Talk:Unix architecture

POSIX

Does POSIX belong in this article?

I think so, but should it be part of a paragraph or just a one-sentence pointer to the POSIX article? I guess that's part of a larger question: how much description of what a UNIX architecture actually looks like belongs in this article? Tarheelcoxn Wed 14 Dec 18:09 (UTC)

Filesystem Hierarchy Standard

Does Filesystem Hierarchy Standard belong here?

yes, but: do UNIX-branded systems universally adhere to the FHS? If no, the reference needs to be carefully qualified. I'm much more familiar with Linux and the LSB than anything else, and I know the LSB includes the FHS. Tarheelcoxn Wed 14 Dec 18:38 UTC

I just did some poking around The Open Group's website, and I can't find a mention of the FHS. How does the FHS relate to the SUS? Is the FHS an effort including only non-UNIX Unix-like architectures? Tarheelcoxn Wed 14 Dec 19:51 UTC

No, it does not. FHS is a feature of some UNIXes, not a fundamental component of the architecture of UNIX systems in general. If you can do it a completely different way and still call it UNIX then it's not part of the architecture. Georgewilliamherbert 03:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SUS Adherence

It may be a Unix-like architecture if it doesn't adhere to the SUS, but it can't be a branded "UNIX" architecture without meeting the spec. If we want to rename the article "Unix architecture" then I think we can stick the word "likely" in there. Tarheelcoxn Thurs 15 Dec 05:37 UTC

Stubby merge

This article has been a stub for a while and I really don't see why it can't be merged into the Unix article somehow. I've added a tag. Aubray1741 15:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of two objections:

making UNIX too crufty
This stub has only been around for two days. Why not give it a week?

If it should be merged, I'll be happy to edit UNIX to make it flow better with that article, perhaps making it part of the "Standards" subsection. Tarheelcoxn Thurs 15 Dec 23:56 UTC

After posting and getting feedback on Unix, I feel like it would be better to expand and clean up here. They said a merger might be in order after some sprucing up and paring down in Unix. If anybody thinks there should still be a merger, please tell them there. Tarheelcoxn 23:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge issue

Does anyone still think this article should be merged into Unix?

There's still a merge notice on that article. Ideogram 02:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see no merge notice on the article. I dont know if it should merge. -- Frap 09:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The intro too vague

A Unix architecture is an operating system architecture that embodies some certain operating system related virtues in the Unix philosophy, not all of the virtues in that philosophy. I would say, everything is a file is one of those virtues, while everything is an agglomerate of small components aren't necessarily included, since many Un*ces are somewhat monolitic. I would say the theory of the non-Unix GNU/Hurd would embody such a small components' pilosopy better. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 17:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]