Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!apple!voder!wlbr!mh From: mh@wlbr.EATON.COM (Mike Hoegeman) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: System V Release 4.0 Developer Conferences Message-ID: <23539@wlbr.EATON.COM> Date: 27 Sep 88 23:10:18 GMT References: <167@hsi86.hsi.UUCP> <1988Sep22.173745.14647@utzoo.uucp> <8570@smoke.ARPA> <1988Sep26.213223.407@utzoo.uucp> Reply-To: mh@wlbr.eaton.com.UUCP (Mike Hoegeman) Organization: Eaton IMSD, Westlake Village, CA Lines: 14 In article <1988Sep26.213223.407@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <8570@smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa ... > ...etc... >ABI implies that a conforming machine must have kernel support for both >NeWS *and* X. This is ridiculous for people who plan to run neither. > Could You explain this? I don't understand why this would be so. Last time I looked NeWS and X did'nt need much in the way of kernel support. This is supposedly one of their strengths. thanks. -mike