Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!gnu
From: gnu@sun.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: net.micro.att,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: instability in Berkeley versus AT&T releases
Message-ID: <2423@sun.uucp>
Date: Tue, 16-Jul-85 05:24:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2423
Posted: Tue Jul 16 05:24:59 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Jul-85 05:59:47 EDT
References: <2067@ucf-cs.UUCP> <363@cuae2.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 15
Xref: watmath net.micro.att:254 net.unix-wizards:13865

Ron Heiby at ihnp4!cuae2!heiby responded to a user's question "why doesn't
AT&T distribute [possibly optional] Berkeley enhancements, I hear they
use them in house anyway" with:
>                                     As to any other BSD developments:  They
> are all known of and looked at by AT&T developers.  Some appear in System V,
> like "cat -v" and "ls -RadCxmnlogrtyucpFbqisf" and "mailx" (alias Mail).  The
> thing to remember is that Berkeley is (supposed to be) in the education
> business.  They do a good job by letting students experiment.  AT&T is in the
> stable computing environment business.  We do a good job by making darn sure
> that what we do doesn't break something (like a shell script or worse) and
> that we spend our efforts spending resources on the most important/needed
> enhancements first.

By implication that puts all commercial vendors of 4.2BSD systems
in the "unstable computing environment business"?