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