Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!gatech!cadeta!dtscp1!scott From: scott@dtscp1.UUCP (Scott Barman) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: BSD vs. System V, one last thing... Message-ID: <347@dtscp1.UUCP> Date: 20 Sep 88 01:20:00 GMT References: <553@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> <21106@cornell.UUCP> Reply-To: scott@dtscp1.UUCP (Scott Barman) Organization: Digital Transmission Systems, Atlanta Lines: 24 In article <21106@cornell.UUCP> murthy@cs.cornell.edu (Chet Murthy) writes: >In article <553@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> jherr@umbio.MIAMI.EDU (Jack Herrington) writes: >At least, not paged virtual memory. sysV diesn't >have it because, as I heard it, it is derived from >PWB/UNIX, and not v7. PWB was the same UNIX, >so I have heard, that spawned 32v, which went on to >become 2bsd, 3bsd, 4bsd, etc. However, sysV did >get paging in version V.2.2. And also in V.3 >System V did indeed have swapping, though. But >then swapping can be done with a minimum of hardware. No! 32V (and I used 32V waiting for a 4.0bsd tape--way back when :-) was version seven made to run on the Vax. It was not derived from PWB. BSD was derived (from what I have been told) v6 (2.x bsd) and 32v (from 3 bsd, a beastie I never used :-). System III was derived from PWB and, of course, System V is derived from System III (System IV never worked real well from what I have been told by someone who has used it). Since AT&T based SV on PWB and not v7, it convinced the company I worked for to stay with BSD since stuff running on our PDP 11/55 running v7 required extra work to port and worked with no problems on BSD. (yes, this is a jab at AT&T--I still feel they should have "gone with the girl that brung 'em"). -- scott barman ..!gatech!dtscp1!scott