Unix & Linux Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

More specifically, is it a goal to make Linux match up to the Single UNIX Specification?

Additional details would be nice, for example.

  • Is Linux hopelessly far, or somewhere nearby the SUS?
  • Is the SUS considered pointless?
  • Has Linus said anything about it?
share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Mat, jasonwryan, Gilles, rozcietrzewiacz, manatwork Mar 23 '12 at 7:51

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

This is just how I see it, but turning Linux into Unix would be a step backwards. – rubixibuc Dec 30 '11 at 18:44
possible duplicate of Why isn't GNU/Linux SUS v3+ compliant? – Gilles Dec 30 '11 at 21:39
See also Is Linux a Unix? – Gilles Dec 30 '11 at 21:39
This is bordering on trolling or spam for SUS. – XTL Mar 23 '12 at 6:49

The truth is Linux does not need SUS certification and does not want to become Unix. And it doesn't lack in anything by doing so.

You need to pay in order to become SUS-certified, and it's actually very expensive. This is what BSD-like and GNU/Linux operating system vendors don't apply to it.

Most of all the GNU/Linux distribution follows the Linux Standard Base, that is free of charge and recognized by almost all the Linux vendors.

See: Why isn't GNU/Linux SUS v3+ compliant?

share|improve this answer
I don't think it's meaningful to talk about what Linux does or does not "want". Linus Torvalds might want something, but the kernel by itself couldn't be certified. A vendor could submit a particular distribution for certification, and I wouldn't be astonished to see that happen, but apparently it hasn't been worth the cost so far. – Keith Thompson Dec 30 '11 at 20:03
Since this answer is almost word for word the same as the accepted answer for the cited question, if it gets accepted wouldn't that make a very convincing argument for closing the question as a duplicate? I don't think it helps to have duplicate answers scattered all over. Should this be discussed on meta? – jw013 Dec 31 '11 at 1:51

No. If anything, in practice UNIX(tm) systems have been becoming more and more GNU/Linux with time. Some in look and API, most by actually offering ports of GNU software for their system.

Most importantly, Linux is just the kernel and there's a crazy number of "operating systems" built with it. Some of them might indeed be interested in pursuing a certification, but it would probably not be worth the effort. Most wouldn't want to be bound by any antiquated spec anyway.

The LSB is a more open effort and many will happily break even that to follow their own ideas.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.