Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!ll-xn!adelie!minya!jc
From: jc@minya.UUCP (John Chambers)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: more rm insanity
Message-ID: <431@minya.UUCP>
Date: 12 Dec 87 14:28:41 GMT
References: <1257@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <6840002@hpcllmv.HP.COM> <9555@mimsy.UUCP> <1901@celtics.UUCP>
Organization: home
Lines: 42
Summary: If we'd follow Unix design, it would work...

> Explain to a user, please, why the user can get a list of filenames beginning
> with "cel" by typing
> 	ls cel*
> ...but in order to get a list of adjacent network nodes beginning with "cel",
> using the hypothetical "netlist" command, the user must type
> 	netlist cel\*
> ...makes no sense to me.  

Nor to me.  Ane there are "network" Unix systems where it works.  For example,
with the Newcastle Connection, you can find out about network nodes at the
same level as your system by typing:
	ls /../*
Other wildcard expansions work similarly, because "/../" is implemented as
a normal directory.  (It is actually a special file, of course, within which
is hidden the network.)

On a more general note, part of the problem is the widespread violation of
the object-oriented design of Unix.  Objects are, of course, called "files",
and operators are called "processes".  If you have a set of objects, you
make them a set by linking them into a directory.  You can then use various
operators (such as ls or find or wildcard expansion) to extract subsets.
There is no reason that this can't be used for network nodes, as it can
be used for programs, directories, source files, object files, disk drives,
or anything else whose name can be entered in a directory.

Instead, most network implementations are kludges that violate this useful
design, usually by introducing some sort of special syntax for network nodes
(host:file, host!user, something@host, etc.) which the standard Unix library 
programs don't understand, and which doesn't follow the model of a tree of
directories.  Then we go through the process of "reinventing the wheel", 
trying all sorts of ways to use a bad design, when we already had one that 
works well.

It's really another case of Henry Spencer's .signature:  Those who don't
understand Unix are re-inventing it, poorly.  Eventually, people might 
realize that networked systems, like multi-disk file systems, should
simply be combined in the same heirarchy that looks the same from any
vantage point.  Anything else (like Sun's NFS) is simply an interim kludge 
that interferes with effective applications of simple tools.
 
-- 
John Chambers <{adelie,ima,maynard,mit-eddie}!minya!{jc,root}> (617/484-6393)