Dear ppl!
I think that the core (oops...) of the question is very simple: There is a
difference between the Operating System as a Software to Hardware
interface, and the Operating System as a User to Software to Hardware
interface.
It is a fact though, that there are two major schools of operating
systems. One is UN*X school and the other is Microsoft School. We can
clearly say that the MS school is now Win9x + WinNT/2K. OS/2 used to be
another operating system that fits in that same school. MacOS could fit,
but it has a very tight connection with its hardware.
Linux is definetly a part of UNIX school, although it is not the same as
Solaris or HP-UX. In fact - it is more compliant with POSIX:)
Since Linux is open-source, there are some 55 distributions of it, and the
whole idea behind Linux, is that it is the same OS that can be distributed
with different packages of software.
Now - imagine - if some really sick people spend about two years
replicating WinNT UI (almost 100%) and making it work on top of Linux
kernel - will it be Linux or WinNT? Ofcourse it is going to be a Linux,
just that the distribution can be called "LinuxNT":) (Please don't kill
me, and no - I don't work for Microsoft!) Ok - so the OS is obviously the
part that does the hard work of letting Software operate on top of
Hardware. While the rest is "User Interface" or "Operational
Interface". The fact that most linuxes (BTW: BeOS is based on Linux, have
You heard about that?) utilize the UNIX-like Operational Interface (shells
and X11) is historical. It is now changing, from bottom up. Products like
GNOME and KDE revolutinize the way people look at X11. But somehow the old
shell thingies survive, I guess, because people simply like them...
Oops... I think I didn't give a short answer to this question. So,
briefly, Linux Kernel is the operating system. Shells and all the turf on
top is "Operational Interface" and is a part of a distribution. That's
it:)
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Oded Arbel wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Adi Stav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > But Linux is not a brand. Most of the Linux-based distributions
> > include the Linux kernel as it is, or with relatively negligible
> > changes. Linus has neither the power nor the desire to influence
> > "userland" applications. It is Red Hat, Debian etc who brand the
> > complete systems. So I would not say Linux is a single operating
> > system, but a family of operating systems, because there's no OS you
> > can point at and say "this is the original Linux", unlike Unix or BSD.
>
> A friend of mine, reading this discussion, suggested that you can treat
> linux as you do species of animals in the "Real World"(tm) - as long as they
> can interbread, they are of the same specie. I think it means that as long
> as you can take the kernel out of one distro, dump it in another and expect
> it to work (relativly painlessly) then it's the same OS.
>
> Oded
>
> ..
> Democracy is also a form of worship. It is the worship of Jackals by
> Jackasses.
> -- H. L. Mencken
>
>
>
> =================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
> echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
