[Gllug] Re:SCO's Linux fight

[Nix]

On Fri, 30 May 2003, Christopher Hunter uttered the following:
> It's amusing to note that they didn't try taking on Microshaft - much of the 
> guts of NT4 was an almost direct lift from UNIX

That's a very strange claim. The inside of NT is not remotely Unixlike
(well, except for the POSIX subsystem of course, and even that is only
Unixlike on the surface).

It has more similarities to VMS than to Unix from an architectural and
design-decisions POV, and not all that terribly many to either.

>                                                  - the bits that weren't were 
> cobbled together in a variety of languages (which goes a long way to 
> explaining all the M$ OS's lack of stability).

I can't see how using many languages implies instability. A running
Linux box likely has critical components written in C, C++, Perl, M4,
awk, Python, and at least one Lisp-like `little language' (RTL); at the
very least, while building it would have used things written in all of
these.

Little languages that fit the job well are a *good* thing, not some kind
of sign of failure and fragmentation.

-- 
`It is an unfortunate coincidence that the date locarchive.h was
 written (in hex) matches Ritchie's birthday (in octal).'
               -- Roland McGrath on the libc-alpha list


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug