Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!caen!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!deepthot!brtph500.bnr.ca!nrtphba6.bnr.ca!bcarh189.bnr.ca!nott!torn!watserv3.uwaterloo.ca!undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca!vluu From: vluu@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Viet-Trung Luu) Subject: Re: Historic Opportunity facing Free Unix (was Re: The Lai/Baker paper, benchmarks, and the world of free UNIX) Sender: news@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (news spool owner) Message-ID: <DpzJD3.IDL@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 02:39:03 GMT References: <4ki055$60l@Radon.Stanford.EDU> <316ECE94.61162F47@dark.mountain.stronghold> <4kntvi$hmm@agate.berkeley.edu> <199604161742.SAA02177@kythera.demon.co.uk> Nntp-Posting-Host: lhopital.uwaterloo.ca Organization: University of Waterloo Lines: 51 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:21642 comp.unix.bsd.386bsd.misc:653 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:3278 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3109 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17571 comp.os.linux.advocacy:46056 In article <199604161742.SAA02177@kythera.demon.co.uk>, Ray Auchterlounie <rda@kythera.demon.co.uk> wrote: [...] >Locking applications into one Linux distribution is NOT a _necessary_ >change though - and it is IMO a highly undesirable one. They aren't really *locked* into any distribution per se. See below. >By doing this the commercial Linux vendors are starting to do the same >as the other commercial unix vendors. Instead of looking for >compatibility and interoperability they are trying to lock users into >their one-true-linux. > >It's not difficult, for example, to envisage some applications only >being available for Linux-FT-Posix-Certified and others only for >Caldera. The different distributions may not always run on the same >hardware. There's not much difference between: > > "Product X available for unix" (requires Sparc running Solaris) > "Product Y available for unix" (IBM AIX or HP-UX only) >and > "Product X for Linux" (Caldera version bar only) > "Product Y for Linux" (FT-posix release foo required) > >If this happens we've gone full circle back to a maze of different >unixes all based on Linux but all subtly different/incompatible and >all claiming to be the "standard". > >The opportunity will then be well and truly missed. :( What Caldera does is basically limit technical support to those who have Caldera Network Desktop. However, it should work with RedHat's distribution also, with little trouble (especially since CND is based on RedHat), and Slackware with a little more trouble. (I remember something about a README file that they include... telling you how to do this.) Of course, I could be wrong, but this is what I remember reading. Evidently, Caldera wants to limit its tech support costs. This is understandable. However, to my knowledge, they have not *excluded* other distributions deliberately. In the world of Linux where people are used to not getting support, this isn't too bad and it is a start. (What would be nice is for all the commercial vendors to get together and agree to support each other's releases and software -- and thereby ensuring anyone who gets a commercial version that they'll also get support for commercial software. Otherwise, some form of money-back guarantee (even a partial one) would be nice.) - Trung