"Noah Slater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Uh, no. The POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) specification >> specifies at several levels what comprises a UNIX-like API. > > Thanks, I am aware of this. I think it a reasonable enough thing for > me to suggest that when we have a specification that outlines an > operating interface it can be taken to point to what is expected from > an operating system.
> Given that you accept that statement it's not unreasonable to state > that POSIX lays out the definition of what it means to be a *certain > type* of operating system, namely a POSIX one. 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". -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
