Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!uunet!world!unixland!bill
From: bill@unixland.uucp (Bill Heiser)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: ESIX and MCA
Message-ID: <1990Nov18.132854.612@unixland.uucp>
Date: 18 Nov 90 13:28:54 GMT
References: <5683@crash.cts.com>
Organization: The Think_Tank BBS & Public Access Unix
Lines: 23

In article <5683@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes:
>
>One of the things I have done is rule out getting ESIX for the system that I'm
>proposing in the next few months.  Reason being that security hole that was
>mentioned awhile back.  Since the machine in question will be used as a
>mailhost and gateway, it would be very foolish to use an OS with even the
>HINT of a security hole.

Why don't you just using Esix and install smail in place of sendmail?  The
sendmail problem doesn't seem like enough of a reason to slam the door shut
on Esix.

The things I've heard about Interactive and SCO do *NOT* lead me to believe
they are all so great themselves...  It seems that ALL of the available 
products have their own unique problems.



-- 
home:	...!{uunet,bloom-beacon,esegue}!world!unixland!bill
	bill@unixland.uucp,  bill%unixland.uucp@world.std.com
	Public Access Unix  - Esix SYSVR3 - (508) 655-3848
other:	heiser@world.std.com   Public Access Unix (617) 739-9753