what Linux could REALLY benefit from is MPE's batch and spool
environment, there's virtually nothing other than cron and regular
disk files, it's a real pain in the butt and I'm really surprised no
one has done something yet, well, maybe someone did and I didn't notice it yet.
At 12:17 PM 6/29/2008, Peter M. Eggers wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Ron Horner
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > I thought that the great thing of the later versions of MPE was that it was
> > POSIX compliant. If that is the case, couldn't you just load the
> OS modules
> > on to Linix? Granted the hardware drivers would be different.
>
>There are a number of good things about POSIX compliancy, especially
>on Unix. When from MPE, it adds complexity and more ways to screw
>things up. The underlying Linux is fully POSIX compliant and many,
>many other good things. You could also add Windows compliancy, MVS
>compliancy, and so on. But, integrating different designs necessarily
>causes complications and trade-offs.
>
>My point is to put a friendly MPE face on whatever is useful in Linux
>and not to expose it directly. Just add what you need to the API, and
>write a MPE utility to access it, or integrate it into an existing MPE
>utility. The KISS principle. MPE should be the quickest and easiest
>way to solve business information problems. The more time spent on
>technical details of the OS, the less focus and time spent on solving
>the problem at hand.
>
>My idea is that MPE should be focussed on solving business information
>problems only. The hardware and operating system details should be
>handed off to Linux, running below and out of sight.
>
>Pete
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
Regards,
Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
www.mindawn.com
949-713-3276
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
