Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!chinet!bigtex!james From: james@bigtex.uucp (James Van Artsdalen) Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport Subject: Re: new groups for iX86 unix Message-ID: <6560@bigtex.uucp> Date: 20 Aug 88 21:04:52 GMT References: <425@uport.UUCP> Reply-To: james@bigtex.UUCP (James Van Artsdalen) Organization: F.B.N. Software, Austin TX Lines: 37 In article <425@uport.UUCP>, plocher@uport.UUCP (John Plocher) wrote: > AT&T Vr3.2 (shipping for the WGS series on 8/15) is Unix V with the ability > to support Xenix: > "This release supports the Microsoft Xenix application programming interface > (with system call extentions supporting existing Xenix SystemV/386 and Xenix > System V/286 applications) at both a source code and a binary executable ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ > level. [...] ^^^^^ > [Note: this does NOT specify object level compatibility. -John] Then what does "binary executable level" mean? > The above quotes were taken from my copy of the AT&T Unix System V/386 > Release 3.2 Product Overview manual which just came back from the print > shop. ;-) Interesting implications. Let us know when the boot disks come back from the duplication shop. > why not just comp.unix.intel for all of the above - the volume does NOT > demand a split. I agree here. I try to place "386" in the subject line of my GNU C postings, and figure a little more of this would eliminate the confusion. As for renaming the existing newsgroup to avoid being overly vendor-specific, I think it's a good idea, and I'm glad uPort volunteered, but I don't think it's worth the trouble. Inertia is a powerful thing on usenet. -- James R. Van Artsdalen ...!uunet!utastro!bigtex!james "Live Free or Die" Home: 512-346-2444 Work: 328-0282; 110 Wild Basin Rd. Ste #230, Austin TX 78746