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!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!bonkers!web.nmti.com!peter From: peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.osf.osf1 Subject: Re: Solaris 2.6 Date: 12 Dec 1996 22:44:13 GMT Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI Lines: 10 Message-ID: <58q1rt$mgf@web.nmti.com> References: <32986299.AC7@mail.esrin.esa.it> <32B04040.68FD@nho.hydro.com> <58pjda$atb@web.nmti.com> <32B05FCD.7C5@nho.hydro.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: sonic.nmti.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.solaris:92364 comp.unix.bsd.misc:1800 comp.unix.internals:11599 comp.unix.osf.osf1:17030 In article <32B05FCD.7C5@nho.hydro.com>, Birger Wathne <Birger.Wathne@nho.hydro.com> wrote: > > Well, I had some packages that were set up for BSD or System V, and found > > that they were easier to get running if I told them it was a BSD box. > True for packages that mean 'System V release < 4'. I dunno, man. I didn't have the same sort of problems with UnixWare and UHC SVR4. -- </peter>