Re: Offtopic - Amiga and Linux join forces?
Stefan Nobis wrote:
>
> >>>>> In article <[🔎] 378C9371.4B6168FC@mindspring.com>, "Keith G. Murphy"
> >>>>> <keithmur@mindspring.com> writes:
>
> KGM> If the Amiga folks are not going to use any of the GNU tools, or
> KGM> dpkg/apt especially, that would be a perverse decision. In fact,
> KGM> not making it based on/compatible with m68k Debian would be
> KGM> perverse, seems to me.
>
> I think you still missunderstand the point. The Amiga folks is looking
> for a new kernel. The will take the Linux kernel, cause there are much
> device drivers, so they are only interested in hardware
> support. Around this kernel they will make an AmigaOS. So nothing will
> look like a Linux, not the command line, not the GUI and there is a
> good chance even the API will not look like the Linux API. It will be
> the innermost section of the OS which is based on Linux. As i
> understand the text, you can say, Linux is something like the Hardware
> Abstraction Layer of NT for the new AmigaOS. And on this Linux, which
> is there to support more hardware, a complete AmigaOS is set on
> top. And with this AmigaOS the user and even the programmer has to
> deal, so neither of them will see anything of Linux.
>
> And from this point of view, the hole thing has nothing to do with any
> Linux-Distribution.
It is a Linux distribution by definition. Just a highly unusual one.
You've shown, however that, for example, Debian would not be an
appropriate choice, given the decision to only use the Linux kernel. I
would question that very decision, though. Think, for example, of all
the software their users will forego being able to use if *all* they're
using is the kernel... And they still have all the effort associated
with solely maintaining their distribution. But I guess they don't want
to tick off their old user base. Maybe the developers don't want any
competition from open source, either. What *I* would have wanted would
just be a boot manager like LILO or System Commander so I could still
run my old stuff (games) the old way. Or, AmigEMU. :-)
>
> And if they take gcc as their compiler or use the dpkg/apt package
> tools for managing installed software is quite another question - it
> matters as much as asking, why not using dpkg/apt tools for windows
> for software installation/administration.
>
It would seem to me more comparable to Mac with the Mach/BSD kernel,
and, I guess, no BSD utilities or binary compatibility with anything
else. It makes more apparent sense for Mac, though, with a larger
existing user and developer base.
Still, only time will tell. I hope it's something nifty.
Reply to: