On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 16:14 -0700, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:54:15PM -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote: > > Philip Brown wrote: > > >The thing about all that, is that it forces the machine to be closer and > > >closer to a linux machine, until eventually, it becomes nothing more than a > > >linux machine with a user-invisible solaris kernel. > > > > > > > > > > Gong! -- You violated my pet peeve -- one of the two[1] flagrant abuses > > of the word Linux. > > > > Your punishment: 1000 sentences: > > > > Nexenta boxes are Debian/Nevada machines, they are not "Linux machines". > > Nexenta boxes are Debian/Nevada machines, they are not "Linux machines". > > Pffft... everyone here understands what is meant, and it's a lot easier > than trying to describe, > > closer to 'one of those types of machines that is based around > what is commonly called a "linux distribution", and/or > a Linux Standards Base compliant system in addition to adhering to > all the system-administration admin level issues, which may or may > not be specified in the LSB mentioned hereabove
Yes, NexentaOS will be a bit closer to LSB than Solaris. But this is a *good* thing taking into account how popular GNU/Linux platform today. Meanwhile, SVR4-compliant apps/scripts will run too, since underneath we still have a shiny OpenSolaris core. -- Erast _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
