Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!mintaka!think.com!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!att!cbnewsl!cbnewsk!cbnewsj!cbnewsi!cbnewsh!cbnewsu!cbnewse!cbnewsd!cbfsb!cbnewsc!dcon
From: dcon@cbnewsc.att.com (david.r.connet)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Another <sys/sioctl.h> / <sys/ptem.h> query
Message-ID: <1990Nov20.185601.21420@cbnewsc.att.com>
Date: 20 Nov 90 18:56:01 GMT
References: <50005@bigtex.cactus.org>
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 17

In article <50005@bigtex.cactus.org>, james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) writes:
> 1. Does AT&T SysVr3.2 have <sys/ptem.h>?
Yes.  3 machines that I'm on:
	iwtng iwtng 3.2.1 3 3B2
	cbnewsc cbnewsc 3.2.2 3 3B2
	iwwlb iwwlb 3.2 2.2 i386

> 2. If not, which add-on package of AT&T SysVr3.2 adds this file?
> 
> At this point, the consensus seems to be to drop <sys/sioctl.h> in all
> configurations and to use <sys/ptem.h> instead.  It is believed that
> there are few systems with <sys/sioctl.h> that do not also have
> <sys/ptem.h>, and that ISC no longer sells this configuration.
None of these systems have <sys/sioctl.h>.

Dave Connet
dcon@iwtng.att.com