OSNews:

pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (areimann) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:29:00 GMT

pointless, but cool and i'm sure it was fun to do.

OMG

donotreply@osnews.com (judgen) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:29:00 GMT

This is the year of linux 0.01 on the desktop! hehe

Cool

donotreply@osnews.com (Bleistift) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:32:00 GMT

I'd say this qualifies as "geeky". Gonna try it out on qemu now

RE: Cool

donotreply@osnews.com (Bleistift) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:49:00 GMT

Works quite nice. And hardcore linuxer will say they don't miss any features in linux 0.01 lol.

Cheers.

RE: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:05:00 GMT

pointless, but cool and i'm sure it was fun to do.

I smell forkage!

RE: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (Sodki) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:32:00 GMT

I agree, porting Vim is pointless when we have Emacs.

Pics

donotreply@osnews.com (odnomzagi) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:34:00 GMT

Pictures:

http://digg.com/linux_unix/Retro_booting_Linux_kernel_0_01_on_moder... Edited 2008-01-07 20:34

Interesting

donotreply@osnews.com (CaptainPinko) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:36:00 GMT

but I'd be more interested in someone porting Linux to be 100% C99 compliant. Perhaps this could be a first step.

RE: Interesting

donotreply@osnews.com (SomeGuy) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:07:00 GMT

How about a C99 compiler existing first? Currently, I don't think there *are* any 100% C99 compliant compilers. Certainly none of the mainstream ones are (MSVC is still C89. GCC has partial support, and so on)

RE[2]: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (diegoviola) — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:19:00 GMT

Vim > Emacs

RE[3]: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (sorpigal) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:08:00 GMT

Vim < Emacs

There, fixed it for ya.

This reminds me ...

donotreply@osnews.com (WorknMan) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:57:00 GMT

Of the guy who turned his Gameboy Advance into a web server. Some people have entirely too much free time.

RE[2]: Interesting

donotreply@osnews.com (binarycrusader) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:18:00 GMT

Actually, Sun Studio is 100% C99 compliant. It's also "free" (as in beer). It is available for GNU/Linux and Solaris platforms:

http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/documentation/ss12/mr/READMEs/c... Edited 2008-01-08 01:19 UTC

RE[4]: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (dizzey) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:27:00 GMT

vim < emacs migth add up since less is more

RE[2]: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (ormandj) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:56:00 GMT

I agree, porting Vim is pointless when we have Emacs.

Not all people have 9^8402740 years to spend porting an OS to another OS. (???)

Slow day? Not been to Kerneltrap lately?

donotreply@osnews.com (tyrione) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 02:59:00 GMT

I bet both.

RE[4]: pointless

donotreply@osnews.com (m_abs) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:09:00 GMT

No you introducted a new bug

RE[3]: Interesting

donotreply@osnews.com (SomeGuy) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:09:00 GMT

Actually, no. There are still a number of changes to the system headers that have to be made in order for their compiler to be C99 compliant. From their manuals:

"Note - Though the compiler defaults to supporting the features of C99 listed below, standard headers provided by Solaris software in /usr/include do not yet conform with the 1999 ISO/IEC C standard. If error messages are encountered, try using -xc99=%none to obtain the 1990 ISO/IEC C standard behavior for these headers."

This is more or less the same situation that GCC is in. The C99 syntax changes are complete, more or less, but the headers and library functions are still not ready.

MS, of course, isn't even trying to move past C89.

Vim > Emacs

donotreply@osnews.com (Kebabbert) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:02:00 GMT

Unix philosophy is having smaller well defined programs doing one thing well, interact. VI/Vim is small and have a beatiful and elegant editing model.

Emacs is large and monolithic. An operating system with an editor attached to it. It fits more into the paradigm of Microsoft; that of large monolithic programs that can do everything.

Hence, VI/Vim > emacs. ;o)

RE: Vim > Emacs

donotreply@osnews.com (DoctorPepper) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 10:52:00 GMT

Agreed, and another thing: some of us don't have a choice in the matter. I work with hundreds (seriously!) of Sun boxes on a daily basis, and vi is what we have. Not even Vim (bummer), and definitely no Emacs.

For me, and lots of others, you learn to use the editor you have access to. I can always apply my mad Vim skillz to vi (well, some of them) and vice-versa. Emacs doesn't even fit into the equation.

RE[4]: Interesting

donotreply@osnews.com (binarycrusader) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:16:00 GMT

If you read the link again, you will note that it has *full compliance* with the standard.

However, the catch is that system headers supplied with Solaris are not

So, actually, yes.

The other difference is that gcc is NOT in the same situation. If you look at the gcc c99 status page, you will note that some c99 features are still broken or missing whereas Sun claims *full* compliance with c99.

Priceless

donotreply@osnews.com (gustl) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:19:00 GMT

Windows Vista on a P III 200MHz Machine - $250
HPUX on a Superdome - $20000
Linux 0.01 on a 2GHz PC - priceless!

RE: Vim > Emacs

donotreply@osnews.com (yiyus) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:47:00 GMT

all you should learn to use ed and stop this terrible war . sam is the only other option.

RE[2]: Vim > Emacs

donotreply@osnews.com (MatzeB) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:37:00 GMT

Hurray! I thought this clasic flamewar was nearly extinct these days. These Gnome vs. KDE, Ubuntu vs. Gentoo, GPL vs. BSD flamewars just aren't the same... since everyone knows that Gnome, Gentoo and GPL are the best ;-)

RE[2]: Interesting

donotreply@osnews.com (CaptainPinko) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:32:00 GMT

I think you could have a 100% compliant C99 Linux before you have a a 100% compliant C99 compiler because Linux does not use every possible aspect of C99. As long as it used a supported subset everything would be fine... and the GNU extensions would be gone.

RE[2]: Vim > Emacs

donotreply@osnews.com (Rugxulo) — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:57:00 GMT

all you should learn to use ed and stop this terrible war . sam is the only other option.

The only people who seem to advocate that are BSDers. Granted, that's fine if you prefer it (or really hate command mode), but most other people seem to prefer Vim (or XEmacs or whatever).

I also like TDE, XVI, VILE, JED, FTE, FED, MINED, and others, though. (Heh, lots of options.) :-)