[ale] Differences in UNIX & UNIX-like systems...

[Jeff Hubbs]

I remember using emacs on my Amiga, which I obtained c. 1986-1987.  I
knew at the time that it was a derivation of something from UNIX-land.

Michael B. Trausch wrote:
> Jeff Lightner wrote:
>   
>> Most Linux commands are either clones of or derived from UNIX
>> commands of the same name.   Since UNIX has been around for more than
>> 30 years most of your favorites predate Linux.  I will say that for
>> the most part the features in the Linux versions of commands are
>> broader than those of their UNIX counterparts.  (Of course even the
>> UNIX variants don't always have the same options for the same named
>> commands.)
>>
>>     
>
> Yeah, that's very true.  When I worked for IBM, I found many variants of
> UNIX systems that forced me to read man pages to learn how to do things
> that I thought I knew how to do quite well.  :->
>
> I like that Linux has "multiple" personalities with many of the tools
> that are in use.  For example, 'ps' supports both BSD and AT&T UNIX
> syntax, and that rocks, because I had to learn BSD (I think? Whichever
> one it was that used 'ps -ef' instead of 'ps axu') syntax when I was
> working at IBM, and I started typing things that way on my systems at
> home, mostly out of habit.  And, surprisingly, it worked as I expected,
> even though that's not what I was expecting!  :-)
>
> It would seem that Linux is definitely a superset, at least, in most
> areas.  Lately, though, I am thinking that the ultimate system is a
> FreeBSD kernel, paired with the GNU utilities in the userland... Well,
> at least on servers.  I haven't tried such a pairing on my desktop
> machine... yet.  I might at some point, if I can ever get a secondary
> machine again.
>
> 	-- Mike
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale