Re: Is Linux Unix?
Ryo Furue wrote:
"Steven Jones" <Steven.Jones@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message news:<2keyS-1CXfirstname.lastname@example.org>...
Working in a MS, Solaris, Linux, Tru64 shop, I find that for the vast
majority of our servers the usability of Linux is as good as Unix if not
better. While Unix might have high end bits Linux lacks for 95% of the
world's servers that small missing % I suspect is not an issue.
This is not a Linux-vs-Unix issue, but I've recently been experiencing
a downside of Linux. I think one of the biggest problems for developers
of commercial software for Linux is that there's no such thing as "the"
Linux OS. There are simply too many combinations of the kernel version,
libc version, pthreads version, etc. to support all. The consequence is
usually the vendor supports only the RedHat Linux.
I'm using the Intel Fortran Compiler (IFC). Its version 7 runs on Debian
without any problem whatsoever, although Intel doesn't support Debian. But,
last year Intel released a total rewrite of the compiler, version 8, with
which my Fortran programs don't work at all (*). Since Debian isn't supported,
about particular software (nptl thread library) not being available
for woody: why not install it yourself? just because it's not available
as debian package does not mean you cannot install it. I can imagine
that this might not be possible in all cases but in general this
approach solves lot of portability problems (from one linux
distro/version to another linux or even unix distro/version).
even if I paid (which I don't), Intel wouldn't fix my problem. (If paying
would fix it, I would pay.) This is a big headache. Uniformity is sometimes
I also heard from a programmer that her company develops software only for
Windows because it's so uniform and ubiguitous. Her company, being small,
wouldn't be able to support Linux. If a costomer doesn't have a Windows
machine, the company makes the costomer buy one. (The sofwares so expensive
that the cost of a lowly Windows machine is nothing.)
Unfortunately, uniformity and community efforts don't come together.
I don't understand it. if you (they) think that it is acceptable to
buy computer with windows just to make sure that the client has OS that
software company supports why wouldn't it be acceptable to buy computer
with redhat linux? if you are willing to have a dedicated machine then
you can have a dedicated machine that plays nicely with other linux
depending on the circumstances (not all solutions are
possible/desirable in all situations):
- statically link everything
- provide your own shared libs (do not install in system dirs!)
- have an experienced sysadmin set up the machine
- develop portable software, do not depend on random quirks of
uniformity and community don't come together??? compare linux distros
to unix versions!