On 12/02/2024 22:30, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> Linux and Unix have *never been* cause insensitive with respect to
>> filenames.
>
> macOS (almost certainly the most widely used desktop Unix) has been case
> insensitive all along.
>
Well no, it hasn't.
That was the source of a huge exercise in finding out .
When I added a case sensitive HFS disk to an existing Mac OS/X and all
hell broke loose

--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 13/02/2024 08:31, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes:
>> On 2/12/24 17:55, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> And it is the one system that is officially entitled to call itself
>>> “Unix”.
>
> I don’t think TNP was talking about the trademark users so much as the
> wider set of things which provide a reasonably faithful implementation
> of the normal Unix interfaces.
>
>> Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, OpenMVS, OpenServer, and UnixWare question the
>> veracity of /the/ /one/.
>
> The context was ‘desktop Unix’, and most of those only made any sense as
> server deployments. Solaris certainly qualified in the past but it’d be
> a weird choice today. I can’t remember if Unixware ever had pretences to
> desktop use, I only used it as a server (until Linux matured enough to
> replace it).
HP UX and IRIX were used woith SUNOS and Solaris as powerful desktop
environments back in the day. Half the City ran on SUNOS on SPARC
workstations.
>
>> There's even a Linux distribution that has permission to call itself
>> "Unix".
>
> So I’ve heard.
>

And I don't class OS/X as Unix, any more than I class Android as Linux.

OS/X simply took a short cut to its development by using BSAD kernel -
almost none of that operating system's normal utilities are left. All is
replaced by a veneer of sophistication that is the GUI. ]

Which doesn't even run X windows.

And, as I discovered. OS/X IS case sensitive *if the file system serving
it, is*.

--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

with <uqbcta$1cov$1@nyheter.lysator.liu.se> Andreas Kempe wrote:
> Den 2024-02-09 skrev Marc Olschok <nobody@nowhere.invalid>:
>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2024 02:48:02 Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

>>> Did you know that the ext4 filesystem has the option for
>>> case-insensitive file/directory names?[...]
>> I did not know and in fact I cannot think of a situation where I
>> would desire case-insensitivity. But of course it helps to be aware
>> of this possibility just in case one runs into a system configured
>> this way. Thanks.
*SKIP* [ 7 lines 2 levels deep]
> I think Windows got this one right, but I also think that the
> case-sensitive assumption has been prevalent in *nix for too long for
> me to ever run my file systems case-insensitive.

So it seems The Industry(TM) is about to snap on caseless filesystems
any moment now. Because windows-does-it is reason good enough.

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom

On 2/13/24 03:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> And I don't class OS/X as Unix, any more than I class Android as Linux.

You may not classify OS/X as a Unix, but I think it has a legal right to
call itself such.

> OS/X simply took a short cut to its development by using BSAD kernel -
> almost none of that operating system's normal utilities are left. All is
> replaced by a veneer of sophistication that is the GUI. ]

What defines a Unix OS is sometimes a little non-obvious.

> Which doesn't even run X windows.

I am fairly certain that you can /add/ X11 server capability to macOS
with optional components from Apple /without/ much effort.

--
Grant. . . .

On 2024-02-13 07:56, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 03:20:17 -0000 (UTC), Jack Strangio wrote:
>
>>> Also, XTerm is in and of itself a GUI application emulating a terminal.
>>
>> Yeah. Isn't it great? Instead of being restricted to 7 or 8 pure
>> text-only virtual terminals, I can take advantage of half a dozen or so
>> virtual desktops and XTerm and have literally dozens of text terminals
>> open at the same time. (I tend to do that.)
>
> And copy-and-paste, that great innovation of the GUI paradigm, works
> really well between text (editor and terminal) windows. Very useful for
> automating command sequences.
>
> Paradoxically, GUIs do not let you copy-and-paste sequences of actions
> (keystrokes and mouse clicks), or even settings of GUI widgets, between
> windows. So they force you to repeat all the settings/actions again.

Right! Interesting idea.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> macOS (almost certainly the most widely used desktop Unix) has been case
> insensitive all along.

It's configurable (per file system I believe).

In order to pass the UNIX conformance tests, Apple must be running
the tests on a case sensitive file system.

