On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:34:28 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>>> Who said anything about the kernel? I'm talking about the entire Linux
>>> OS. (Most of which is actually GNU, if you want to be technical about
>>> it...)
>> 
>> So yes, be technical about it, then - I don't know of any Linux distro
>> that uses "standard" tools that aren't GNU, be it awk, sed, perl, bash,
>> etc.
> 
> Except that Unix /= Linux. There's also BSD and Solaris and random stuff
> like that... and autoconf works with all of them.

Yes, I'm aware - have used Solaris, BSD, and SYSV.  And autoconf is there 
to make sure what's there.

> "Windoze" is more or less one product line. Binaries work unmodified on
> most versions of it. (Assuming the features they use are there.) "Unix"
> is not one product. It's not even close to being one product. It's a
> vast stew of different products all bolted together in a giant mess.

An OS can be called a "UNIX System" only if it meets certain standards, 
as defined by The Open Group.  So right away, you're operating under a 
fallacy that you can compare UNIX to Windows - Windows is a product, UNIX 
is a set of standards that define the operation of a product.

Microsoft occasionally deigns it's OK to follow standards they didn't 
define - they use the BSD TCP/IP stack in most versions of Windows; they 
follow (to a greater or lesser extent) standards for web browsing 
software; they even have in the past (not sure about today) incorporated 
a POSIX-compliant subsystem.  They don't own any of these standards, but 
they use them.

>>> I have yet to experience "DLL Hell". I'm told it exists, and it's not
>>> fun, but I haven't seen it personally. (Don't ask me why...)
>> 
>> You've been lucky.
> 
> Let's hope it stays that way...

The longer you work in IT, the less likely it is to happen.

Jim

Post a reply to this message