3 ms·
> Further, the applications themselves were portable between POSIX implementations. It appears you may be new to this whole "Unix" thing. Application source po
by cbd1984 12y ago
> Further, the applications themselves were portable between POSIX implementations.
It appears you may be new to this whole "Unix" thing. Application source portability was never absolute, not by a long shot, back when Sun and SGI and HP were still relevant to what Unix was. They all had value-add APIs, little different ways of doing things which were deliberately different from everyone else's to encourage lock-in. And even disregarding that, the BSD/SysV split was even stronger then than it is now, with heterodox APIs like STREAMS still in use.
Linux and the Open Source BSDs are still different, but the standards are better-followed and the auto-configuration tools are better.
- anonbanker 12y ago> It appears you may be new to this whole "Unix" thing. I understand that you're doing this out of malice, and are using "reflection" in order to make yourself feel superior, and to take me down a peg, but I do regret using that sentence in the GP. The rest of the post was completely accurate, and that sentence diminished it. However, I'll have to disagree with the rest of your reply; The BSD/SysV split, while large, is fairly comparable to what's going on today with systemd. Poettering has made his contempt for *BSD very clear multiple times, and is actively trying to extinguish compatibility with it. GNOME needs massive work to play nice with any BSD now, thanks to Lennart. Porting between SunOS/IRIX/HP-UX was far less work than GNOME now requires.