poor definition of
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| gus3 Jun 08, 2014 3:10 PM EDT |
"Lean," perhaps, in the Unix tradition of "do just enough and stay out of the way of the real work." But I'd hesitate to call Linux "robust." That implies Apollo 11-level rigorous proof of correctness, which has never been done on the Linux kernel. Or, if we're talking about functional robustness, VMS was far more so. Of course, the supported hardware was a lot more narrow, and mis-managing the cash cow didn't help matters. EDIT: The title was supposed to be poor definition of "robust". |
| kikinovak Jun 08, 2014 5:24 PM EDT |
My desktop has Apollo-13-level rigorous proof of correctness. :o) |
| cr Jun 08, 2014 8:12 PM EDT |
> Or, if we're talking about functional robustness, VMS was far more so. ... mis-managing the cash cow didn't help matters. Yeah, I understand its successor, WNT, was bit more profitable. Robust in the security sense, though... not so much (7min to pwn?). |
| CFWhitman Jun 09, 2014 11:30 AM EDT |
I suspect that "flexible" is a closer match to the word the author was really looking for, though perhaps still not an exact match for what he was trying to convey. |
| BernardSwiss Jun 09, 2014 7:02 PM EDT |
"versatile"? |
| gus3 Jun 09, 2014 7:15 PM EDT |
But still not "robust," I assert. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!