Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.solaris:501 comp.unix.bsd:7852 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!olivea!uunet!auspex-gw!guy From: guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: Solaris 1.1 vs. Solaris 2.0 (BSD vs AT&T) Message-ID: <15510@auspex-gw.auspex.com> Date: 16 Nov 92 19:19:37 GMT References: <BxLz6x.EL7@cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Nov13.232053.7061@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu> <VIXIE.92Nov14194825@cognition.pa.dec.com> Sender: news@auspex-gw.auspex.com Followup-To: comp.unix.solaris Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara Lines: 28 Nntp-Posting-Host: bootme.auspex.com >USL is >even less clueful. System V UNIX is dead. The market opened their eyes >and told them "you can't possibly be serious!" and they adopted BSD as >the only way to keep selling licenses. POSIX won the interface battle, >not SVID. BSD won the users over. If you think a new user would take >System V.[01234] seriously as a competitor to Windows/NT or BSD, you are >totally out of your freaking mind. Umm, from your claim that "they" - presumably meaning "USL" - "adopted BSD", you are asserting that "System V.4" actually *is* BSD, so the statement that If you think a new user would take System V.[01234] seriously as a competitor to Windows/NT or BSD, you are totally out of your freaking mind. should be changed to refer to "System V.[0123]". (And from your list of "You mean I'll have to" list, you're clearly enumerating AT&T/USL bogosities that they've abandoned, with the possible exception of the shell script, not enumerating stuff that's the case with *current* SV - SVR4 supports file systems with long file names, provides a sockets interface to TCP/IP, supports X11, and provides the C shell for those people perverse enough to like it :-) - so, again, you are aware that SVR4 isn't like earlier SV's.) (Oh, and if SV sucks so badly, how come you wrote a "cron" that behaves like SV's "cron"? :-))