On Jan 30, 2010, at 1:35 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > All I meant, originally, by poking fun at OSX as a "unix" was this: > > People go around saying OSX is Unix because it runs a Netbsd kernel. When > you're a unix or linux admin, new to OSX, people assume, "Well, it's a unix. > You must already know how to use it, at least to the level that all unixes > have in common." But this is way false. Your past knowledge of other > unixes will help you just as much as your past knowledge of windows systems, > when it comes to OSX. > > In my opinion, running the netbsd kernel doesn't make OSX much more > unix-like, than running the VMS kernel makes Windows NT vms-like. They're > wholly separate beasts, with almost no connection to the platform from > whence it originally derived. >
XNU is not unix ;-), and it certainly isn't NetBSD. It uses more FreeBSD code than anything, esp. since Jordan Hubbard came on board. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XNU http://osxbook.com/book/bonus/ancient/whatismacosx//arch_xnu.html managing the userland of any unix is fraught with learning the local dialect. Judging from your list of complaints, I'm going to guess that you played with OS X in the 10.2/10.3 time frame, didn't install the BSD subsystem package the first time through, tried to upgrade to perl5.8 from CPAN and hit the case-insensitivity problem and have dogged it ever since. I urge you to take another look. It is different and they definitely give little thought to the whims and desires unix system administrators, but the environment continues to improve. _______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
