*BSD News Article 7718


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.unix.solaris:482 comp.unix.bsd:7768
Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!nntp.msstate.edu!news
From: fwp@CC.MsState.Edu (Frank Peters)
Subject: Re: Solaris 1.1 vs. Solaris 2.0 (BSD vs AT&T)
Message-ID: <1992Nov15.035135.15514@ra.msstate.edu>
Sender: news@ra.msstate.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: jester.cc.msstate.edu
Organization: Computing Center, Mississippi State University
References: <BxLz6x.EL7@cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Nov13.232053.7061@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu> <1992Nov15.014513.28154@nobeltech.se>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 03:51:35 GMT
Lines: 55

In article <1992Nov15.014513.28154@nobeltech.se> ppan@nobeltech.se (Per Andersson) says:
: In article <1992Nov13.232053.7061@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu> rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner) writes:
: >There are a lot of reasons to unify the UNIX world under one roof.  You
: >may prefer BSD over SysV, but let's face facts -> BSD is dead.  BSD is
: >the property of UC California, Berkeley, and they are closing it down.
: 
: This might be true, but SunOS 4.x is not dead, and has a very large installed 
: base. So why do they stuff system V up out throats ? Deal with AT&T ? - 
: probably not. Good sales word when dealing with executives ? - probably.

Most other major workstation vendors already use SYSV.  MAny of the
package and printer administration and other services in SYSV make it a
more practical system for the growing administrative market.  SYSV
scales better to the larger systems sun is beginning to offer (there is
a reason that just about every large scale multiprocessor system vendor
from Sequent to Cray uses SYSV).

If Sun stuck to SYSV they would steadily lose their market share
leadership.  Software vendors would start writing to other (SYSV based)
vendors first and Sun second which would cost them more market
share...and so on.  And eventually, instead of catching flack for
changing to SYSV they would be catching flack (like they do with Open
Look) for pushing their own way instead of following the industry.
Amusingly, I suspect that many of the people bitching about this change
would be the same people bitching in a couple of years if they didn't
change.  There are a lot of people who just look for reasons to be
unhappy.

: To bad all software will have to be ported, especially for all of us that
: use SUNs for managing and debugging networks (Where is my NIT?).

But once you get it ported it will be a lot easier to make it run on
the other major systems out there.  And, perhaps more importantly,
vendors writing software for other major systems out there will have a
lot less trouble porting their software to Sun.

Yes it is a lot of work, and for very little gain in the short run.
But I think that it makes a lot more sense if you look at it in terms
of Sun's place in the UNIX community of the future.

: And look at all the time we will have to spend learning to administer sysV.

But its very nice once you do learn it.  Adding new devices is easier.
Software management is nicer.  The rc script system is makes making
changes to the boot sequence easier.  And inittab is a very powerful tool
for some specific applications.

: In addition SUN doesn't even promise to keep in line with sysV in the future,
: and might deviate away. So why this fuss at all?

Who did you ask this of?  

--
Frank Peters  -  UNIX Systems Programmer  -  Mississippi State University
Internet: fwp@CC.MsState.Edu  -  Phone: (601)325-7030  -  FAX: (601)325-8921