--
Geoff Clare <netnews@gclare.org.uk>

On 12/02/2024 12:43, Andreas Kempe wrote:
> Den 2024-02-11 skrev Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>:
>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 21:06:50 -0000 (UTC), Andreas Kempe wrote:
>>
>>> I think Windows got this one right ...
>>
>> I would be careful about jumping to that conclusion, judging from
>> remarks like
>> <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20181505/unicode-case-folding-to-upper-case>.
>>
>
> I had never heard of the Compound File Binary format this question
> pertains to and fail to see an obvious connection to their file
> systems being case-insensitive. Does NTFS also have the issue that
> they upper-case everything, making some file names ambiguous?
>

NTFS is case-sensitive. Windows OS is case-preserving.

I don't really care much one way or the other, but having Unix and
Windows behave differently is potentially a problem.

The Unix case-sensitive filename paradigm seems to me much easier to
understand, so I would plump for that as better.

On 13/02/2024 13:52, Pancho wrote:
> On 12/02/2024 12:43, Andreas Kempe wrote:
>> Den 2024-02-11 skrev Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>:
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 21:06:50 -0000 (UTC), Andreas Kempe wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think Windows got this one right ...
>>>
>>> I would be careful about jumping to that conclusion, judging from
>>> remarks like
>>> <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20181505/unicode-case-folding-to-upper-case>.
>>>
>>
>> I had never heard of the Compound File Binary format this question
>> pertains to and fail to see an obvious connection to their file
>> systems being case-insensitive. Does NTFS also have the issue that
>> they upper-case everything, making some file names ambiguous?
>>
>
> NTFS is case-sensitive. Windows OS is case-preserving.
>

Sorry, I meant Windows OS is case-preserving, to an extent. If you
create a filename, it will preserve the case you specify. However, case
cannot be used to correctly distinguish between filenames which differ
only in case.

Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes:
> On 2/13/24 03:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> Which doesn't even run X windows.
>
> I am fairly certain that you can /add/ X11 server capability to macOS
> with optional components from Apple /without/ much effort.

Yes, it ran X11 fine as a more-or-less standard feature back in the
day. XQuartz still exists though it’s been a few years since the last
release; I suspect it’s reached the point that basically nobody cares
any more.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

On 13/02/2024 09:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 13/02/2024 08:31, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> writes:
>>> On 2/12/24 17:55, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> And it is the one system that is officially entitled to call itself
>>>> “Unix”.
>>
>> I don’t think TNP was talking about the trademark users so much as the
>> wider set of things which provide a reasonably faithful implementation
>> of the normal Unix interfaces.
>>
>>> Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, OpenMVS, OpenServer, and UnixWare question the
>>> veracity of /the/ /one/.
>>
>> The context was ‘desktop Unix’, and most of those only made any sense as
>> server deployments. Solaris certainly qualified in the past but it’d be
>> a weird choice today. I can’t remember if Unixware ever had pretences to
>> desktop use, I only used it as a server (until Linux matured enough to
>> replace it).
> HP UX and IRIX were used woith SUNOS and Solaris as powerful desktop
> environments back in the day. Half the City ran on SUNOS on SPARC
> workstations.

I doubt half, just a sizeable proportion, in the early to mid 1990s. But
Excel was always king, and that didn't run on Unix. Lotus 123, which did
run on Sparcs, was a bit shit in comparison.

It was recognised as a huge error by 1995, due to faster Intel CPUs, and
especially after Windows NT came along.

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 10:04:18 +0000, Eric Pozharski wrote:

> So it seems The Industry(TM) is about to snap on caseless filesystems
> any moment now. Because windows-does-it is reason good enough.

Linux has had this for years <https://lwn.net/Articles/784041/>.

All that’s happened is you just noticed because I mentioned it.

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:52:11 +0000, Pancho wrote:

> NTFS is case-sensitive. Windows OS is case-preserving.

There is no real distinction between “NTFS” and “Windows OS”. Windows has
no equivalent of the Linux generic VFS layer: most of the Windows
filesystem features are intimately tied specifically into NTFS.

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:25:10 +0000, Geoff Clare wrote:

> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>
>> macOS (almost certainly the most widely used desktop Unix) has been
>> case insensitive all along.
>
> It's configurable (per file system I believe).
>
> In order to pass the UNIX conformance tests, Apple must be running the
> tests on a case sensitive file system.

Is this end-user-settable, at all?

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:06:11 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> And I don't class OS/X as Unix ...

They are legally allowed to use the trademark. They are just about the
only platform left standing that does.

