*BSD News Article 66461


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!mv!news.missouri.edu!vortex.cc.missouri.edu!rhys
From: rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu (Justin "Rhys Thuryn" McNutt)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX)
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: 18 Apr 1996 17:09:09 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Columbia
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <4l5svl$1eam@news.missouri.edu>
References: <NELSON.96Apr15010553@ns.crynwr.com> <Pine.3.91.960417210610.23800C-100000@galactica.cs.odu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vortex.cc.missouri.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:21864 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:722 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3361 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3202 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17769 comp.os.linux.advocacy:46436

Ragnar (bowden@cs.odu.edu) wrote:
: On 15 Apr 1996, Russell Nelson wrote:

: > See?  Again and again you address technical issues.  Technical issues,
: > in general, don't matter.
: > 
: > But you didn't answer my question: what is wrong with Linux that you
: > cannot fix?

: Well, let's start with the fact that there are more linux distributions 
: than there are *bsd's...unified camp my ass.

Underneath, though, they're all the same Unix.  The different Linux 
distributions are akin to the various PC vendors.  One says "Dell", and 
another says "Zeos", but they're all x86-compatible PCs with an 
ISA/VLB/PCI bus, 3 1/2" disk drives, and IDE hard drives.  The main 
difference between the Linux distributions is the install procedure, 
package maintenance, and specific support progs installed.  They're all 
the same kernel (which *is* the OS), and I'll bet they have pretty 
similar binutils, etc.

: Next we move on to the fact 
: tha t linux is not UNIX, is not even an os, it's a kernel.

If the kernel isn't the OS, what is?  Here's DOS:

MSDOS.SYS
IO.SYS

Those are the kernel files.  That's the OS.

COMMAND.COM

That's the shell, similar to tcsh in function.  It's not the only shell.  
I use NDOS.COM.

The kernel IS the OS.  All else are just programs and libs that the OS USES.

: Then we move 
: into the GPL, where you can't use it in anything propriteary EVER

This is a good thing.  However, it's only limited to the kernel.  You can 
distribute proprietary Linux *software* if you want.  Netscape does it 
day in, day out.  They just distribute a statically linked binary under 
their own license.  If you're going to talk about the licensing, be 
careful to distinguish the kernel from the software.  The kernel is and 
probably always will be GPL'ed.  This is good.  That's all that's 
necessary.  You are perfectly free to use free software under Linux, or 
to purchase/sell/write/distribute non-GPL'ed software.  Look at DOS.  
There's free software, and there's commercial software.  Linux is the 
same way, except that in DOS, you pay for the kernel.  In Linux, it's
GPL'ed.

: and 
: you have to make the source available long after what you gave away is no 
: longer valid, and is most likely long obsolete

Just distribute the source with the OS on a CD.  No problem.  If you're 
really successful, have an FTP site, or have someone host one for you.  
This isn't really a drawback.

: From there we'll move 
: into security and stability, the majority of linux dists. lack both.  

Security issues are a Unix problem, not just a Linux problem.  The 
distributions do need a lot of work as far as security is concerned, but 
that doesn't make Linux different from, say, IRIX.  :)

Linux itself is quite stable, if you mean, "it won't crash my system."  
As far as whether or not Linux changes a lot, yes, it does, but you 
aren't required to use the latest and greatest kernel all the time.  Find 
one that works, and use it.

Besides, I can't think of a really stable desktop OS at all.  MS always 
releases a bunch of DOS "upgrades" that contain bug fixes (DOS 5.0 
excepted.  For DOS, 5.0 rocked!).  We won't even go into System 7.5.x.x.x 
or Windows!

: After that we move into portablilty...most of my sunos 4.1.x source 
: compiles happily in freebsd, netbsd, and openbsd...for linux, I have to 
: first make go in sloaris, and then attempt the linux almost sysv like 
: atmosphere...fuck it, I don't have time.  I have used linux, I am a 
: FreeBSD user and advocate...it outperforms any other os I have used in 
: terms of stability, portability, speed, and ease of install.

While that is a valid concern, I seem to have had far more luck than you 
in getting packages to compile in Linux.  What were you trying to install?

--------
If you can lead it to water and force it to drink, it isn't a horse.

Got a Linux problem?  Or can you help others solve them?  Visit the Linux 
Common Problems page at http://vortex.cc.missouri.edu/~rhys/linux.html

rhys@vortex.cc.missouri.edu