Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!panix!news.panix.com!not-for-mail From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.osf.osf1 Subject: Re: Solaris 2.6 Date: 13 Dec 1996 10:09:45 -0500 Organization: Panix Lines: 42 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <58rrjp$c1c@panix2.panix.com> References: <32986299.AC7@mail.esrin.esa.it> <58n5q1$9ci@arktur.rz.uni-ulm.de> <58pdbt$mjv@web.nmti.com> <58rqg5$4gc@panix.com> Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.solaris:92486 comp.unix.bsd.misc:1814 comp.unix.internals:11615 comp.unix.osf.osf1:17053 In article <58rqg5$4gc@panix.com>, Bryan Althaus <bryan@panix.com> wrote: >Peter da Silva (peter@nmti.com) wrote: >: In article <58n5q1$9ci@arktur.rz.uni-ulm.de>, >: Andreas Borchert <borchert@turing.mathematik.uni-ulm.de> wrote: >: > On 11 Dec 1996 16:37:18 GMT, Peter da Silva <peter@nmti.com> wrote: >: > > I've got a bunch of reasons for disliking Solaris. That it's based on System >: > > V isn't one of them. I've got far more experience with System V than BSD. >: >: > Would you please so kind to enumerate some of your reasons? >: >: >: Now, some of these have apparently been fixed in 2.4 and 2.5, and of course >: porting System V software has become less of an issue... I've done my ports, >: and new software that uses the System V interfaces tends to be written for >: the Solaris environment now. But Solaris gave me a pretty bad time for a >: pretty long time, and I'm not much interested in renewing my acquaintance >: with it. > >This is such bullshit. Read your last line. You haven't used Solaris >in a long time. Most people consider Solaris from 2.4 on. So in all >your arguements your talking about Solaris 2.0->2.3, which everyone >knew was buggy and to stay away from. Oh? I seem to recall Sun pushing a lot of customers, including me, very, very hard to use "Solaris 2.0->2.3". I also seem to recall each and every new Solaris release from 2.0 to 2.4 claiming to not be buggy, not be a total performance dog, etc. and so forth. I recall quite a bit of hardware that was supported by "Solaris 2.0->2.3" which was *not* supported by SunOS4.1.3 until other SPARC vendors did it themselves and Sun was forced to. Sun downright *coerced* its customers to use early Solaris 2 versions, and now they're surprised that Solaris has a bad reputation in consequence? Peter -- somewhere around 2.5 or 2.5.1, Solaris actually got usable. Rumor has it that this is because certain of the Solaris developers were forced to run it themselves, instead of SunOS. :-) It might be worth another look. -- Thor Lancelot Simon tls@panix.COM Stumbling drunk in the railyard looking for God: http://www.panix.com/~tls/