Multiple file versions -- FLAME ON!!

[Dick Dunn]

>...this is one area where i think UNIX has a weak point.  i do  not
>think that one needs to keep multiple versions after logout, but
>should be permitted to do so while logged in.

So if you want multiple versions, keep them.  If you think lack of file
versions is a weak point, you must work for a disk manufacturer!  When I
worked on a VMS system, I spent more time in an average month deleting
extraneous files, fixing up after programs bomb for running out of disk
space, and running around trying to find out who was hogging the disk, than
I'd spend in a couple of years recovering files under UNIX.

If you haven't encountered "versions" the way VMS does them (with a
vengeance), consider the standard edit-compile-run cycle while developing
or fixing a program.  Suppose you're working on abc.c--each edit gets you a
new version of abc.c; each compile gets you a new version of abc.o and
a.out.  An hour or so of fixing and tweaking will easily give you a couple
dozen files.

>...and if i use  the
>UNIX standard way of "filename.1", "filename.2", etc., i  have a
>compatibility problem when i try to downline to tape and then to
>VMS, since that system only allows one extension and only 3 let-
>ters in the extension, etc.  (i know--that is the fault of VMS &
>not UNIX, but the problem could be partially solved by  allowing
>multiple versions...

The problem would be better solved by fixing your software that does the
move from UNIX to VMS.  You might have chosen a different convention for
the file versions.  (";" and the number is probably a bad choice for UNIX,
but you can invent one without too much thought.  Then write a simple
script to automate it.)
-- 
Dick Dunn	{hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd		(303)444-5710 x3086
   ...Never offend with style when you can offend with substance.