On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 02:16:34PM -0700, Gary Hennigan wrote: > [email protected] writes: > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2000 at 03:49:59PM -0500, Joe Block wrote: > > > [email protected] wrote:
[...] > > > I'm kind of curious - what makes you say MacOS X isn't a full unix? I > > > run OSX Server on a couple machines and it seems pretty full to me - > > > most stuff builds with ./configure;make > > > > Interesting. My understanding was that MacOS X wasn't a full Unix. I'm > > often wrong. > > > > Could you provide pointers to the Unixy features of MacOS X? Are the > > standard Unix features and utilities provided or do you have to obtain > > them independently > > Aren't you running things together here? Unix does not equal X. We're wandering well off the primrose path here. I *know* that. "X is a networked, multi-platform, windowing environment". 'Nuff said. > My understanding was that MacOS X was a full X-windows implementation > for MacOS. No. MacOS X == Mac Operating System 10 (X == Roman numeral 10) There is a Mac X server with a distressingly similar name, minus the OS, IIRC. The question is how much Unix there is in MacOS X, not how much X there is in the Macintosh X Terminal Emulator. -- Karsten M. Self ([email protected]) What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? SAS for Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html Mailing list: "subscribe sas-linux" to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
