Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen
From: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Come on, stop blaming/flaming SCO!
Message-ID: <2237@crdos1.crd.ge.COM>
Date: 3 May 90 20:55:55 GMT
References: <216@pcssc.UUCP> <1990Apr26.173835.26100@ico.isc.com> <544@isipc.UUCP> <839@visenix.UUCP> <1990Apr30.233248.24317@ico.isc.com> <218@pcssc.UUCP> <6005@scolex.sco.COM>
Reply-To: davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corp R&D Center, Schenectady NY
Lines: 27

In article <6005@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) writes:

| In article <218@pcssc.UUCP> dma@pcssc.UUCP (Dave Armbrust) writes:
| >SCO is compatable with other AT&T System V.3.2 but as I understand they are
| >not using the same port that other UNIX's have used.  
| 
| No.  As far as I know, we used the same port that everyone else did.  From
| what I understand, we *had* to, in order to be able to call it 'UNIX(tm)'.
| AT&T licenses the name, of course, and they have some restrictions on what
| can be called UNIX.

  There goes one argument.
| 
| >My understanding is they took their Xenix Sys V release 2 port and made
| >it release 3 compatable.  If I am wrong on this please correct me.
| 
| You're wrong. 8-)

  There goes another.

  There are some very good arguments for comp.unix.i386.apps, and Peter
has made most of them (although I don't think that's the name he
mentioned). Since the same apps run on ALL 386 versions called UNIX
(they have to to get the right to call it UNIX) there could be one group.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
            "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me