Re: GNU/Linux Naming

[David Kastrup]

"Noah Slater" <nslater@bytesexual.org> writes:

> On 07/12/2007, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Uh, no.  The POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) specification
>> specifies at several levels what comprises a UNIX-like API.
>
> Thanks, I am aware of this. I think it a reasonable enough thing for
> me to suggest that when we have a specification that outlines an
> operating interface it can be taken to point to what is expected from
> an operating system.

> Given that you accept that statement it's not unreasonable to state
> that POSIX lays out the definition of what it means to be a *certain
> type* of operating system, namely a POSIX one.

Uh no.  POSIX does not lay out what it means to be a "type of operating
system".  It lays out what _interfaces_ must be there for certain
degrees of POSIX compliancy.  It does not require the embodiment of
those interfaces to run under the name "operating system".

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum