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