Moinak Ghosh wrote: >> >> Why not rm -rf xenix_od ? The GNU od is pretty good. > > It is easy to replace OpenSolaris userland utilities with GNU > coreutils/binutils however > we need to consider the implications. One of the driving principiles > of Solaris and now > OpenSolaris has been strict compliance to standards like, SVR4, SVID > (System V > Interface Definition), POSIX, SUSv3 (Single Unix Specification). > Unfortunately GNU > utilities do not always adhere to these standards and are not fully > compatible with their > UNIX counterparts. > I am not very clear on these Standards compliance issues. AFAIK, these are issues to be complied by the C libraries rather than the individual pieces which go into the numerous core utilities of *nix. As regards core C libraries are concerned, the GNU has been quite meticulous. It follows all relevant standards (ISO C 99, POSIX.1c, POSIX.1j, POSIX.1d, Unix98, Single Unix Specification). It is also internationalized and has one of the most complete internationalization interfaces known. It is definitely 100% compliant with POSIX and ISO C (and also supports features of other popular Unix variants (including BSD and System V)) when these do not conflict with the standards stated earlier.
> One of the aims of BeleniX is to retain as much compatibility with > Solaris as possible > while still coming up with new innovations. This is quite possible. > However simply > replacing OpenSolaris utilities with GNU stuff will break binary > compatibility with Solaris. If you use gcc, and specially glibc, 100% compatibility with pure Solaris binaries may stand broken, whether you like it or not. The compatbility is to be built at more core levels than userland utils and apps ... > > There was a long discussion on the OpenSolaris discussion list about > the various distros > and the need to have binary compatibility between them. When Linux > started evolving > such standards did not exist for Linux and the existing UNIX > standards were not fully > followed which led to the proliferation of incompatible Linux > distros. The Linux Standard > Base is a recent effort in the right direction but few distros > comply to it as yet. > Distros is NOT Linux. I am a Linux user for a decade, and as of now, I am on LFS with everything compiled from scratch. Freedom from all distros, and everything runs, no conflicts ... Distros is a different issue altogether. These are merely compilations of user space software on distro preferred init systems and layout. The issues at conflict here boils down to where binaries are installed, and which libraries are installed. This accounts for binary software incompatibility between distros, which is by design, not default ! In any case, how inconvenient is this ? This is a non-issue for most people, except for folk who want to market binary-only software, and want them to run everywhere. I strongly feel that there is NO need for 'standardisation' out here, which essentially caters for closed-source interests. Sources, if distributed can be compiled to run from anywhere. If standardisation at user level is enforced, the essense of freedom would be lost. "Your box, your rules". Does it really matter if firefox or KDE runs from /opt or /usr ? Nothing breaks really at these levels. Proponents of this uniformity is somewhat in line with the Henry Ford school of thought: "You can paint it (Ford car) any colour you like, as long as it is black!" The issues are much lower down. Not at the level of user space. > Since OpenSolaris already has a well defined Filesystem Hierarchy > and well defined > Interface Specifications lets not break things. It is entirely > acceptable to enhance utilities > with non-standard extensions - Solaris does so and hey it is your > value proposition that > sets you apart. But breaking compliance with the base standard is > not the right direction > to go. I suppose for Solaris, which has its own established practices, there is a need for the system to be preserved. But these in no way would this be affected by core utils which populate /bin or /sbin. FSH and IS is a much later step after sorting out the levels of fundamental compatibility issues of 'open, malloc, printf, exit' and a host of other things which POSIX and ISO address ... it is not switches or extensions to utilities which are hurdles. Extras can always be trimmed (if felt redundant or non-confomant). > > Having said all this I really like the enhancements in GNU > utilities, the long options and the > extensive built-in help. For many cases the manpage is not required > at all. So that is where > the OpenSolaris utilites can be enhanced. > > And for the closed source stuff they are few and most can be easily > implemented while > adhering to the specifications in the manpage. These are: > > kill, alias, bg, cd, od, pax, read, sed, tail, test, type, ulimit, > wait, tr, unalias, umask, printf, > jobs > Of this list 'sed' is the only major issue if GNU stuff is to be used. If sed is affected so would 'awk' (gawk). These would need major re-writes. I do feel, that the rest can be used as they are with 'unwanted' sections commented during compilation. Bish
