Re: Is Linux Unix?
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 02:04:36PM +0200, John L Fjellstad wrote:
> Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca> writes:
> > John L Fjellstad <john-debian@fjellstad.org> writes:
> >
> >> I was wondering if Linux can be considered Unix?
For me the term "Unix" can mean three different things. First there
was the "original Unix" system from AT&T and all the systems that evolved
from it by modifying and extending the original source code. The second
meaning is that an operating system vendor is allowed to officially call
it's product "Unix" (as a trademark) by having passed a certification
program of the Open Group. The third and most commonly used meaning
specifies an operating system that works mostly like... hum... UNIX! :)
I mean, a multitasking multiuser kernel with init, gettys, shells, all
the basic file- and text-utilities etc. And of course the system
programming interface! I use the term "Unix" when it doesn't matter
wheter it's FreeBSD, GNU/Linux, Solaris etc. In this respect GNU/Linux
can be considered Unix in sense three but not in sense one and two.
> I'm just thinking of the statement, GNU's Not Unix.
This is a pun because in fact it *is* Unix (sense three) but they're
not allowed to call it Unix. It's probably intended to emphasize
the difference in it's free'ness to other Unices too.
> Does that mean that GNU/Linux is a OS with unix like functionality,
> kinda like Windows with Service For Unix, or OS/2 with its POSIX layer,
> or is GNU/Linux an unix.
I would consider GNU/Linux an Unix but definitely not Windows with SFU
because the latter provides the API and utitilities only on top of a
completely different operating system. I don't know OS/2 though.
Regards
Matthias
Reply to: