sirredbeard/awesome-unix

All the UNIX and UNIX-Like: Linux, BSD, macOS, Illumos, 9front, and more.

awesome-unix's Issues

Illumos distribution - OmniOSce

Other important server oriented Illumos distribution - https://omniosce.org/

Contiki is not unix-like

The list lists Contiki under the RTOS category. While it is an RTOS, it is not a unix-like RTOS.

Create Table of Contents

WLinux

I'm surprised to not see WLinux somewhere related to Windows Subsystem for Linux 😆

Missing information as to why Linux is not classified as Unix by the Open Group

Is it just a certification that you can pay for? What if any aspects are missing? It's unclear to the reader if the open group hasn't rubber stamped it or if it is radically different.

Missing ThinkPenguin as a vendor

Missing ThinkPenguin as a vendor, which is resolved with PR #42

Printable format

Is there any chance that you will create a printable version of this docs as it would be very useful if it is distributed on my college tech club and my fellow linux geekmate. Thanks

execute script

we can execute the bash script with bash command even if the execute permission is not given to that user

Cygwin and MSYS2

Cygwin and its good friend MSYS2 are very popular Unix-like distributions (Git for Windows uses MSYS2). I feel they're worth a mention (considering Cygwin is more than 26 years old at this point).

• Is it under active development, receiving commercial support, or have an active volunteer community?

Yes, both are very actively developed.

• Is the operating system notable or unique in some way?

I think so, because they let you use all UNIX tools and functionalities while being on Windows.

• Does the operating system strive for UNIX philosophy?

I'm not sure how to answer this question, but I have a link here: https://cygwin.com/faq.html#faq.what.what

Re-Create Infographic In Open Format

Relationship between BSDs and AT&T Code

I have some difficulties with the following paragraph (emphasis mine):

The term UNIX also debatedbly encompasses operating systems that are direct descendants of the original AT&T UNIX codebase but have since re-implemented the AT&T code with code under open source licenses. The most prominent of which the family of BSDs: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD, and their derivatives. These are not UNIX® certified, they are technically Unix-like, but share a unique direct link back to AT&T UNIX®, while newcomers like Redox OS do not.

I think there needs to be some clarification surrounding FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD, and their connection to AT&T copyrighted Unix source code. I don't have all the answers, but my understanding is this, and I can submit a pull request when we have all the wrinkles ironed out.

• NetBSD is based on BSD Net/2, which is 4.3BSD-Lite, released in June 1991. AT&T brought a lawsuit against Berkeley Software Design (BSDi), which prompted the BSD developers to fork the codebase into two branches- "Lite", which was sans AT&T code and "Encumbered" which contained AT&T code. Because NetBSD is based on code completely written from scratch, it isn't exactly "re-implemented" AT&T code "under open source licenses".
• OpenBSD is a fork of NetBSD 1.0, released in October 1995, so it may need to be a nested item under NetBSD, rather than standing on its own. It also borrowed code heavily from 4.4BSD-Lite 1 and 4.4BSD-Lite 2, making it free of any encumbered AT&T code, where everything was written from scratch.
• FreeBSD forked from the 386 BSD codebase, and released in December 1993, which in turn was based on BSD Net/2, like NetBSD. So it also would not qualify as "re-implemented" AT&T code "under open source licenses".

I would rewrite the phrase "but have since re-implemented the AT&T code with code under open source licenses" as "but have rewritten code from scratch, compatible with AT&T, released under open source licenses". I think that clarifies it a bit better.

A link to the BSD history as told by Marshall Kirk McKusick

The history of BSD has a pretty reliable source that can be linked to, in the form of Marshall Kirk McKusicks section of the Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution titled "Twenty Years of Berkeley Unix - From AT&T-Owned to Freely Redistributable". Alternatively, there's also a ~3 hour video where Kirk tells it all, including a lot of very charming asides and copious amounts of beer drinking, but it's up to you whether it should be linked to.

will be an actualization

opnSense

There was split in pfSense community and opnSense was/it a result of that split.

https://opnsense.org/

Probably its even better then pfSense because its more modern and make modification to vanilla FreeBSD as less as possible while pfSense modifies FreeBSD heavily.

Submit to Awesome Master List

Correct or Source Better Venn Diagram

What is the problem

The Venn Diagram is a useful isustration that I personally find more informative than the parallel timelines or tree diagrams used by Wikipedia to visually communicate the history of UNIX and related OSes. However, this diagram has many inaccuracies and is plainly wrong on several points.

What is expected

• Haiku and Redox are not UNIX like, both have a terminal/shell interface, but in terms of both history and design both are completely independent.
• The "UNIX-Like" circle of the diagram is not really a useful separation. The line between what is "true" UNIX and what is merely "like" UNIX is a mile wide gradient, and I would argue that even "true" UNIX is still "UNIX like". This circle really just encapsulates all the OSes listed (save Haiku and Redox, as mentioned above), and I believe a better indication of the relationships of these systems would be for this circle to completely encapsulate the *nixes and be used to show the separation of Haiku et al.
• The "Descendants of AT&T UNIX" circle is really just two separate groups, BSDs and System V like systems. Unlike in most venn diagrams, these two categories are mutually exclusive (if my memory serves).
• The "Certified UNIX by the Open Group" circle is a in contrast a classification that in and of itself does not contain any systems inherently, this may be better shown as as sub-circle of the "UNIX like" circle, covering both BSDs and System Vs. Additionally, there are some (commercial) Linux distributions that have been certified, so these should also be acknowledged, perhaps by a tip of the Linux circle towards the "Unix like design" of the spectrum (which can be fleshed out with more examples but is otherwise solid).
• Since the defining trait of Linux (insert GNU/Linux GNU+Linux meme) is the Linux kernel, in addition to the BSD/System V split, the Unices should be divided by design, i.e. Linux/Hurd, BSD/SysV, DOS/DOS-like (DOS clones, Windows, ReactOS), BeOS/Haiku, Post-UNIX (Plan9, Inferno), and the odd balls (Temple OS, Redux).
• Lastly, MacOS is certified, but it also is a direct descendant of FreeBSD via Darwin and thus is not in it's own category but rather is a BSD.

What can be done

There is an existing issue (#10) requesting that the image be recreated in a open format, presumably something with a trackable text representation like svg. If being recreated from scratch then it might as well be corrected at the same time.

I'm happy to volunteer myself to make a new infographic, if there is any interest.

Proposed Hierarchy (where -> means 'influenced')

• UNIX like -> Plan 9 -> Inferno
  • BSD
    • FreeBSD -> Darwin -> MacOS
    • OpenBSD
    • NetBSD
  • System V
    • SunOS -> Solaris and friends
    • HP-UX
    • AIX
  • Minix -> Linux
    • Certified UNIX
    • Uncertified but keeping with UNIX philosophy
    • Uncertified and diverting from UNIX philosophy
  • GNU Hurd
• DOS line -> Windows -> React OS
  • DrDos
  • FreeDos
  • OS2
• BeOS -> Haiku
• Redux OS
• Retro MacOS -> MacOS (There isn't really a code ancestry but there is in design and philosophy)
• Temple OS

Original

iXsystems

Under UNIX and UNIX-Like Hardware Vendors You can add iXsystems as FreeBSD hardware supplier.