Linked by Eugenia Loli-Queru on Tue 8th Jul 2003 18:00 UTC
Today we host an interview with Christophe de Dinechin, Software Architect in HP-UX (Software business unit, Infrastructure Solutions). Most of you already know HP-UX, the leading "traditional" UNIX today feature-wise (second only to Solaris in Unix market-share, mostly competing with AIX). With Christophe we discuss HP-UX's competition, the other... 5 OSes HP supports with its various products, the Itanium platform and more.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
<EM> He keeps referring to *ALL* open source *nix clones as "GNUs"
Sorry dude, only Linux and HURD should be called that name.
The BSDs are an entirely different beast all together.
(And GNU zealots, please don't start with the "*BSD wouldn't be anywhere without GCC" bull-crap)</EM>
I respectfully disagree, but I admit that my choice of nomenclature is largely a matter of personal preference.
Stallman's point about saying "GNU/Linux" is that the GNU movement was started to create a free Unix clone, and that this included both the applications and the kernel. Today, on any free OS, including BSD, you find mostly the same (user-space) stuff, and a lot of it can be attributed to GNU origin. Apple ships tons of GNU tools with their BSD-based MacOSX. Only the kernel really differs. The rest is (according to gnu.org) about 30% GNU, and 70% the rest, including the kernel. In all cases, on a typical system, GNU in general represents the most important single contribution (even more so if ranked by usefulness rather than by line of codes, IMHO).
In that respect, I see really no difference between BSD and Linux. This is the reason I disagree with your comment. BSD may have had self-standing implementations with zero GNU contribution. But today, any BSD system needs GNU stuff to be really usable. I probably wouldn't use OSX much without bash, gmake, gnu tar, gzip, gcc or emacs!
By the way, I don't really like calling Linux systems "GNU/Linux", simply because it's long in the mouth. And it sounds petty, if you ask me. On the other hand, I think that the GNU project deserves some recognition. Calling all "freedom-compatible" systems with a large GNU genom "the GNUs" seems like a good way to remind people of the GNU contribution. And it's short, and it sounds good.
But, again, that's just me.