[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Free system that could be "real Unix".

From: mike3
Subject: Re: Free system that could be "real Unix".
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:00:08 -0700
User-agent: G2/1.0

On Oct 14, 8:06 pm, Christopher Browne <> wrote:
> After takin a swig o' Arrakan spice grog, mike3 <> belched 
> out:
> > Well the thing I was asking more about was making a system
> > that would be "real Unix" in the sense that it would be *capable
> > of passing* such evaluations -- so it would be "real Unix" in all
> > but the legal sense (ie. what you can market it as) (unless of
> > course all the money needed to get certification was paid.).
> I *think* that STREAMS would need to be added in order to pass the
> official tests.  That might no longer be true, but I think it was, at
> one time...

Well, I could not check the recent SUS (Single UNIX Specification),
since to get a copy would cost $250 (!). I don't have that kind of
money on hand yet to blow on it.

> >> The biggest *change,* as far as I was last aware, that would be needed
> >> would be to introduce the STREAMS abstraction, which both BSD and
> >> Linux folk have generally eshewed.
> > What was so bad about it, anyway, that they didn't like it?
> There was an implementation:
>   <>
> It was discussed back in 1997:
> <>
> A cogent response was this one from Larry McVoy:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> : Now that there is a GPL'ed STREAMS package available (albeit for
> : 2.0.29) which is being actively maintained, isn't it time for STREAMS to
> : be integrated into the base system? I seem to remember Linus objecting
> : to this but can remember why - heck, if it is just a compile time
> : option, or even better a loadable module why should Linux be deprived of
> : such a nice framework?
> While I don't want to start another flame war, please understand that
> it is the widely held opinion of people who have used STREAMS that it
> is not a nice framework. It is complicated and slow and there are no
> really high performance networking stacks that use STREAMS. Sun tried
> and has gone back to sockets. Even Ritchie, the streams (streams !=
> STREAMS) inventor hates STREAMS.
> Sockets is a fine architecture. Learn it. Use it. Live free and prosper.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm. Could this mean then that perhaps it is _better_ that the
Free systems are not "real Unix" in the sense of 100% compliance
with the SUS? Then what is all this stuff about "Real Unix = power",

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]