Subject: Re: LimpM, why the umbilical and the storage arrangement with the PDP10?
From: (Rob Warnock)
Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 23:04:10 -0500
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>
Kent M Pitman  <> wrote:
| But the other subtlety that is probably not occurring to you, and that
| is an artifact of the modern world and the way progress reduces
| choice, is that the Lisp Machine operating systems didn't presuppose a
| file system; those are orthogonal choices.  You sort of see this in
| the issue of FAT32 vs NTFS on Windows NT, but the choice was
| considerably more active on the Lisp Machine.  There were some LispMs
| with 3 different file systems, each with their own filename syntax,
| theory of locking, backup, file properties, etc... big differences,
| not little ones.  They were competing in a kind of market capitalism
| not seen in the modern world...

Actually, one still sees quite a bit of that even today; consider
UFS, EFS, EXT3, XFS, ZFS, ReiserFS-3 & -4, etc. I've seen machines
in the last week that had XFS, EXT2, EXT3, NFS, CIFS, FAT16, & ISO9660
filesystems all mounted at once.


Rob Warnock			<>
627 26th Avenue			<URL:>
San Mateo, CA 94403		(650)572-2607