Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!rex!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!adk
From: adk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Andrew D Kailhofer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ncr
Subject: Re: RFS is Unsupported
Summary: and who's bright idea was it, anyway?
Keywords: SVR4 stateless support not-smart-decisions
Message-ID: <4470@uwm.edu>
Date: 14 Jun 90 11:10:58 GMT
References: <3572@texbell.swbt.com> <569@ofc.Columbia.NCR.COM>
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Reply-To: a07932@gus.AMERITECH.COM (Andrew D Kailhofer)
Organization: Ameritech Applied Technologies
Lines: 21

I too have had the same rude awakening...  "No, really...  we're
SPECing the man pages.  You have a documentation bug."

For an operation allegedly supportive of open standards and all of
that good commitment stuff to not support an important (i.e. has
important technical differences), functionality-wise different
product, especially one that is going to be part of SVR4, doesn't make
the most sense.

Also, my pet NCR peeve:  if you aren't going to support it, don't even
include it if it doesn't actually work!!!  or include the source (if
you legally can--I know, for RFS, you can't).  We can support things
as well as you can, and we don't have to wait three weeks for Columbia
to get back to CODAR, either.

Andy Kailhofer
kailhofr@cvax.cs.uwm.edu
Ameritech Applied Technologies
414/678-7793

My opinions are not those of Ameritech, or myself for that matter.