Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site baylor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!rocksanne!sunybcs!kitty!baylor!peter
From: peter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.micro.att,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Re: instability in Berkeley versus AT&T releases
Message-ID: <307@baylor.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Jul-85 15:31:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: baylor.307
Posted: Wed Jul 24 15:31:23 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jul-85 01:35:27 EDT
References: <2067@ucf-cs.UUCP> <363@cuae2.UUCP> <2423@sun.uucp> <406@petrus.UUCP>
Organization: Ancient Illuminated Seers of Bavaria
Lines: 22
Xref: linus net.micro.att:319 net.unix-wizards:11182

> > 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.

Judging by how much stuff Bell broke when they came out with SV, and judging by
the fact that BSD is still sufficiently compatible that you can run a
V6 binary on it (2BSD, but 2 is source compatible with 4), even if it
uses stty, I'd say it's Bell that's in the unstable computing environment
business.

System III.
System V, consider it standard.
System V, release 2, from now on consider it standard.
System V, release 2, Version 2?
-- 
-- Peter da Silva (the mad Australian)
-- UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter
-- ARPA: baylor.peter@RICE.ARPA
-- MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076; DELPHI: PJDASILVA
--