Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ames!amdahl!nsc!unixprt!monkey
From: monkey@unixprt.UUCP (Monkey Face@unixprt)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions,comp.bugs.sys5
Subject: Re: Remote File Sharing (RFS) - SVR3
Message-ID: <262@unixprt.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Jan-87 23:33:22 EST
Article-I.D.: unixprt.262
Posted: Tue Jan  6 23:33:22 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Jan-87 06:39:29 EST
References: <261@unixprt.UUCP>, <371@oblio.UUCP> <7478@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: uni-xperts - Unix System and Networking Consultants
Lines: 18
Keywords: RFS, SVR3
Summary: SVID compliance
Xref: mnetor comp.unix.wizards:514 comp.unix.questions:549 comp.bugs.sys5:18

In article <7478@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes:
> Unfortunately, licensing SVR3 is not something that can be taken for granted,
> since the license contains some troublesome clauses about mandatory SVID
> compliance that have made a lot of vendors think twice about it.

It seems appropriate that if you have a UNIX port based on SVR3, that at
least one of the environments available to the user is SVID compliant.
I do not believe that this this disallows having other 'known'
environments available.

Application writers need to have a finite set of environments 
to address their work to, else so many things will only run on very
specific environments (like now).

Several vendors are providing this multi-environment solution already.

Monkey Face - Uni-xperts, Milpitas CA
(408) 946-6572