Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!ukma!gatech!emcard!sdba!stan From: stan@sdba.UUCP (Stan Brown) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: O'pain Software Foundation: (2) Why is it better than AT&T? Message-ID: <266@sdba.UUCP> Date: 31 May 88 17:50:11 GMT References: <24369@pyramid.pyramid.com> <10978@steinmetz.ge.com> <14181@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <5085@nsc.nsc.com> <11006@steinmetz.ge.com> <503@bacchus.DEC.COM> Organization: S. D. Brown & Assoc. Atlanta, Ga Lines: 20 Posted: Tue May 31 13:50:11 1988 > > In article <11006@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > > > An ABI is not for a vendor, it's for a CPU type. There will be one for > >SPARC, 386, 68020, and hopefully for VAXen. These are all markets in > >which there are either multiple hardware or software vendors. ABI > >describes how things call the O/S, and you don't need to "get one," you > >just buy the standard and write to it. > > This is yet another example of the blind speculation that seems to > be rampant throughout this topic. Getting an ABI is not as simple > as you state. DEC cannot get an ABI for the VAX. AT&T wouldn't allow > it. Do we need any more reason to rebel and form OSF? How tight Exactly what do you base this statement on ? -- Stan Brown S. D. Brown & Associates 404-292-9497 (uunet gatech)!sdba!stan "vi forever"