Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 11:33:49 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Das Devaraj <das@netcom.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is FreeBSD UNIX? Message-ID: <19980116113349.19517@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9801151337.A21235-0100000@netcom18>; from Das Devaraj on Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 01:44:02PM -0800 References: <Pine.3.89.9801151337.A21235-0100000@netcom18>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 01:44:02PM -0800, Das Devaraj wrote: > (This is _reluctantly_ sent to freeBSD-isp also, in case the > commercial folks - ISPs - see it in a different light). I've taken them off again. Maybe they will, but I don't see how they can. > Can I _legally_ claim that my box running FreeBSD is UNIX? No. > Or should it phrased that the OS is a _UNIX clone_. No. It's not a clone. It's a UNIX derivative and contains much of the same source code that runs in UNIX System V. > Note that this has nothing to do with the actual power of FreeBSD. > What happened after the UNIX name was bought from AT&T by Novell (is > it public domain now?) UNIX is currently a registered trade mark of The Open Group. See http://www.rdg.opengroup.org/public/tech/unix/trademark.html for more details. > Also is there a minimum set of functionality that needs to be > supported before something is considered UNIX or even a UNIX clone? > Have heard terms like UNIX 95, X/Open branding etc. tossed around. Correct. There are such names, and they have some minimum (they must be *very* minimum) requirements, but I don't know what they are. IMO, there are three reasons why FreeBSD hasn't applied for this kind of branding: 1. It's all hype (see below) 2. It costs a lot of money. 3. There are probably some minor areas where FreeBSD would not comply, and where the FreeBSD team considers non-compliance to be superior. Those of you who have been around UNIX for a while will know that all through the 80's, 4.xBSD was the leading edge of UNIX development, and that *all* current UNIX implementations (which effectively means System V) contain large parts of almost unchanged BSD code. With this background, which of these systems may *not* be called UNIX 95? UNIX System V 4.4BSD Microsoft NT IBM OS/390 (formerly MVS) The answer is: 4.4BSD. The suits have disowned the very version of UNIX which made it what it is today. Since they also allowed such obviously non-UNIX systems as NT and OS/390 to be called UNIX, I don't think any of us care too much. Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980116113349.19517>