I was reading Ritchie and Thompson's paper about the Unix file system. They write, 'It is worth noting that the system is totally self-supporting'. Were the systems before Unix not self-supporting? In what ways?

  • 3
    It is worth looking into the FOSDEM 2018 talk on Unix evolution by Diomidis Spinellis; I also enjoyed Liam Proven's the circuit less traveled talk Feb 19, 2018 at 8:23
  • 5
    It might also be worth asking about non-self-supporting operating systems on Retrocomputing, where you’d be likely to get very detailed answers. Feb 19, 2018 at 11:05
  • 5
    Another term for self-supporting is self-hosting
    – Nayuki
    Feb 19, 2018 at 18:13
  • It is equally accurate to call it self-contained, for the same reasons others list. Not only can a new system (kernel, userland) be compiled, but the manual pages and documentation are usually present, except on embedded/tiny systems.
    – user2497
    Feb 27, 2018 at 8:42

3 Answers 3


The question in your title is addressed immediately after your quote in the paper:

All Unix software is maintained on the system; likewise, this paper and all other documents in this issue were generated and formatted by the Unix editor and text formatting programs.

So “self-supporting” means that once a Unix system is setup, it is self-sufficient, and its users can use it to make changes to the system itself. “This issue” in the quote above refers to Bell System Technical Journal, Volume 57, Number 6, Part 2, July-August 1978 (also available on the Internet Archive), which was all about the Unix system (and makes fascinating reading for anyone interested in Unix and its history).

The fact that Unix is self-supporting doesn’t mean all other systems before it weren’t; but some operating systems did require the use of other systems to build them (this became more common later, in fact, with the advent of micro-computers, whose systems were often developed on minis). Unix was novel in that it also included typesetting tools, which meant that it could not only build itself, but also produce its documentation, both online and in print (I imagine Unix might not be the first such system, but this would have been at least unusual).

  • 21
    The typesetting tools (roff) were crucially important for early Unix. Part of the funding came from promising to produce a document typesetting system.
    – Kusalananda
    Feb 18, 2018 at 19:06
  • 23
    @Kusalananda IIRC, from written accounts of the original Unix/C team, they asked permission to work on a small simplified OS because Multix was so late but were not given permission. They then got the job of developing a document management system (of which typesetting was only a part of, the other parts include the filesystem and file editor) an in typical hacker fashion decided to write an OS in order to develop the product
    – slebetman
    Feb 19, 2018 at 8:41
  • Multics, that is
    – Artelius
    Feb 20, 2018 at 0:53
  • Does that mean that buildroot-based OSs are no longer self-supporting because the team removed gcc as a target app? Feb 21, 2018 at 1:17
  • Wouldn't an included C compiler be the most important thing? Feb 21, 2018 at 5:10

The PDP-11 was made by Digital Equipment Corporation, and the manufacturer's operating systems for the PDP-11 were:

  • RT-11
  • RSX-11
  • RSTS/E

Of these, at least RSTS/E required yet another operating system to generate the system. It was a single-task single-user Disk Operating System, called DOS of course, that supported little but tape, disks, a teletype, the sysgen program that asked you configuration questions and created assembly-language configuration files, and an assembler and linker. The output of the sysgen program was a RSTS/E bootable operating system. I can't speak for RT-11 or RSX-11 as I never had to sysgen them, but I sysgen'd RSTS/E many times in the late 1970s.

They fixed all that by RSTS/E version 6b or possibly 6c, which hosted the sysgen program itself, via an RT-11 runtime system (and also had an RSX-11 runtime system), but all this had by then been going on since about 1968. Hence the emphasis on Unix being self-supporting.

  • RT-11 indeed did have sysgen and worked the same way. However, it ran on a regular RT-11 system which was single user, though there was a third party system called TSX-Plus which made RT-11 multi-user.
    – wallyk
    Feb 19, 2018 at 19:25

To answer the original question Why is Unix self-supporting? it is because systems which were not self-hosting kind of sucked.

When there is another system needed to develop, the resulting system does not get the needed attention to be reliable and friendly and usable.

Early in Sequent's history, they used VAXes to develop their Unix-like operating system and other components. In relating their history, the engineers proudly state that as soon as their product was mostly reliable, the company president helped roll the VAXes away so that development had to be self hosting, and the company attributed the de-VAXing as a major milestone resulting in high reliability and driving user friendliness.

I personally experienced several annoying, non-self-hosting development systems from the 1970s: ISIS and iRMX which were reputedly developed on VAXen, though I think iRMX may have been largely self-hosting by the late 1980s.

  • 10
    This is known informally as 'eating your own dog food'. It was very apparent in the 1980s which software makers did and didn't use their own products internally.
    – user207421
    Feb 19, 2018 at 23:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .