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.