15 Mar
2017
15 Mar
'17
1:48 a.m.
So what I'm hearing is Linux's timeline, which includes things that were
not developed just for Linux, extends further out than SunOS does.
Again, I'm including everything ... You could make a case for certain
Unixes that do not include a pre-existing C compiler being bounded by
their own development (or any other operating system that needs a
precursor). For example, say there was an operating system that used a
C compiler to build itself that was developed 10 years before. That
example operating system's timeline would have to include said C
compiler IMHO.
On the other hand, an operating system who's sole method of creation was
engineered in year 0, and was "developed" for 10 years and ended, we
could say that OS's timeline was a solid 10 years.
All I'm saying is comparing Linux's timeline to something like SunOS has
to include everything that went into both because they both relied on
precursors.
Side note: I'm a bit of a bitch when it comes to Linux - which doesn't
mean I don't think Linux is "UNIX" - it just means I think it's the
Coherent of today's UNIX ;)
On 3/14/2017 2:20 PM, Clem Cole wrote:
That's not really fair. The compiler and the
utilities was developed
for UNIX long before the Linux kernel existed. This is why so many of
consider "Linux" just the current version of UNIX.
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Arthur Krewat <krewat(a)kilonet.net
<mailto:krewat@kilonet.net>> wrote:
Everything. I'm trying to grok how long Linux as a whole was in
active development. That includes all the GNU utilities, GCC,
everything.
Just like a "regular" corporate development environment would have
devoted to the cause :)
On 3/14/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Kjörling wrote:
On 14 Mar 2017 11:51 -0400, from krewat(a)kilonet.net
<mailto:krewat@kilonet.net> (Arthur Krewat):
in reality, how much of Linux was based on previous works?
Linux the kernel, or Linux the usable operating system (which
would
include at least the essential userspace parts)?