Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.misc:10641 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:5227 comp.unix.bsd:13166 comp.windows.x.i386unix:6006 biz.sco.general:9626 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!demon!stonewall.demon.co.uk!nigel Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.bsd,comp.windows.x.i386unix,biz.sco.general From: nigel@stonewall.demon.co.uk (Nigel Whitfield) Subject: Re: SCO market share References: <WAYNE.93Dec17083053@backbone.uucp> <9312210930.aa08217@fags.stonewall.demon.co.uk> <1993Dec22.021625.22831@kf8nh.wariat.org> Organization: Jenny Agutter Fan Club Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 08:43:46 +0000 Message-ID: <9312220843.aa11509@fags.stonewall.demon.co.uk> Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk Lines: 12 In article <1993Dec22.021625.22831@kf8nh.wariat.org> bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes: > >...after watching both cc and rcc under SCO 3.2.2 really botch up generated >code, I've been using gcc exclusively. I haven't tested either under 3.2.4 to >see if they can be trusted for critical applications yet. Compilers - who need's em? I'm sure I have one around here on a spare disk somewhere, but we don't have one in the office. I don't view it as necessary for running Unix. Nigel.