Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 17 Jan 1998 09:08:46 +1030
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        Ruslan Shevchenko <Ruslan@Shevchenko.kiev.ua>
Cc:        Das Devaraj <das@netcom.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Is FreeBSD UNIX?
Message-ID:  <19980117090846.08224@lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <34BE2FA2.7B201AEC@Shevchenko.kiev.ua>; from Ruslan Shevchenko on Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 05:47:47PM %2B0200
References:  <Pine.3.89.9801151337.A21235-0100000@netcom18> <19980116113349.19517@lemis.com> <34BE2FA2.7B201AEC@Shevchenko.kiev.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 15, 1998 at 05:47:47PM +0200, Ruslan Shevchenko wrote:
> Greg Lehey wrote:
>> 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
>>
>
>       NT ?        You mean OpenNT ?

I don't know.  I've heard that NT passed UNIX 95 certification.  I
didn't ask for details.
 
>>  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?19980117090846.08224>