On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Uh no. POSIX does not lay out what it means to be a "type of operating > system". It lays out what _interfaces_ must be there for certain > degrees of POSIX compliancy. It does not require the embodiment of > those interfaces to run under the name "operating system".
I consider that to be a good enough definition of "operating system" -- Noah Slater <http://bytesexual.org/> "Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results." - R. Stallman _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
