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