Andrew McLaren wrote:
Struth, cobber ... you must be joking.
Unix System Services is certified as a true Unix, as defined by the Open
Group (see http://www.unix.org)
Linux is a Unix-like operating system ... but so far, *no* Linux
distribution has passed Unix certification. No matter how much the zealots
might squeal, Linux is *not* Unix; not even close.
So, there's a big difference between Unix System Services on z/OS, and Linux
running in an LPAR: o One is Unix; the other is Linux.
In fact the most vitriolic anti-Linux rants I encounter come not from
Microsoft advocates, but from old Unix guys working on SGI and Solaris
systems.
Cheers
Andrew
Andrew,
You are technically correct, the practical considerations tell a
different story.
Consider the popular Unix implementations: Solaris, HP-UX and AIX.
The portability of applications and tools between Linux and these Unix
implementations is significantly better than with z/OS USS. There is
really no comparison.
I'm not saying that compliance with the Open Groups standards isn't
good, only that it is far from the whole story.
Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com
http://oss4zos.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
