From: Paul A Vixie (vixie@pa.dec.com) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-03-28 22:39:42 PST >> The names are similar to SysVr4. Nope. SVR4 is similar to BSD. BSD was first, remember. If SVR4 got it wrong, pick up your phone and dial AT&T. -- Paul Vixie, DEC Network Systems Lab Palo Alto, California, USA "Ready, Fire, Aim" decwrl!vixie vixie!paul Message 32 in thread From: Guy Harris (guy@Auspex.COM) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-04-03 11:34:00 PST >Nope. SVR4 is similar to BSD. BSD was first, remember. Nope. SVR4 and BSD are similar to SunOS 4.x. SunOS 4.x was first, remember. >If SVR4 got it wrong, pick up your phone and dial AT&T. If SVR4 or BSD got it wrong, pick up your phone and dial AT&T or CSRG. Message 33 in thread From: Jim Lick (jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-04-03 14:54:24 PST In <12330@auspex-gw.auspex.com> guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris) writes: >>Nope. SVR4 is similar to BSD. BSD was first, remember. >Nope. SVR4 and BSD are similar to SunOS 4.x. SunOS 4.x was first, >remember. Nope. SunOS is mostly based on BSD4.2 but has been moving in a SysV direction for a long time. SVR4 is the main result of this effort, combining most features from both BSD and SysV, although the built in utilities are mostly of the SysV variety. Jim Lick Work: University of California| Play: 6657 El Colegio #24 Santa Barbara| Isla Vista, CA 93117-4280 Dept. of Mechanical Engr. |(805) 968-0189 voice/msg 2311 Engr II Building | "Like beauty and sadness/It's hard (805) 893-4113 | to love/With so much to hate/I'm jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu| feeling worthless" -Life Talking Message 34 in thread From: Rob Robertson (rob@hanalei.berkeley.edu) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-04-03 16:11:27 PST In article jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu (Jim Lick) writes: Nope. SunOS is mostly based on BSD4.2 but has been moving in a SysV direction for a long time. SVR4 is the main result of this effort, combining most features from both BSD and SysV, although the built in utilities are mostly of the SysV variety. yeah, but i'd say the stuff that's current BSD and the BSD releases yet to come have been heavily effected by SunOS 4.X. Same goes with SVR4. that may have been Guy's point. rob --  william robertson  rob@violet.berkeley.edu "when i was your age, i walked 10 miles to school, unarmed." Message 35 in thread From: Guy Harris (guy@Auspex.COM) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-04-03 19:15:34 PST >>Nope. SVR4 and BSD are similar to SunOS 4.x. SunOS 4.x was first, >>remember. > >Nope. Wrong. SunOS 4.x *WAS* first to come up with the new file system layout; the latter, not "UNIX in general", was what was under discussion here. SVR4 most definitely didn't pick it up from BSD; they picked it up from SunOS 4.x. >SunOS is mostly based on BSD4.2 but has been moving in a SysV >direction for a long time. Being one of the prime movers, I'm quite aware of that, but it's completely irrelevant when it comes to the file system reorg; the idea originally came from Rusty Sandberg at Sun, and got propagated to various places, including Berkeley and AT&T. Message 36 in thread From: Guy Harris (guy@Auspex.COM) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-04-03 11:42:15 PST >Yep. I also want to rip up the /usr/spool vs. /usr/lib stuff. The problem >is that there's not a lot of consistency here... even in SunOS/SVr4. Some >of the stuff in /usr *isn't* artchtecture-dependent (how about all the >Postscript fonts in /usr/openwin/fonts). As Mr. Hopkirk has already noted, "/usr/share" is for stuff that's not architecture-dependent, although the fact that it's under "/usr" is arguably a glitch, as he also noted. "/usr/openwin" is a completely *separate* glitch, although it has its own "share" directory ("/usr/openwin/share"). I've no idea where "/usr/openwin/fonts" comes from; it doesn't appear to be in the Open Windows 2.0 nor the Open Windows 3.0 "/usr/openwin" directory. They have "/usr/openwin/lib/fonts" instead (and they're not "Postscript fonts" in the sense of Adobe Type N fonts, as far as I know; it's a different font technology). Message 37 in thread From: Peter da Silva (peter@ferranti.com) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-04-07 11:13:01 PST In article <12333@auspex-gw.auspex.com> guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris) writes: > "/usr/openwin" is a completely *separate* glitch, although it has its > own "share" directory ("/usr/openwin/share"). I've no idea where > "/usr/openwin/fonts" comes from; I meant /usr/openwin/lib/fonts > it doesn't appear to be in the Open > Windows 2.0 nor the Open Windows 3.0 "/usr/openwin" directory. They > have "/usr/openwin/lib/fonts" instead (and they're not "Postscript > fonts" in the sense of Adobe Type N fonts, as far as I know; it's a > different font technology). There are Postscript fonts in there. Run "ldf" with no arguments. -- /F { dup /Courier findfont exch scalefont setfont } def /S { show } def /L { 8 mul 24 add 24 exch moveto } def 8 F 1 L (Peter da Silva, Ferranti Internat) S (ional Controls Corporation) S currentpoint 0 L (Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012;) S ( +1 713 274 5180) S 8 sub moveto 16 F ( Have you hugged your wolf today?) S Message 38 in thread From: Per Lindqvist (pgd@compuram.bbt.se) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-03-25 00:24:09 PST sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: : That also isn't that difficult, as most of them are the same for both BSD : and SysV bases. But there are also things which don't exist in BSD, and : will need to be rewritten. Terminfo, for example. Not an insurmountable : problem, true, but not necessarily trivial. There is a public-domain terminfo. I works great! -- Per Lindqvist Internet: pgd@compuram.bbt.se Fidonet: Per Lindqvist @ 2:201/332 Message 39 in thread From: Steve Simmons (scs@iti.org) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-03-24 08:32:54 PST sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: >At UseNIX, Rob Kolstad promised to be SCO compatible. In private >discussions with him, I verified that BSDinc plans on making their product >both DOS (which version? I dunno) and iBCS2 compatible. (iBCS2 being the >version of the BCS Intel, SCO, and AT&T hammered out which contains SCO >compatibility.) Their current flier says (quoted without permission): What about binary compatibility? The production system is planned to support SCI UNIX V.3.3 binaries. This will enable access to a large body of third party packages. From this, I'd assume the compatibility isn't there yet, but will be by production release. The flier says "Summer 1992" for that release. -- "One could implement POSIX using a very fast and very smart cockroach." Donald A. Lewine, <1992Feb18.204251.3356@uunet.uu.net> in comp.std.unix Message 40 in thread From: Jaye Mathisen (osyjm@coe.montana.edu) Subject: Re: 386BSD announcement Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd View this article only Date: 1992-03-23 14:26:16 PST In article <23.03.92.161425.216@cogsci.cog.jhu.edu> wjb@cogsci.cog.jhu.edu (Bill Bogstad) writes: >By the way, it was suggested to me in private email that BSDI plans to >support the standard 386 ABI in their first non-Beta release sometime this >summer. Would anybody care to confirm or deny this rumor? If true this >would (IMHO) make BSDI much more interesting to business users. From the brochure mailed to me, (and I think available in /vendors/bsdi in Postscript format ((Although it used the Palatino font which my PS printer didn't have. A quick editing job fixed this, and I think I still have a diff if you need it))) 2nd page, 3 lines up from the bottom: "What about binary compatibility?" "The production system is planned to support SCO UNIX V.3.3 binaries. This will enable access to a large body of third party packages". For whatever that's worth... -- Jaye Mathisen, COE Systems Manager (406) 994-4780 410 Roberts Hall,Dept. of Computer Science Montana State University,Bozeman MT 59717osyjm@{cs,coe}.montana.edu