From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3e2839f528cc1c40 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Charles Hixson Subject: Re: Project: FreeOS Date: 2000/01/18 Message-ID: <3884B021.239D0BC0@earthlink.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 574318399 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <387C8CB3.1276637F@icn.siemens.de> <85j75o$ofk$1@news08.btx.dtag.de> <387F0B20.2FC5F945@icn.siemens.de> <2000Jan14.120633.1@eisner> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-ELN-Date: Tue Jan 18 10:25:27 2000 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 948219927 198.94.156.19 (Tue, 18 Jan 2000 10:25:27 PST) Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 10:25:27 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-01-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article , Preben Randhol writes: > > /* snip */ > If you provide Linux compatibility you are bound by the legacy Unix > behavior, defeating the purpose of a "new" operating system. > > Certainly providing useful programs on existing operating systems is > better. Providing useful programs on existing OS's is desireable, but different folk are interested in different things. Also, what limits does providing Linux compatibility impose? One could, if one desired, restrict the compatibility to running in a subshell of the OS rather as MSDos runs within Win95 (but possibly with better isolation). I suppose that this might result in an OS that was larger than otherwise needed, but then most of the requirements of Linux would need to be met by any other OS also, so it might not add that much.