Xref: utzoo comp.unix.admin:1537 comp.sys.hp:8302
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!cello!renglish
From: renglish@cello.hpl.hp.com (Bob English)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin,comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: Snakebytes (long -- and poisonous?).
Message-ID: <1991Apr08.195116.20193@cello.hpl.hp.com>
Date: 8 Apr 91 19:51:16 GMT
References: <17746@uudell.dell.com>
Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs
Lines: 21

sblair@upurbmw.dell.com (Steve Blair) writes:
> I've spent many, many years in BSD systems' environments. Now...
> I find myself working in new ways. Very, VERY few things that worked
> before in BSD land don't work in SYS V.4 . I've got a csh that works
> great, my pick of cc's that I wish to utilize...

That is all true, but it is also not the point.  If I have a large
number of different systems to administer and I have to keep track of
the differences between them, it is much more painful than if I have
only one.  As a user who has used both, I care very little which one I
use.  If I were an administrator, I would become increasingly unhappy as
the number of variants I had to simultaneously administer increased.

I don't know which is harder or easier or whatever, but even if sysV
were half as difficult to administer as BSD, the addition of sysV
machines to a BSD world makes the administrator's job more difficult.

--bob--
renglish@hplabs.hp.com
I'm not even saying this.  If HP could talk, it probably wouldn't,
either.