Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpnmdla!darrylo
From: darrylo@hpnmdla.HP.COM (Darryl Okahata)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Esix verses the rest of 386-unix
Message-ID: <12870008@hpnmdla.HP.COM>
Date: 20 Feb 91 17:48:42 GMT
References: <1991Feb19.111424.5711@lth.se>
Organization: HP Network Measurements Div, Santa Rosa, CA
Lines: 20

In comp.unix.sysv386, jh@efd.lth.se (Joergen Haegg) writes:

> Is there any difference between Esix and the other types like SCO and
> Interactive?
>
> Esix seems to be the cheapest alternative,
> but is there any problem with it?

     The biggest thing Esix is missing (in my opinion) is a real BSD
sockets library (both ISC and SCO have it).  Esix has a library that
appears to be a BSD socket library (the routine names in the library
*appear* to be BSD socket routine names), but it's not.

     -- Darryl Okahata
	UUCP: {hplabs!, hpcea!, hpfcla!} hpnmd!darrylo
	Internet: darrylo%hpnmd@relay.hp.com

DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion or policy of Hewlett-Packard or of the
little green men that have been following him all day.