Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- raya's research on "The Four Freedoms"

[David Kastrup]

Stefaan A Eeckels <hoendech@ecc.lu> writes:

> On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 17:23:50 +0200
> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Well, I am the author of a CP/M 2.2 BIOS that has seen some
>> moderate distribution, and I don't remember ever coming across
>> either the term "kernel" or "nucleus" in connection with CP/M.
>
> For which machine? 

Nascom II, Z80 4MHz machine.

>> It would actually appear to me to be pretty preposterous, since
>> CP/M does not manage any system _resource_ worth mentioning.  It
>> provides access to the devices, but it does not manage memory,
>> processing power, access, or even file ids (the caller has to
>> allocate FCBs, the internal control structures for files, by
>> itself, and pass the pointers into CP/M).  There is no heap, no
>> kernel thread, not even a system stack IIRC (though the CCP calls
>> applications from its own stack, and if the application _returns_
>> instead of calling the exit BDOS function, the CCP assumes that it
>> has not been overwritten by the application and continues).
>
> CP/M doesn't have the concept of a "process" either, or security, or
> many of the basic functions we expect of an OS today. But it would
> be churlish not to call it an operating system.

Sigh.  Focus.  Right now we were talking about the words
"kernel"/"nucleus", not the word "operating system".

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum