Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ll-xn!mit-eddie!apollo!brezak From: brezak@apollo.uucp (John Brezak) Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix Subject: Re: Huh? Message-ID: <35e5f0fe.8a06@apollo.uucp> Date: Mon, 6-Jul-87 10:21:00 EDT Article-I.D.: apollo.35e5f0fe.8a06 Posted: Mon Jul 6 10:21:00 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 7-Jul-87 04:51:03 EDT References: <143@lakesys.UUCP> Reply-To: brezak@apollo.UUCP (John Brezak) Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, MA Lines: 20 Keywords: Xenix SYSV Is Xenix real System V R2 ???? I don't think so. I had a problem once using the ( SVR2 ) shared memory calls, once. Upon disassembling I discovered, to my horror, that all Microsoft did was to write a front end to their own shared memory management system for Xenix, that did not follow the documented SVID behaviour. Also for BSD Unix users, Try to compare the Xenix Csh to the "real" Csh. Also look at curses. Just another point, I tried Microport Unix once, I found the same brain-damaged Csh, that was the end of using Microport. I already knew Xenix's incompatibilities, I didn't want to find out Microport's. If anyone has any more recent experience, I would like to hear from you. This isn't a flame on Xenix or Microport. I'd use them both is I have to use an 80286 over the other alternatives. But I prefer Virtual Memeory and not having to figure out the correct memory model. =============================================================================================== John Brezak Apollo Computer