The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: pepe@naleco.com (Josh Good)
Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"?
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:51:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170313215157.GK27536@naleco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net>

On 2017 Mar 13, 21:06, Michael-John Turner wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:04:12PM +0100, Josh Good wrote:
> >And I quote: "EulerOS 2.0 for the x86-64 architecture were certified as
> >UNIX 03 compliant. The UNIX 03 conformance statement shows that the
> >standard C compiler is from the GNU Compiler Collection (gcc), and that
> >the system is a Linux distribution of the Red Hat family."
> 
> Inspur K-UX is similar - a Chinese repackaging of RHEL.
> 
> Interestingly, it seems that Red Hat have not gone down the certification 
> route themselves - perhaps they don't see any value in it?

I've wondered about that too. The cost of doing the certification tests
themselves --not including the engineering time to prepare the tests--
probably is about US$ 100,000 so Red Hat should be able to afford it.

My theory is that Red Hat sees more value in *not* passing the UNIX
certification tests. As if thus Red Hat was stating: "Linux is the
new standard, and Red Hat makes it happen. Anything else out there,
is just legacy."

And truth be told, probably most (all?) of the "certified UNIX" systems
on the list have some "Linux compatibility" layer of some kind built
into them. So compatibility with whom is the compatibility that matters?

-- 
Josh Good



  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-03-13 21:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-12 15:04 Josh Good
2017-03-13 10:15 ` Joerg Schilling
2017-03-14 13:58   ` Nemo
2017-03-14 14:14     ` Joerg Schilling
2017-03-14 23:27       ` Josh Good
2017-03-15 11:11         ` Joerg Schilling
2017-03-15 13:42           ` Random832
2017-03-15 14:14             ` Joerg Schilling
2017-03-15 15:16               ` Random832
2017-03-13 21:06 ` Michael-John Turner
2017-03-13 21:35   ` Clem Cole
2017-03-14 10:20     ` Joerg Schilling
2017-03-14 11:35     ` Tim Bradshaw
2017-03-13 21:51   ` Josh Good [this message]
2017-03-14  0:11     ` Wesley Parish
2017-03-13 22:30   ` Arthur Krewat

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170313215157.GK27536@naleco.com \
    --to=pepe@naleco.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).