[Info-vax] Hard links on VMS ODS5 disks

[tridac]

On 7/18/23 19:30, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 7/18/2023 1:55 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2023-07-18, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>> On 7/18/2023 1:31 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> On 2023-07-18, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2023 8:21 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>> On 2023-07-17, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/17/2023 9:29 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Simple is good - complex is bad.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm a firm believer in KISS ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then you should strongly prefer Unix over VMS... :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not so sure about that.
>>>>>
>>>>> VMS is probably one of the smallest and leanest commercial
>>>>> OS'es today.
>>>>>
>>>>> It may be more a result of lack of investment for 20 years
>>>>> than a deliberate strategy. And we we miss a lot of things.
>>>>> But still small code base and small API.
>>>>
>>>> How does that API compare to the APIs available on Unix (especially
>>>> Linux) when you want to write an application (especially one with
>>>> modern requirements) ?
>>>>
>>>> VMS had a world-leading API 20-30 years ago, but things (and 
>>>> expectations)
>>>> have moved on since then.
>>>
>>> ????
>>>
>>> The third letter in KISS stands for simple not for feature-rich.
>>
>> I know that Arne, and that is _exactly_ my point.
> 
> Well - Linux is not simple.
> 
>>> Linux as of today is definitely feature rich but it is not
>>> simple.
>>
>> It's a hell of a lot simpler to implement an application on Linux
>> than it is to implement that application on VMS.
>>
>> Linux gives you functionality that is expected these days, but is
>> missing from VMS. That's what I am primarily referring to above.
> 
> Linux is not simpler than VMS. Linux is more feature rich than VMS.
> 
> In theory that would mean than an application on Linux is
> simpler than an application on VMS. Because given same functionality
> then the OS doing more means the application has to do less.
> 
> But practice is more that an application on Linux has more features
> than on VMS and it is more complex because of the code needed
> to use all those Linux features.
> 
> At least I do not recall ever seeing all those simple Linux
> applications.
> 
> Latest Debian distro is over 1.3 BLOC.
> 
>> For one example, I refer you to Stephen's often posted diatribe about
>> the effort involved in writing a secure network application on VMS
>> versus doing the same thing on Linux.
> 
> The basic application API's are the same. C/C++ applications use OpenSSL
> (or LibreSSL or GnuTLS). Java application use the builtin JCE. PHP
> applications get it via Apache and OpenSSL. Python has a builtin
> (that is a wrapper around OpenSSL).
> 
> Linux got more tools on top of the basic.
> 
> But having more tools is not what I call simple.
> 
> Arne
> 

Develop under FreeBSD here, but have spent a few days recently
evaluating current Linux distros, one of which is Debian. If anything,
the mass adoption of systemd has a been a disaster in terms of
system complexity, which only increases the possible attack surface
width. If you hold the nose, Debian Bookworm is pretty good at user
level but so is Devuan, the systemd free Debian, which seems every
bit as good. Also looked at Suse, like meeting an old friend, but again,
systemd encumbered and nothing is where one expects it to be. Still
have 11.4 on a couple of old laptops, which is how unix should be.
Fedora produced rubbish on screen, while Xunbuntu works out of the
box, just like Debian and Suse.

I need to build and test some code under Linux, as FreeBSD is not so
mainstream, though a thoroughly more straightforward and hassle free
experience than any current Linux. Always saw systemd as a power grab
by Redhat and their most recent antics over source licensing only
serve to reinforce that view. All about the money, as usual, sadly...

Chris