Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - the Linux of Databases...
От | teunis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - the Linux of Databases... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.3.96.980303155550.498B-100000@sigil.computersupportcentre.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - the Linux of Databases... (Andrew Martin <martin@biochemistry.ucl.ac.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL - the Linux of Databases...
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Andrew Martin wrote: > Marc wrote... > > On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote: [clipa-clipa] > > that you can spark > > up just with a comment like "Linux != Unix"...which, it isn't, its a > > Unix-like clone...but they can't seem to figure the distinction *rofl* > > Agreed... :-) But BSD isn't Unix either - not officially. [Waits for > Marc to disagree, again...] Nope - I'm not even sure SCO Open Server is UNIX - and afaik THEY now own the trademark papers. Be VERY happy that neither Linux nor BSD is a "real" unix. Those systems are seriously restrictive and clumsy (I suspect SCO is close - sorry, I've had to do a lot of tech-service work on SCO systems recently. Not even Solaris is _THAT_ bad... (close though). Guess I just miss my GNU and BSD tools too much *grin*) if you were just to talk about programs, Linux is a superset of everything (except Irix at this time). If you were to talk about networking, BSD is the standard that Linux follows. Who wants STREAMS anyways? If you're talking API interface (and here's where I bate non-glibc users), GLIBC-2 is the standard for Unix98+. (I still don't see why postgres doesn't support it... though I haven't gotten around to writing a patch (or looking recently)...). > Not to mention the fact that at least one release of Linux did go through > full Posix certification and is thus allowed to be called Unix :-) *heh* Just being a nard... G'day, eh? :) - Teunis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: