naftoli@aecom.UUCP (Robert N. Berlinger) (11/20/85)
The upcoming releases of System V are no longer supporting DEC equipment.
This includes System V release 2.1 (prerelease) and System V
release 3. AT&T is obviously trying to force DEC people to
buy AT&T equipment. I think that this is rediculous! What happened to
their big commitment of support? Does anyone know if DEC will be supporting
System V? If AT&T thinks that people are going to sell DEC and buy AT&T
just because they waive their hand, they've got another thing coming!
--
Robert Berlinger
...{philabs,cucard,pegasus,ihnp4,rocky2}!aecom!naftolijoel@gould9.UUCP (Joel West) (11/24/85)
In article <2073@aecom.UUCP>, naftoli@aecom.UUCP (Robert N. Berlinger) writes: > The upcoming releases of System V are no longer supporting DEC equipment. > This includes System V release 2.1 (prerelease) and System V > release 3. AT&T is obviously trying to force DEC people to > buy AT&T equipment. This is pretty ludicrous, given that the largest purchaser of DEC hardware in the world (with the exception of DoD) has been AT&T Bell Labs. To run, you guessed it, AT&T UNIX. > Does anyone know if DEC will be supporting System V? DEC's having enough trouble supporting BSD. :-) Besides, I've seen very little evidence that anyone wants System V on a VAX, except: * AT&T sites * Sites involved in AT&T projects * Sites hosting a port of System V to another computer Maybe the answer is that nobody wanted it. In some ways, that's too bad; for example, once you've used System V's make on a large project you'll never go back. -- Joel West (619) 457-9681 CACI, Inc. Federal, 3344 N. Torrey Pines Ct., La Jolla, CA 92037 {cbosgd,ihnp4,pyramid,sdcsvax,ucla-cs}!gould9!joel gould9!joel@nosc.ARPA
gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>) (11/25/85)
> In article <2073@aecom.UUCP>, naftoli@aecom.UUCP (Robert N. Berlinger) writes: > > The upcoming releases of System V are no longer supporting DEC equipment. > > This includes System V release 2.1 (prerelease) and System V > > release 3. AT&T is obviously trying to force DEC people to > > buy AT&T equipment. All it indicates to me is that AT&T feels it can't adequately support another vendor's product line. Considering all the past complaints about lack of support for the latest DEC peripherals, that seems correct. Clearly the best outfit to support a product line is its vendor. My main concern is that AT&T will pay even less attention to the universality of UNIX software than they have in the past. I guess the vendors will have to pund on them about this. > This is pretty ludicrous, given that the largest purchaser of > DEC hardware in the world (with the exception of DoD) has > been AT&T Bell Labs. To run, you guessed it, AT&T UNIX. This does bring up the interesting question of what the AT&T VAX sites are going to do for future UNIXes. > > Does anyone know if DEC will be supporting System V? There is evidence that DEC's Ultrix group is accommodating System V in one way or another. I expect that future 4.nBSD systems will move somewhat in the System V direction anyway, so this may become a non-issue.
vsh@pixdoc.UUCP (Steve Harris) (11/27/85)
A recent issue of Forbes (I don't have the date -- but the cover story
is on the AT&T - MCI - Sprint battle for long distance service) suggests
that AT&T may be looking to acquire (merge with) DEC to shore up its
computer know-how in the upcoming main event against IBM. Or if not
DEC, some other established major player in the DP biz.
Any comments?
--
Steve Harris | {allegra|ihnp4|cbosgd|ima|genrad|amd|harvard}\
Pixel Systems Inc. | !wjh12!pixel!pixdoc!vsh
300 Wildwood Street |
Woburn, MA 01801 | 617-933-7735 x2314romain@pyrnj.uucp (Romain Kang) (11/28/85)
Or could it be that they're trying to avoid accusations of favorable
treatment towards DEC? For boxes other than AT&T's and DEC's, the
System V port has always been left up to vendors, who submit their
ports to AT&T for validation. Now SV.3 has become a generic System V
which is defined by its behavior on AT&T's own boxes. This will open
support on DEC machines to a System V equivalent of Mt Xinu
(Unisoft?). Or even (shudder) DEC if they care to do so.
--
Romain Kang, Pyramid Technology Corporation
US Mail: 900 Route 9, Woodbridge, NJ 07095
Ma Bell: (201) 750-2626
UUCPnet: {allegra,cmcl2,pyramid,topaz}!pyrnj!romain
"Eggheads unite! You have nothing to lose but your yolks!" -Adlai Stevensonjk@plx.UUCP (John Kullmann) (12/03/85)
> > > Does anyone know if DEC will be supporting System V? > > There is evidence that DEC's Ultrix group is accommodating > System V in one way or another. I expect that future 4.nBSD > systems will move somewhat in the System V direction anyway, > so this may become a non-issue. DEC has a group in Holmdale (something like that) New Jersey that is getting System V up. It will supposedly be available for beta test in February (seems kind of long to me but that's what they told me...) John Kullmann
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (12/06/85)
In article <177@plx.UUCP> jk@plx.UUCP (John Kullmann) writes: >> > > Does anyone know if DEC will be supporting System V? >DEC has a group in Holmdale (something like that) New Jersey >John Kullmann I don't know about a group in Holmdell, but the Ultrix Applications Centre in the DC area just hosted the DECUS UNIX Local Users' Group (how 'bout that!) and talked a lot about Ultrix 1.2, to be released (they think) in January or February 1986. This realease is said to be source-code compatible with System V Release 2.? per the System V Interface Description (SVID). Several of the DECUAC people were mighty proud of the work they had put into this version. It will still not be an "approved port" of System V, it seems, if that has special meaning to anybody; but I believe this is being done to fulfill government requirements for a UNIX that meets the currently available UNIX standard (i.e., SVID). -- Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}