From: Ted Harding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |On 08-Jun-99 Mark Wright wrote: |> I've checked the FAQs, and I can't seem to find a good answer to this: |> why is Linux not refered to as a flavor of Unix? On Linux.Org, it's |> referred to as "Unix-like", and this hedging seems pretty universal. |> Is there some Unix standard that Linux does not adhere to. Is there |> some licensing organization that expects someone to pony up some dough |> before they can say, "Unix(TM)" (but if that's it, who paid for |> FreeBSD?) In my experience, Linux is no more different from any |> particular flavor of Unix than Solaris is from AIX, or whatever - is |> there some important difference I'm missing? | |"UNIX" is a registered trademark of The Open Group -- see | | http://www.unix-systems.org/trademark.html | ... |To register a product (e.g. Linux) as "UNIX" with The Open Group you |would have to register it under "UNIX95" or "UNIX98": see | | http://www.opengroup.org/public/prods/xum4.htm | |and | | http://www.unix-systems.org/unix98.html | |respectively.
Did someone register FreeBSD? If you check out FreeBSD.org, they say "FreeBSD is an advanced BSD UNIX operating system". --- Mark Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
