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"?