Re: [Sheflug] A question on Ownership

["Chris J" <xxxxx [at] xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I was under the impression that Solaris was more BSD than SysV. To the
> extent  that Sun is a Berkeley company, although it does have SysV
> features I thought  it was derived from SunOS which was almost the same
> as BSD 4.3.

BSD begat SunOS which begat Solaris. But Sun in their wisdom(?) decided to
move the emphasis in SunOS 5.x to be a SysV based system, removing
ol'faithfull /etc/printcap and adding a new fun interface for maintaining
printers, that I /still/ can't remember. The changes are deeper than that
though; some commands behave differently (e.g., ps) and kernel configuration
is handled mostly through a sysctl interface and kernel modules. I've not had
to rebuild a Solaris kernel yet, but I'm almost certain it doesn't have the
easy BSD approach.

Digital UNIX OTOH grew out of OSF/1, and although there are SysV-ism's in
user space (e.g., it has a SysV style rc directory strucutre, ps
understands "ps -ef"[1]) there are still strong BSD-ism's (has /etc/printcap,
ps understands "ps auwx"[1]). It's actually a very nice balance of SysV and
BSD in userland, and is one of the reasons it's "my favourite" UNIX. Kernel
config is done in the traditional BSD style of hack a config file,
do "config -C <filename>", "make", then cp the kernel into place.

Chris..

[1] "ps" on Digital UNIX supports both SysV and BSD style options (in the
same way it can on Linux by way of "PS_PERSONALITY"). This can be a bloody
useful feature to have at times :)

-- 
\ Chris Johnson                 \
 \ cej [at] nightwolf.org.uk          \
  \ http://cej.nightwolf.org.uk/  ~-----------------------------------+
   \ Redclaw chat - http://redclaw.org.uk - telnet redclaw.org.uk 2000 \____



___________________________________________________________________

Sheffield Linux User's Group -
http://www.sheflug.co.uk/mailfaq.html

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.