[Info-vax] Userland programming languages on VMS.

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 1/31/2022 4:17 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 1/31/22 14:43, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> Linux was designed for that (and so were OS options such as the various
>> dedicated embedded operating systems). Windows NT was also originally
>> designed somewhat with portability in mind as well.
> 
> Linux was designed (if you can even say that) to imitate Unix,
> nothing more.  I seriously doubt Linus Torvald had any idea
> that it would be running on anything other than Intel at the
> time he was writing it.

There is evidence to support that.

The original Linux announcement said:

<quote>
I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and 
professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.
...
It is NOT portable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never 
will support anything other than AT-harddisks, as that's all I have
</quote>

But it did get ported to Alpha and SPARC after 4 years. I believe
Digital gave him a DS20.

>> The DEC operating systems however were not designed with that level
>> of portability in mind due to the era in which they were designed.
> 
> And yet we have a clone of RSX and if I had the sources available
> to me we would also have a clone of RSTS.  And, if anyone was really
> interested, I expect RT-11 could be cloned in a very short time, too.
> 
> Seriously, it's not rocket science.  Unless one deliberately made the
> hardware obscure and obtuse the OS is really going to be something
> any CS grad could deal with.  The only thing protecting proprietary
> OSes is obscurity and a total lack of interest.

A simple 60's or 70's OS may not be a big task, but modern OS'es
has become very complex.

Expect something like 50 MLOC. And a price tag on the bad side
of 10 B$.

Arne