Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!sun!guy From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: net.micro.att,net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: instability in Berkeley versus AT&T releases Message-ID: <2453@sun.uucp> Date: Sat, 20-Jul-85 19:12:21 EDT Article-I.D.: sun.2453 Posted: Sat Jul 20 19:12:21 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jul-85 23:10:46 EDT References: <2067@ucf-cs.UUCP> <363@cuae2.UUCP> <2423@sun.uucp> <406@petrus.UUCP> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Lines: 34 Xref: linus net.micro.att:295 net.unix-wizards:11122 > > By implication that puts all commercial vendors of 4.2BSD systems > > in the "unstable computing environment business"? > > Judging by how often we find bugs and our machines crash, I'd say yes, > runnning 4.2 BSD is being in an unstable computing environment. John didn't say "by implication that says 4.2BSD is an unstable computing environment", he said "by implication that puts all *commercial* vendors of 4.2BSD systems in the 'unstable computing environment business'." My machine is supplied by a "commercial vendor of 4.2BSD systems" (as is John's, I suspect :-) :-) :-)), and, well, 4:00pm up 5 days, 2:33, 6 users, load average: 0.23, 0.07, 0.00 It's been up longer. The only times it's crashed due to an OS bug are a few times when some pre-release software hung and it had to be rebooted (that problem hasn't recurred, and it wasn't the 4.2BSD base's fault) and once when it crashed due to some code I'd added (which, for the benefit of those of you who sneer at "lint", would have been reported by "lint"ing the kernel). I've rarely found bugs, and most of them have been pretty small. (Several pieces of code from the System V release would have crashed on this machine, because they dereference null pointers, so the Berkeley people aren't the only people who ship buggy UNIX software.) Then again, the "stability" being discussed here is not resistance to crashes but the absence of system changes that break existing code. Yes, 4.2BSD has introduced some changes which break existing code. So has System V. (Remember the time they decided to enforce the "only one external definition" rule? The old COMMON-block semantics came back faster than Old Coke...) Guy Harris