The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011)

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by umanwizard on Thursday June 09, 2016 @01:13AM (#11867680)

Yeah, it's mind-blowing that a guy who refers to himself as a "UNIX Historian" doesn't mention Stallman even once.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by cperciva on Thursday June 09, 2016 @01:19AM (#11867694)

Maybe because GNU's, uhh, Not Unix?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by umanwizard on Thursday June 09, 2016 @02:43AM (#11867927)

Well, the author claims that Linus Torvalds single-handedly created an operating system; which simply isn't true, regardless of whether GNU is Unix.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by olalonde on Thursday June 09, 2016 @03:18AM (#11868019)

Didn't Linus develop the first versions of the Linux kernel by himself?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by creshal on Thursday June 09, 2016 @03:24AM (#11868038)

A kernel does not make an operating system, you need an userland for it to be useful.

And that was GNU.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by olalonde on Thursday June 09, 2016 @03:48AM (#11868111)

Ah ok, I see what you mean. I've always thought of "operating system" as the kernel itself (and some set of user land tools as a "distribution") but I can see how it could be interpreted differently.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by umanwizard on Thursday June 09, 2016 @03:50AM (#11868118)

I mean, what counts as the "operating system" is not the point here. It's that, whatever "UNIX" is (operating system, distribution, or whatever you want to call it), is more than just the kernel, and can't meaningfully be said to be replicated by Linux without mentioning GNU.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by mikekchar on Thursday June 09, 2016 @05:06AM (#11868286)

I have found the easiest way for people to understand it is: Android runs a Linux kernel. The systems we often call "Linux" systems are really Linux + GNU + X to get to the same kind of place.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by the_why_of_y on Thursday June 09, 2016 @02:22PM (#11871278)

That is an interpretation at odds with UNIX history, and basically only applicable to Linux, which is the exception to the rule. I suggest reading this article, it's written for FreeBSD but applies very similarly to Solaris etc.

https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/03

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by gohrt on Thursday June 09, 2016 @01:55AM (#11867789)

Linux Isn't No UniX either.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by ploxiln on Thursday June 09, 2016 @01:44AM (#11867749)

wink wink, nudge nudge ... say no more!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by cyphar on Thursday June 09, 2016 @02:12AM (#11867833)

Which is why I personally use the term GNU/Linux. Not because the only other component in the system is GNU, but because it preserves the history of the system. It doesn't help than Linus calls his kernel an operating system.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by renox on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:10AM (#11868822)

Citation please? I don't remember Linus calling the kernel an operating system.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Strange Birth and Long Life of Unix (2011) by cyphar on Thursday June 09, 2016 @08:51AM (#11868997)

The first line of his 1991 announcement comes to mind. He has called it an operating system more recently, but I can't find a link right now.

> I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.

[ Parent | on HN ]