Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!panix!news.panix.com!not-for-mail From: bryan@panix.com (Bryan Althaus) Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.osf.osf1 Subject: Re: Solaris 2.6 Followup-To: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.osf.osf1 Date: 12 Dec 1996 10:18:10 -0500 Organization: Somewhere in Manhattan Lines: 58 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <58p7ni$l1a@panix.com> References: <32986299.AC7@mail.esrin.esa.it> <58ccqm$q13@web.nmti.com> <58hj11$bb6@panix.com> <58hs93$h63@web.nmti.com> <E26rtz.23F@jadpc.jd.com> <32AE95AB.7DE14518@lehman.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0] Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.solaris:92392 comp.unix.bsd.misc:1801 comp.unix.internals:11601 comp.unix.osf.osf1:17033 Paul David Fox (pfox@lehman.com) wrote: : Jim Deitch wrote: : > : > Some of us are still running Interactive. I am up to 4.1. It still : > feels like System V, smells like System V, except for a few minor : > differences. The one I like the most is the long filenames. Solaris : > is kind of like HP/UX 10.X. Big, slow, clumsy. HP/UX 9.X OTOH was a : > System V system. I really rue the day we switched... : I wasnt bitching that ISC was particularly bad. Just that SVR3 was. : E.g. no ABI compatability for TCP apps. No ABI for ^Z/job-control. : Trying to select on a tty device is a joke. (Yes it can work under SCO & : ISC but you cannot use the same binary for the two systems). : : As for HP/UX 9 or 10. Do they support rock-ridge extensions on CD's yet : (how long is it, nearly 10 years since it was proposed and first : implemented). : : Can you see which shared libs a currently running process has mapped, : and how much RAM they take? Can you actually debug anything under HP : without SoftBench or printf() statements. : : HP/UX doesnt come close to a usable Unix system in my personal opinion. : I'm glad you are happy with it. : : If you think Solaris sucks, then you are missing the icings on the cake : that make people devotees. (Of course you could say the same about me & : HP's). : Amen Paul. Having moved from Solaris 2.4/2.5 to HP-UX 10.0 at my current job it's as if the HP-UX programming environment hasn't changed since when I last used HP-UX 7.0 ( I used HP-UX for 4 years! ). At least HP-UX 10.0 comes with a GUI debugger (DDE) now, but it's nothing to brag about. Softbench is no prize, and at $5,500 well.... The current C++ compiler on HP-UX is apparently a port of the one the Bell Labs people used in 1983 :-) No /proc and worse under 10.x the process info is hidden. The author of top had to invent his own process structure. No real thread support (hey even OS/2 has them!), and if you use DCE threads, have fun debugging them. Solaris support for threads is a dream. Soft-realtime on HP-UX?.. Actually, thread support on most other UNIX's isn't great either as is soft real-time. What's the equivalent to truss on HP-UX? When I read these threads, it's always fun to see people who haven't used an OS in years but still don't mind talking as if their an expert on it. As if Solaris hasn't change a bit from 2.0->2.5.1. Of course it ain't BSD like SunOS 4.x was so there are still the people from down south that for them the civil war hasn't ended. They will always have a grudge against Solaris. Luckily I'm from the north (NY) the side that won! :-) No doubt the current version of Solaris could use performance enhancements, which OS can't?, but it's truly the best development environment I've ever used. And Solaris 2.6 will make it even more so...