Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!bwdls61!awhitton
From: awhitton@bnr.ca (Alan Whitton)
Subject: Re: How many machines running Mach?
Message-ID: <1991May7.163912.615@bwdls61.bnr.ca>
Sender: usenet@bwdls61.bnr.ca (Use Net)
Organization: Bell Northern Research, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
References: <7644@auspex.auspex.com>
Distribution: comp
Date: Tue, 7 May 1991 16:39:12 GMT

guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) writes:
> >1) You can't do OSF/1 without Mach.  They are one in the same.
> 
> The first statement doesn't necessarily imply the second, if in the
> second you mean "one and the same".  If OSF/1 has stuff in it that Mach,
> as it comes from CMU, doesn't, the first statement would be true but the
> second would be false....

I agree with Guy. I was at an OSF symposium and the authentication suite
(Authentication Environment Specification) does not specifically mention
Mach. I in fact asked, "Does this mean, you need not have Mach to be 
certified as an OSF/1 compliant OS?", and the response I got back was
"Yes, you don't need Mach to be OSF compliant".

Cheers,
Alan Whitton
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
BNR Ottawa                   Disclaimer: "This is only my opinion"
BITNET: awhitton@bnr.ca  OR  UUCP: ...uunet!bnrgate!forum!awhitton