*BSD News Article 5993


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.unix.sysv386:24385 comp.unix.sys5.r4:131 comp.unix.sys5.r3:15 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:235 comp.unix.bsd:6041 comp.os.linux:11667 comp.os.mach:2244 comp.windows.x:45850
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux,comp.os.mach,comp.windows.x
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewsc!cbfsb!att-out!cbnewsj!dwex
From: dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat)
Subject: Re: Announcing the availability of XFree86 1.1
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 21:50:41 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Oct3.215041.17541@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
References: <BvK6ny.H2J@news.udel.edu> <1992Oct3.192551.1831@netcom.com>
Lines: 27

In article <1992Oct3.192551.1831@netcom.com> dror@netcom.com (Oz Dror) writes:
> 
> Is SCO Unix (3.2.2) Supported?
> -- 
> NAME   Oz Dror
> SMAIL  dror@netcom.com
> PHONE  (213) 874-7978  Fax (213) 667-6908


No.  At least two people have told us (months ago) that they were working on
it.  No one has delivered anything.  If someone wants to do it and contribute
it back, fine.

This, by the way, is a perfect example of why SVR4 is better than SCO.
We have a single binary kit, ~20MB compressed, that works on SVR4 from 7 
different vendors.  There are NO (none, nada, zip, zero) differences.  Not 
in the server, not in the clients, not in the libraries.  And the server
(under SVR4.0.4, anyhow) supports local connections from SCO binaries 
(i.e. I run an SCO binary on my SVR4 box, and it just works).

Was someone mentioning "standards"?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
David Wexelblat             | dwex@mtgzfs3.att.com  | Somebody get me a
AT&T Bell Laboratories      | ...!att!mtgzfs3!dwex  |   cheeseburger!
200 Laurel Ave - 4B-421     |                       |      
Middletown, NJ  07748       | (908) 957-5871        | --Steve Miller Band