Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 17 Jan 1998 09:07:50 +1030
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        Ruslan Shevchenko <Ruslan@Shevchenko.kiev.ua>
Cc:        Das Devaraj <das@netcom.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Is FreeBSD UNIX?
Message-ID:  <19980117090750.07770@lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <34BE2D83.36F7DA23@Shevchenko.kiev.ua>; from Ruslan Shevchenko on Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 05:38:44PM %2B0200
References:  <Pine.3.89.9801151337.A21235-0100000@netcom18> <34BE2D83.36F7DA23@Shevchenko.kiev.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 05:38:44PM +0200, Ruslan Shevchenko wrote:
> Das Devaraj wrote:
>
>> (This is _reluctantly_ sent to freeBSD-isp also, in case the
>>  commercial folks - ISPs - see it in a different light).
>>
>> Can I _legally_ claim that my box running FreeBSD is UNIX?
>> Or should it phrased that the OS is a _UNIX clone_.  Note that
>
> clone.  UNIX is register trademark of X/Open.www.xopen.org

As used in computing, a clone is a copy made to imitate the original.
That definition doesn't fit FreeBSD.  It's more like a disowned member
of the family.

>> 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?)
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> http://www.xopen.org for references.
>
> Look at http://UNIX-systems.org  for online single-unix specification.
>
> FreeBSD is not full compability with standart, (for example  have no
> uid_t and gid_t),

Where did you get that idea from?  They're both defined in
/sys/sys/types.h (and thus in /usr/include/sys/types.h).

Greg



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980117090750.07770>