Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!ucsdhub!jack!sdeggo!dave
From: dave@sdeggo.UUCP (David L. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Standard Un*x H/W architecture
Message-ID: <223@sdeggo.UUCP>
Date: 15 Jul 88 07:20:42 GMT
References: <261@hodge.UUCP> <370STORKEL@RICE> <607@riddle.UUCP> <4801@killer.UUCP>
Organization: Lazy Programmer's Society of San Diego
Lines: 12

In article <11783@ames.arc.nasa.gov>, lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) writes:
> The ABI standards are supposed to at least standardize Un*x 
> within H/W families.  

How is an ABI supposed to cope with differences in semantics across different
Unix's?  For example, a version that has enforced locking for lockf and
one that does not?  Sounds as if an ABI is only good for reasonably identical
implementations.
-- 
David L. Smith
{sdcsvax!jack,ihnp4!jack, hp-sdd!crash, pyramid, uport}!sdeggo!dave
sdeggo!dave@amos.ling.edu 
Sinners can repent but stupid is forever.