Exactly Why We Are No Longer UNIX-ish

Submitted by srlinuxx on Sat, 11/28/2009 - 12:19

When we say that Linux is UNIX-like, what are we saying? At my college, we have a course that is named 'an introduction to UNIX using Linux'. All over I hear people use the phrase 'UNIX/Linux' when referring to UNIX-style systems. It is somewhat hilarious to me, as Linux and the surrounding community have, for the most part, left the UNIX philosophy behind. The UNIX philosophy goes as follows:


Make each program do one thing well. To do a new job, build afresh rather than complicate old programs by adding new features.

Expect the output of every program to become the input to another, as yet unknown, program. Don't clutter output with extraneous information. Avoid stringently columnar or binary input formats. Don't insist on interactive input.

Rest Here


»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If only dotnet packets are bundled in Posix packets ? Unix' king

Submitted by atang1 on Sun, 11/29/2009 - 04:22.

If we think of SYSV and BSD commands; Linux is Unix. Toolkits are used in Unix; such as KDE and Opera(both QTx based) for Unix operating system.

So, for the new data centers done by telcos with IBM370 type of mainframe computer architecture; Unix is desired to have new posix packet converters to package dotnet packets(separating history files or links to new files or links) and subdivided to fit ISP servers and their duty cycles in favour of synchronization in data transmission.

Packet switching is more ideal than file switching of GNU system for large data centers. Linux is still GNU file switching(missing bindings and blacklisted symlinks), has yet to move into packet switching big time.