VERY basic linux system 245

On Friday 27 January 2006 08:01, xlar54 stood up and spoke the following words to the mbuttes incomp.os.linux.misc...:

See below, please...

Yes, but the thing is that we often get posts very similar to yours, and they are quite often - although not always - intended as trolls.

Trust me, as a GNU-Linux and Free Software advocate, I have seen all sorts, and yours did match a lot of the criteria, even if that was never your intention.

If I'm wrong, then I apologize.

I was buttuming that the GUI would be part of the picture. But then what you seem to be after would sound more like a modernized version of DOS to me.

The only possible innovation in that area that I know of would be the development of a 32-bit - or eventually 64-bit - version of DOS.

IBM had plans to do that once, but they never even got started. After all, they were hoping for OS-2 to make the break. Luckily for them, they're now betting on a much healthier horse. ;-)

Fair enough. Well, in essence, pure Linux is only a kernel, and if you're got at programming - the source code does contain quite a bit of buttembler, but the majority is in C - you can tweak it to your heart's desire.

Of course, you would also need to write the utilities and libraries. In GNU-Linux, these are basically the GNU operating system without its native kernel - the Mach-Hurd is a microkernel design that's still not fully functional as we speak. GNU is a Free - as in "freedom" - UNIX clone, written from scratch by the Free Software Foundation, founded by Richard Stallman.

Richard Stallman also wrote most of the GNU utilities himself, includingEmacsandgcc.

Then why not do it right and focus on a proven design such as UNIX-POSIX? Why drop back to drive letters and single-user functionality?

Hmm... Actually, the original Unix as written by Ken Thompson and Dennis Ritchie at AT&T Bell Labs already existed as a fully-functional operating system long before CP-M did, and - as I said before - CP-M had drive letters because it was meant to work with floppies, which required a lot of disk swapping.

Forgive me if I have offended you - as a person afflicted with Asperger Syndrome, my communicative skills are somewhat impaired, contrary to what my writing style might suggest - but I just can't see why you would want to turn a perfect design into a less perfect one.

My guess would be that anyone who would want to write a new operating system from scratch would most definitely not be throwing away all that makes an operating system so much more functional. I would rather expect that person to start working on improvements and enhancements to the design, not that he strips it down.

See, in UNIX, there is no need for the user to know what volume what files are on. There is a single, hierarchic root directory, which simply stands for "the computer", or eventually "the network".

And then, in that hierarchy, you have a designated area where the user can write his own files. Everything else is off-limits to the user for security reasons.

Making a distinction between physical diskdrives is only overhead. Everything is mounted to the same hierarchic tree, whatever medium it comes on.

You may want to check out the following link...:

Again, I apologize. As for people judging you over the medium you use for posting, disregard that. Google Groups was - and still is - known as a tried and tested posting method for Usenet trolls, but they have in the meantime already discovered the virtues of anonymizing proxy servers... ;-)

Okay, okay, get off your horse! ;-)

But just listen to my advice before you start reinventing the wheel by

As someone else has pointed out, there are multiple Free Software licenses beside the GPL. There are also Open Source licenses which are not necessarily Free, or less free - i.e. that allow you to use Open Source code in proprietary software.

Best is to always check what license the original code came under, and what that license allows you to do. The Linux kernel however and most of the GNU-Linux operating system comes under the GPL or a compatible other Free Software license.

No, no, that was not at all what I was saying. I was not challenging you in any way, and I apologize if I made you think that I was.

I said "go ahead and do what you want to do" because nothing stops you. The code - at least, regarding the Linux kernel - is Free, as in Freedom.

That's not what I think. ;-)

I wasn't thinking along the lines of compebreastion. I'm not into competing myself, and I couldn't care less about market shares and economic interests. I think in terms of science and logic.

I was however expecting your goal to be the creation of a new operating system, one you would wish to share or sell at some point. Isn't that what developers do and wish for? ;-)

Yup, I read a book on the Intel 80286 and 80386 and how it was used in the IBM PS-2 series of computers, and how those CPU's offered operating systems like OS-2 and AIX capabilities that DOS and the 8086-8088 did not have. ;-)

My sarcasm was based upon the fact that many of today's so-called IT specialists *don't* know what a protected or real mode is. In fact, all they know is Microsoft Windows and other Microsoft products.

Any average UNIX administrator is more intelligent than those monkeys... ;-)

-- With kind regards,

*Aragorn* (Registered GNU-Linux user #223157)