[Info-vax] Orphaned processes on OpenVMS

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2011-05-23 08.18, Keith Cayemberg wrote:
>
>>> The VMS way sounds much more sensible. As I remember, VMS actually
>>> came after Unix. Anyone know if the design of the VMS process
>>> hierarchy was a deliberate reaction to issues with Unix?
>>
>> Yes, VMS is newer. But no, I don't think Unix had much, if any,
>> influence on design decisions in VMS. Maybe MULTICS did have some
>> effect, but I wouldn't bet on it. When VMS was bring developed, Unix was
>> still somewhat obscure, and only used to some extent in the academic
>> world, and still a bit primitive by todays standards. (We're talking
>> 1975 here.)
>
> Well I don't think it can be argued that Unix was unknown to the VAX/
> VMS design and implementation teams. Gordon Bell has documented that
> Ken Thompson was retained to consult the VAX architecture committee in
> regards to providing Unix the necessary primitives and services needed
> to run on a VAX.

Yes, Ken Thompson was asked for input on the VAX. No doubt DEC 
recognized that Bell was a nice customer, and if I remember right, Bell 
(wonderful with both a person and a company called Bell) had already 
talked with DEC about hardware design issues back in the early PDP-11 days.

That don't say much about what, if any, influence Unix had on VMS though.

VMS engineering also talked with VAX engineering to get various features 
in there that would help with specific solutions they had in mind. They 
were working tightly together, but they were two teams.

	Johnny