Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!asuvax!mcdphx!phx.mcd.mot.com!df
From: df@phx.mcd.mot.com (Dale Farnsworth)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Coherent Unix?
Message-ID: <14092@mcdphx.phx.mcd.mot.com>
Date: 19 Nov 90 23:23:26 GMT
References: <kbDrfFG00VAC02N5xk@andrew.cmu.edu> <1327@crpmks.UUCP>
Sender: listen@mcdphx.phx.mcd.mot.com
Reply-To: df@phx.mcd.mot.com (Dale Farnsworth)
Organization: Motorola Microcomputer Division, Tempe, Az.
Lines: 20

Dan Simoes (Info Systems) (dans@crpmks.UUCP) writes:
> Coherent was reviewed in a recent Byte (a real review, not the commentary from
> a previous issue).  Turns out it's similar to MKS Toolkit, and not very
> effective.  Read the article.

I haven't seen the Byte article, but I wouldn't call Coherent similar to
MKS Toolkit.  The MKS Toolkit is a set of programs that work with dos,
providing a Unix-like interface; Coherent is a standalone implementation
of a Unix-like kernel and utilities.  For me, Coherent 3.10 is deja vu.
It appears to exactly duplicate the Version 7 Unix on a PDP-11 that I
used in 1980 (except no source), with a few enhancements like clones of
emacs and vi.  Coherent has the same 64KB text + 64KB data limitation; it
has on-line manual pages, cc, yacc, uucp, nroff (plus troff with HP LJ output).
I marvel at how faithful the implementation seems.

Coherent is a clone of Unix as it was 10 years ago.

You'll have to decide if it fits your needs.

-Dale