Slashdot Mirror
Is Mac OS X real UNIX®?
Adam Attarian writes "And do we really need to answer the question? Apparently so, because OSOpinion asked, and they got an answer. It's not a surprising answer, is Mac OS X's 'UNIX' core is Darwin, which is based on NeXT Step, which is based on some wacky derivitive of BSD, which in itself isn't a registered UNIX system (nor is Linux). Even with this, I'm not sure I know too many people who would directly compare Linux/BSD with standard UNIX Systems like Irix, Solaris, etc. The article is short and sweet, and provides some good links."
Why don't you just cut the BS and post a story like this: "Please Start A Flame War Here. It can involve Linux vs. BSD vs. Unix, Free Software vs. Commercial Software, Apple vs. Everyone Else, Open Standards vs. Closed Standards vs. No Standards, or pretty much any other subject you want to argue about. Let the games begin."
Do we need to set up a site which compares Unix variants? A little 1 to 10 rating scale where people can decide if FreeBSD is a Unix, or if OSX is not a Unix?
[
NT and Win2k have fork, exec, and exit, all via the POSIX subsystem. Does that make it UNIX ?
(aside: the POSIX subsystem as shipped is all but useless (mostly because if if its a posix app it cant make win32 calls))
You can run apache on W2k out of the box. Does that make it unix ?
You can write scripts in NT. You can compile gcc for NT. You can use gcc to compile other code.
Does that make it unix ?
(heres where i get modded to "troll")
Its amusing that LINUX die hards give a damn about judging some other OSes "unixness" - linux makes some deviations of its own. It's own IP stack, it's own notion of userspace threading (has that been worked out yet ?), its own version of VFS, etc etc.
Each UNIX is different enough that portability for a non-trivial app takes a competant C programmer. People that think autoconf is a solves-all should be gut from throat to anus (or should have to compile your average "pengiun pimp powered" GTK app on an IRIX box with MIPS compilers)
One of NTs design requirements was that it is POSIX compliant. They put enough of a posix subsystem in there to meet the spec, which allowed them to have NT compete for certain contracts. Good luck trying to make anything unixy work on the NT posix subsystem without SFU or standing on the shoulders of cygwin.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/unix/
It's a *GREAT* resource for finding out what came from what and when.
Hrm, I only see the word "Apple". It doesn't say which Unix based Apple OS they are refering to. Remember, Apple has made more than one "Unix". Namely, but not limited to: Mac OSX Server (Rhapsody), Darwin OS, Mac OS X, mkLinux and A/UX
--
that comment getting +5 scares me.
UNIX POSIX are NOT just labels. How do you think the developers of GNU proogie got it to work on so many UNIX systems. Do you think there are a team of programmers for each OS? Or more than likely just one or two people who do the minimal patch required to get the program to compile on the "secondary" platforms.
Using POSIX or UNIX standard, programs can be written to run on a variety of platforms. These standards ARE necessary.
You can choose not to care about these acronyms because the GNU proogie developers, using UNIX and POSIX standards, have already done the caring for you.
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
osOpinion has just posted an update to their story. Now stating that OS X has achieved UNIX certification. Appearently Open Group has updated their list of UNIX approved OS's. score 1 for apple
Shouldn't You expect more from your DJ?