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:58:21 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> On 2024-02-13 07:56, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> Paradoxically, GUIs do not let you copy-and-paste sequences of actions
>> (keystrokes and mouse clicks), or even settings of GUI widgets, between
>> windows. So they force you to repeat all the settings/actions again.
>
> Right! Interesting idea.

Command lines let you automate repetitive actions, GUIs don’t.

On 13/02/2024 20:40, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:52:11 +0000, Pancho wrote:
>
>> NTFS is case-sensitive. Windows OS is case-preserving.
>
> There is no real distinction between “NTFS” and “Windows OS”. Windows has
> no equivalent of the Linux generic VFS layer: most of the Windows
> filesystem features are intimately tied specifically into NTFS.

You can use NTFS on Linux, and make full use of case sensitivity.

Or perhaps more commonly you can share ext4 file systems with Windows,
and just as with NTFS you cannot distinguish files by case.

So I would say Windows OS and NTFS file systems are two very distinct
concepts.

On 13/02/2024 20:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:06:11 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> And I don't class OS/X as Unix ...
>
> They are legally allowed to use the trademark. They are just about the
> only platform left standing that does.

Legals status and technical content are rather different concepts.

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:25:10 +0000, Geoff Clare wrote:
>
>> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>
>>> macOS (almost certainly the most widely used desktop Unix) has been
>>> case insensitive all along.
>>
>> It's configurable (per file system I believe).
>>
>> In order to pass the UNIX conformance tests, Apple must be running the
>> tests on a case sensitive file system.
>
> Is this end-user-settable, at all?

Depends what you mean by "end user". The way I remember doing it
years ago was with a terminal command, using sudo to obtain privilege.
So in a typical personal-computer situation, it is do-able by the
computer's owner/user. I don't know if there is a GUI way.

--
Geoff Clare <netnews@gclare.org.uk>

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 13/02/2024 20:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:06:11 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> And I don't class OS/X as Unix ...
>>
>> They are legally allowed to use the trademark.
>
> Legals status and technical content are rather different concepts.

In general that is true, but in the specific case of UNIX® the
trademark owner (The Open Group) explicitly ties them together.
They will only licence the trademark to an OS vendor if the OS
passes many tens of thousands of tests. And to cover any
non-conformances not identified by the test suites, the licensee
has to sign a TMLA (trademark licence agreement) in which they commit
to fixing any non-conformances that are brought to their attention
with a given time period. For details see

https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/docs/UNIXV7_Certification_Guide.html

--
Geoff Clare <netnews@gclare.org.uk>

On 14/02/2024 13:22, Geoff Clare wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:25:10 +0000, Geoff Clare wrote:
>>
>>> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>>>
>>>> macOS (almost certainly the most widely used desktop Unix) has been
>>>> case insensitive all along.
>>>
>>> It's configurable (per file system I believe).
>>>
>>> In order to pass the UNIX conformance tests, Apple must be running the
>>> tests on a case sensitive file system.
>>
>> Is this end-user-settable, at all?
>
> Depends what you mean by "end user". The way I remember doing it
> years ago was with a terminal command, using sudo to obtain privilege.
> So in a typical personal-computer situation, it is do-able by the
> computer's owner/user. I don't know if there is a GUI way.
>
I don't believe MAC OS/X is UNIX conformant.

I no longer have an example, but AFAICR the case insensitivity is at the
deepest filesystem OS level.

Case is IIRC preserved, but ignored. But you can create an HFS
filesystem where it isn't ignored. At what level this behaviour is
modulated I do not know, as it is entirely possible that e.g. open()'s
behaviour is subverted in one API, but not in another library.

I can imagine the pseudo code...

Scan directory
IF filesysem NOT case sensitive
toupper scan results.
....

and likewise for writing, throw an exception if a case insensitive file
match is found before trying to create a new file.

The semantic question is whether this is in fact a feature in say libc
that voids the claim to be the One True Unix.

But I am not sure I give a rats arse anyway.

