[Malvern] Permissions and Securing Data

[Colin Newell]

nohup is cool too

On 6/18/07, Keith Edmunds <kae at midnighthax.com> wrote:
> Hi Ian
>
> > This all stemmed from a thread on another mailing list to do with
> > running a server command at the CLI and the command stopping when the
> > user logged out of that server.
>
> That user may want to investigate the 'screen' command (although there are
> other ways that can also overcome the problem described).
>
> > Yes, I know it's nothing like my query, but that's the way my mind works
> > - on tangents - and apart from which I was also curious about the
> > different way Linux handles this to M$.
>
> Linux was designed from the outset as a multiuser, multitasking operating
> system. My route to Linux may be a little different to most: in the 1980s
> I was working for Digital, a big American computer manufacturer. There I
> used and worked with VMS, which was (and still is) a very good and
> professional operating system. When I saw my first Windows PC, which was
> relatively late in the day for an IT person, it was running Windows 3.0.
> For those who don't remember it, Win 3.0 was essentially a single-user,
> single-task graphical application (not really an OS) running under DOS. I
> remember being gobsmacked: you couldn't even format a floppy and do
> something else - anything else - at the same time. It was obvious to me
> that there was no way this could survive while VMS, UNIX (which I also
> worked on) and the like were around. Wrong. Soon after that I realised what
> Microsoft's core strength was, and still is: marketing. Not long after
> that (1981, I think) I faithfully downloaded, at probably 19200 baud (or
> maybe even 9600) on my dialup line, an 'a1' floppy image, an 'a2' floppy
> image, and so on. Then, using a new (to me, then) program called
> rawrite.exe, I created a bootable Linux disk. Again gobsmacked, but this
> time for good reasons. Here was an operating system that ran on a PC and
> was a REAL operating system. Even back then Linux supported virtual
> consoles, so you could log in once, Alt-F2 and log in again, and have jobs
> running on both consoles. I remember being disappointed that this was only
> a hobby operating system because it showed so much promise. Wrong again!
> So, probably no good relying on me to predict the future of IT, although I
> doubt my early repeated failures will stop me. The real point of all this
> is that, since those early days for PC operating system, Windows has been
> trying to get closer to being what I regard as a real OS, and Linux has
> been trying to get closer to a desktop system. Both have succeeded to a
> large degree, but there are still many, many signs that Linux has a 'real
> OS' pedigree that Windows lacks. I'm rambling now, but it's hard to
> describe how /exciting/ Linux was when it first appeared.
>
> I'll shut up now.
>
> --
> Keith Edmunds
>
> +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
> |  Tiger Computing Ltd  |  Helping businesses make the most of Linux  |
> |  "The Linux Company"  |       http://www.tiger-computing.co.uk      |
> +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> _______________________________________________
> Malvern mailing list
> Malvern at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/malvern
>