. Conversely, no one can be expected to get anything vaguely comparable when sitting down unattended at a unix shell for twenty minutes.
- reagent_finder 6y agoI just tried 'help' on a linux system. It is absolute garbage.
- Yetanfou 6y agoThat's because 'help' on most Linux-based systems is actually a shell builtin which explains other shell builtin commands. This, in turn, is related to the fact that Linux-based systems are flexible - you could use a totally different shell which does not even have the _help_ builtin - while VMS was a comprehensive single-sourced top-down controlled system. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, the fact that you are nearly certain to be using several Linux instances right at this moment gives some indication of which of these systems eventually turned out to be the strongest, warts and all.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y agohelp on VMS wasn't a builtin. It was a system-provided program, with data files that could be accessed via other software.
- JdeBP 6y agoThe same was true on MS-DOS, DR-DOS, and OS/2. Microsoft provided a help file compiler with some of its DOS development tools, and IBM provided an INF/HLP compiler and (if memory serves correctly) a message file compiler with the OS/2 SDK (HELP using both hypertext help files and message files on OS/2).
- yrro 6y agoIn a normal sized terminal the most useful part is pushed away by the list of built-in commands. IMO it should be printed last, so that it's guaranteed to be displayer to a user who doesn't know how to scroll up: GNU bash, version 5.0.18(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) These shell commands are defined internally. Type `help' to see this list. Type `help name' to find out more about the function `name'. Use `info bash' to find out more about the shell in general. Use `man -k' or `info' to find out more about commands not in this list
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y agoOne of my first tasks as a systems programmer for the Schlumberger corporation in 1986 was to rewrite the VMS help command for use on SunOS. As it turns out, my rewritten version ran nearly twice as fast as the VMS version on VMS. That design (a nested heirarchy of help topics/subtopics, with some navigation hacks to make getting around easier) was quite good. But then came hypertext in the form of the web, and at that point, the "help" command just looks like crap.
- JdeBP 6y agoIf you had tried it on an actual Unix system, your experience would have been rather different. AT&T Unix System 5 Release 3.2 had a standalone help command that provided an interactive menu-driven help system. It looked something like this: $ help help: UNIX System On-line Help Choices description s starter: general information l locate:find a command with keyword u usage: information about command g glossary: definition of terms r redirect to a file or a command q Quit Enter choice >