Re:Posix Abstractions in Modern Operating Systems: The Old, ...
by gaius on Sunday May 08, 2016 @07:20AM
(#11653561)
It's not really proof of that tho', it's proof that they see advantages in less portability between Unix variants, which is not entirely the same thing. There's nothing in it for Red Hat or Canonical shareholders if you decide to run FreeBSD instead, so why would they support the standard?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Posix Abstractions in Modern Operating Systems: The Old, ...
by ZenoArrow on Sunday May 08, 2016 @12:00PM
(#11654523)
Red Hat and Canonical rely on third party software to boost their software ecosystem, that's why it's in their interest to support POSIX standards.
Re:Posix Abstractions in Modern Operating Systems: The Old, ...
by gaius on Sunday May 08, 2016 @01:54PM
(#11654930)
Yes and no. They both have the resources (money, engineers) to do alot in-house, and the market share that vendors will support them specifically. They can't not do this, they are under the same commercial pressure as other OS vendors.
If you want proof, just look at the systemd fiasco. Red Hat's way or the highway.
Re:Posix Abstractions in Modern Operating Systems: The Old, ...
by majewsky on Sunday May 08, 2016 @02:22PM
(#11655067)
> If you want proof, just look at the systemd fiasco. Red Hat's way or the highway.
What kind of proof is this? systemd is the new standard across all major distros (except for stuff like Gentoo or Slackware, which is irrelevant in the targeted enterprise market anyway). And in the process, systemd steam-rolled over lots and lots of bizarre inconsistencies between distros.
If that's Red Hat's version of EEE, I'm very happy with it.