From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: pepe@naleco.com (Josh Good)
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:51:57 +0100
Subject: [TUHS] Does this mean Linux is now "officially branded UNIX"?
In-Reply-To: <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net>
References: <20170312150410.GH27536@naleco.com>
 <20170313210650.umhrdqxzxtkvvczf@tesla.turnde.net>
Message-ID: <20170313215157.GK27536@naleco.com>

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