--
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

On 14/02/2024 13:31, Geoff Clare wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 13/02/2024 20:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:06:11 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> And I don't class OS/X as Unix ...
>>>
>>> They are legally allowed to use the trademark.
>>
>> Legals status and technical content are rather different concepts.
>
> In general that is true, but in the specific case of UNIX® the
> trademark owner (The Open Group) explicitly ties them together.
> They will only licence the trademark to an OS vendor if the OS
> passes many tens of thousands of tests. And to cover any
> non-conformances not identified by the test suites, the licensee
> has to sign a TMLA (trademark licence agreement) in which they commit
> to fixing any non-conformances that are brought to their attention
> with a given time period. For details see
>
> https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/docs/UNIXV7_Certification_Guide.html
>
Do you mind if I don't bother? Having been peripherally involved in the
Unix Wars I really have had more than enough...I was delighted when
Linus came up with Linux (once it was more than a hobbyists toy)
precisely because all the good things in Unix came with it and all the
legal shit was left behind by dint of a 'clean room' rewrite.

In short though it looked like a Unix duck, quacked like a Unix duck,
and paddled like a Unix duck, DNA evidence proved it was, in fact, a
moorhen...

--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

On 2/13/24 06:58, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-02-13 07:56, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 03:20:17 -0000 (UTC), Jack Strangio wrote:
>>
>>>> Also, XTerm is in and of itself a GUI application emulating a terminal.
>>>
>>> Yeah.  Isn't it great?  Instead of being restricted to 7 or 8 pure
>>> text-only virtual terminals, I can take advantage of half a dozen or so
>>> virtual desktops and XTerm and have literally dozens of text terminals
>>> open at the same time.  (I tend to do that.)
>>
>> And copy-and-paste, that great innovation of the GUI paradigm, works
>> really well between text (editor and terminal) windows. Very useful for
>> automating command sequences.
>>
>> Paradoxically, GUIs do not let you copy-and-paste sequences of actions
>> (keystrokes and mouse clicks), or even settings of GUI widgets, between
>> windows. So they force you to repeat all the settings/actions again.
>
> Right! Interesting idea.

If only there was a Linux equivalent to AutoHotKey.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> writes:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:25:10 +0000, Geoff Clare wrote:
>>> In order to pass the UNIX conformance tests, Apple must be running the
>>> tests on a case sensitive file system.
>>
>> Is this end-user-settable, at all?
>
> Depends what you mean by "end user". The way I remember doing it
> years ago was with a terminal command, using sudo to obtain privilege.
> So in a typical personal-computer situation, it is do-able by the
> computer's owner/user. I don't know if there is a GUI way.

(Based on screenshots online) there is an option you can choose in Disk
Utility when creating a filesystem. i.e. yes, user settable in the GUI.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
> On 2/13/24 06:58, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2024-02-13 07:56, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 03:20:17 -0000 (UTC), Jack Strangio wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Also, XTerm is in and of itself a GUI application emulating a terminal.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah.  Isn't it great?  Instead of being restricted to 7 or 8 pure
>>>> text-only virtual terminals, I can take advantage of half a dozen or so
>>>> virtual desktops and XTerm and have literally dozens of text terminals
>>>> open at the same time.  (I tend to do that.)
>>>
>>> And copy-and-paste, that great innovation of the GUI paradigm, works
>>> really well between text (editor and terminal) windows. Very useful for
>>> automating command sequences.
>>>
>>> Paradoxically, GUIs do not let you copy-and-paste sequences of actions
>>> (keystrokes and mouse clicks), or even settings of GUI widgets, between
>>> windows. So they force you to repeat all the settings/actions again.
>>
>> Right! Interesting idea.
>
> If only there was a Linux equivalent to AutoHotKey.

There is:

xdotool

https://github.com/jordansissel/xdotool

Although note this warning:

Note: If you are using Wayland, please be aware this software will
not work correctly. See the 'Wayland' section below for more detail.

And, since it has a more sensible scripting language provided by the
environment, one does not have to write 'scripts' in autohotkey's
scripting language (which should be the poster boy for how *not* to
design a scripting language).

On 14/02/2024 16:28, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> writes:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:25:10 +0000, Geoff Clare wrote:
>>>> In order to pass the UNIX conformance tests, Apple must be running the
>>>> tests on a case sensitive file system.
>>>
>>> Is this end-user-settable, at all?
>>
>> Depends what you mean by "end user". The way I remember doing it
>> years ago was with a terminal command, using sudo to obtain privilege.
>> So in a typical personal-computer situation, it is do-able by the
>> computer's owner/user. I don't know if there is a GUI way.
>
> (Based on screenshots online) there is an option you can choose in Disk
> Utility when creating a filesystem. i.e. yes, user settable in the GUI.
>
That is how I came across it, yes.
At what level it acts, is conjecture as far as I am concerned.

--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"