*BSD News Article 84912


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!panix!news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.osf.osf1
Subject: Re: Solaris 2.6
Date: 13 Dec 1996 10:09:45 -0500
Organization: Panix
Lines: 42
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <58rrjp$c1c@panix2.panix.com>
References: <32986299.AC7@mail.esrin.esa.it> <58n5q1$9ci@arktur.rz.uni-ulm.de> <58pdbt$mjv@web.nmti.com> <58rqg5$4gc@panix.com>
Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.solaris:92486 comp.unix.bsd.misc:1814 comp.unix.internals:11615 comp.unix.osf.osf1:17053

In article <58rqg5$4gc@panix.com>, Bryan Althaus <bryan@panix.com> wrote:
>Peter da Silva (peter@nmti.com) wrote:
>: In article <58n5q1$9ci@arktur.rz.uni-ulm.de>,
>: Andreas Borchert <borchert@turing.mathematik.uni-ulm.de> wrote:
>: > On 11 Dec 1996 16:37:18 GMT, Peter da Silva <peter@nmti.com> wrote:
>: > > I've got a bunch of reasons for disliking Solaris. That it's based on System
>: > > V isn't one of them. I've got far more experience with System V than BSD.
>: 
>: > Would you please so kind to enumerate some of your reasons?
>: 
>: 
>: Now, some of these have apparently been fixed in 2.4 and 2.5, and of course
>: porting System V software has become less of an issue... I've done my ports,
>: and new software that uses the System V interfaces tends to be written for
>: the Solaris environment now. But Solaris gave me a pretty bad time for a
>: pretty long time, and I'm not much interested in renewing my acquaintance
>: with it.
>
>This is such bullshit.  Read your last line.  You haven't used Solaris
>in a long time.  Most people consider Solaris from 2.4 on.  So in all
>your arguements your talking about Solaris 2.0->2.3, which everyone
>knew was buggy and to stay away from.

Oh?  I seem to recall Sun pushing a lot of customers, including me, very, very
hard to use "Solaris 2.0->2.3".  I also seem to recall each and every new
Solaris release from 2.0 to 2.4 claiming to not be buggy, not be a total
performance dog, etc. and so forth.

I recall quite a bit of hardware that was supported by "Solaris 2.0->2.3"
which was *not* supported by SunOS4.1.3 until other SPARC vendors did it
themselves and Sun was forced to.  Sun downright *coerced* its customers to
use early Solaris 2 versions, and now they're surprised that Solaris has a bad
reputation in consequence?

Peter -- somewhere around 2.5 or 2.5.1, Solaris actually got usable.  Rumor
has it that this is because certain of the Solaris developers were forced to
run it themselves, instead of SunOS. :-)  It might be worth another look.

-- 
Thor Lancelot Simon	                                          tls@panix.COM

 Stumbling drunk in the railyard looking for God: http://www.panix.com/~tls/