🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <20016@scorn.sco.COM> timr@sco.COM (Tim Ruckle) writes:
>I don't believe that the FSF is endorsing any Open System Standards
>(POSIX, etc.) much less any binary compatibility specs--their goals
>are significantly different than those companies which are properly
>UNIX System vendors.

Now, as much as I hate to accuse SCO of deliberately spreading
misinformation, that's what springs to mind here.  RMS and the FSF have
claimed, since time immemorial, that they would support POSIX; take a look
in comp.std.unix, about three weeks ago, for a bunch of postings related to
that.  In addition, they have stated, publicly, several times, that GNU HURD
(their OS) would be binary compatible with BSD 4.4.  While this is only of
minor import for the '386, it *is* a binary compatibility issue -- and a
fairly standard one at that.  Note also that, since HURD is based on
Mach3.0, it would not be impossible to write a XENIX or iBCS-2 server --
given all the code you'll be able to borrow from the GNU code, it should
even be almost easy.

I hope Tim's statements were made out of ignorance, not out of an attempt to
mislead people.

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it;
sef@kithrup.COM  |  I had a bellyache at the time."
-----------------+           -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_)
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.