Question regarding UZIX status

Page 2/3
1 | | 3

By madcrow

Expert (78)

madcrow's picture

12-08-2007, 18:00

Whoa? Symbiface III is going to have an MSX version? Sweet. Given that Sunrise seems to have stopped making MSX hardware, symbiface just might find a new market...

Anyway, Uzix is NOT really POSIX compliant any more than SymbOS is Win32 compliant...

By Manuel

Ascended (15696)

Manuel's picture

12-08-2007, 20:17

madcrow: please explain that latter remark.

By madcrow

Expert (78)

madcrow's picture

12-08-2007, 22:45

POSIX is a complex and DETAILED specification. POSIX defines is GREAT detail such things API calls, the C library and more, shell commands, userland command syntax and more. UZIX would in no way qualify as POSIX compliant. Just because something LOOKS Unix-y does NOT make it POSIX-compliant.

By AuroraMSX

Paragon (1901)

AuroraMSX's picture

12-08-2007, 23:18

one of the minor details is that posix requires a 32-bit (or up) environment....

By madcrow

Expert (78)

madcrow's picture

13-08-2007, 02:43

That's true, but it's POSSIBLE to write an OS (or at least your C libraries) well enough that they can "fake" a 32 bit environment. Certain expensive 3rd part cross-compilers do stuff like that. The real issue is that the function calls are WAY to small a subset to be useful. The carn thing can't even run antique old 2BSD "vi"...

By sunrise

Paragon (1091)

sunrise's picture

13-08-2007, 06:49

Whoa? Symbiface III is going to have an MSX version? Sweet. Given that Sunrise seems to have stopped making MSX hardware, symbiface just might find a new market...

Anyway, Uzix is NOT really POSIX compliant any more than SymbOS is Win32 compliant...

Seems people tries to tell lies to rest of the world . lOOK People seems to think we are a commercial company like you !!
But you have to wait , we sell still a lot of cf's AND THERE IS HARDLY MONEY FOR DOING MORE

By Manuel

Ascended (15696)

Manuel's picture

13-08-2007, 09:23

madcrow: this page tells us amongst others:

UZIX implements almost all of the 7th Edition AT&T UNIX functionality. All file I/O, directories, mountable file systems, user and group IDs, pipes, and applicable device I/O are supported. Process control (fork(), execve(), signal(), kill(), pause(), alarm(), and wait()) are fully supported. The number of processes is limited only by the swap space available, with a maximum of 252 processes (total of 4096k memory). As mentioned, UZIX implements UNIX well enough to run the Bourne Shell in its full functionality. The only changes made to the shell's source code were to satisfy the limitations of the C compiler.

This makes it a lot more POSIX compliant than SymbOS Win32 compliant... AFAIK SymbOS has no functions similar to Win32 at all. (But it might be possible to map some subset to SymbOS functions, I don't know.)

By karloch

Prophet (2059)

karloch's picture

13-08-2007, 09:23

we sell still a lot of cf's AND THERE IS HARDLY MONEY FOR DOING MOREw00t? o_O

By karloch

Prophet (2059)

karloch's picture

13-08-2007, 11:27

That's just what I read several years ago. However I don't know the details of POSIX specification, but even if it's not true POSIX, it is very much POSIX-like, much more than SymbOS would be win32.

By Prodatron

Paragon (1788)

Prodatron's picture

13-08-2007, 11:59

As I never saw any Win32 api specs and whatever, I guess, that SymbOS is not Win32 compliant at all Big smile
Regarding Sunrise, I think that Rob is doing his job (his hobby) in such a good and professional way, that people may get the impression, it is commercial.

Page 2/3
1 | | 3