bob@pedsgo.UUCP (02/04/87)
Can anyone tell me if 1) I buy a XENIX development system, do I get a Microsoft C based compiler or is it a PCC based compiler? 2) Is XENIX 386 available for the COMPAQ 386 yet? How bout for any other 386? 3) Anything good or bad about SCO? Thanks in advance. Bob Weiler
davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (02/06/87)
In article <636@pedsgo.UUCP> bob@pedsgo.UUCP (Bob Weiler) writes: >Can anyone tell me if > >1) I buy a XENIX development system, do I get a Microsoft C based > compiler or is it a PCC based compiler? Unfortunately the Microsoft compiler. While this is a good compiler, generates multiple memory models, cross compiles for PCDOS, etc, it will not compile some useful programs posted to the net without hours of hacking. If you don't need complete compatibility, this is not a problem. Anything which passes the compiler's internal checking with top error level is *far* more portable than checking with lint. I have never found a problem which wasn't really a bug in the program, except in the "huge model", which is a non-portable nest of bugs. It uses non-portable keywords and procedure names (such as 'halloc'). A switch to use 32 bit ints would have eliminated most of this. > >2) Is XENIX 386 available for the COMPAQ 386 yet? How bout > for any other 386? It was shown at UniForum, but doesn't seem to be shipping. Microport also showed, I think they're a little closer to being ready, but that could just be because I got a bad demo from the Microsoft guy. > >3) Anything good or bad about SCO? > Their support policy is aimed at supporting the novice and soaking the expert. They give one month free tech support with a copy, but that frequently runs out before you find the *real* questions. I would prefer one or two hours of support anytime in the first year. Since you have no choice but to buy from SCO (the IBM version seems to lack some features), "you might as well enjoy it". Disclamer: all personal opinion... -- bill davidsen sixhub \ ihnp4!seismo!rochester!steinmetz -> crdos1!davidsen chinet / ARPA: davidsen%crdos1.uucp@ge-crd.ARPA (or davidsen@ge-crd.ARPA)
ben@catnip.UUCP (02/07/87)
In article <636@pedsgo.UUCP> bob@pedsgo.UUCP (Bob Weiler) writes: >Can anyone tell me if > >1) I buy a XENIX development system, do I get a Microsoft C based > compiler or is it a PCC based compiler? You get Microsoft C-Merge, which can compile programs for execution under either Xenix or MS-DOS. Of course, when you specify the -DOS flag, you get different libraries that support a slightly different set of calls. C-merge is very similar to the 3.0 release of Microsoft C for MS-DOS. >2) Is XENIX 386 available for the COMPAQ 386 yet? How bout > for any other 386? Not yet. It has been announced in the latest issue of their magazine diSCOver, and should be available in a few months. If you want '386 support now, you can buy Xenix/286 and the 386 developers toolkit. This will give you the 386 compiler, plus a minimal kernel for testing your software. With this route, you can have your software all ready when they start shipping Xenix/386. -- Ben Broder {ihnp4,decvax} !hjuxa!catnip!ben {houxm,clyde}/
bob@ahxenix.UUCP (02/09/87)
In article <636@pedsgo.UUCP>, bob@pedsgo.UUCP writes: > Can anyone tell me if > > 1) I buy a XENIX development system, do I get a Microsoft C based > compiler or is it a PCC based compiler? > Microsoft CMERGE compiler, in which Microsoft C 4.0 for PC-DOS is compatable. > 2) Is XENIX 386 available for the COMPAQ 386 yet? How bout > for any other 386? Not yet, although I think SCO will have it ready sometime during the next quarter. (my opinion, not a fact) SCO will sell you a 286 version, with a free upgrade to 386 when it's released. > > 3) Anything good or bad about SCO? > Well, as with most companies like SCO, they are experiencing growing pains. They are getting better than they used to be, but they still stumble every now and then. -- Bob Leffler - bob@ahxenix.REL.COM ...!ihnp4!mb2c!edsdrd!ahxenix!bob