Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!pyramid!decwrl!sun!guy
From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: UUCP USERFILE
Message-ID: <5561@sun.uucp>
Date: Mon, 28-Jul-86 14:41:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.5561
Posted: Mon Jul 28 14:41:20 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 29-Jul-86 02:56:56 EDT
References: <1759@brl-smoke.ARPA> <976@decuac.DEC.COM> <459@oracle.UUCP> <5431@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 40

> When I buy 4.2, I expect my users and staff to be able to use 4.2
> documentation to deal with the system.  We have a number of different
> machines.  We do not want each machine to have a random combination of
> features chosen from 4.2, 4.3, SVr2, and SVr3.

As time goes on, you're likely to be more and more often disappointed.
There's really no point in, say, offering the old obsolete V7/4.2BSD version
of the Bourne shell with a system.

> I would not mind having System V UUCP as an option, if there is really some
> improvement, but I expect Berkeley's to be there if I have bought a system
> that is claimed to be Berkeley Unix.  Pyramid, which you mention, is of
> course the last place you would expect to find a System V UUCP mixed into a
> 4.2 system.  They maintain separate 4.2 and System V universes.  Thus they
> have two separate UUCP's.

I very sincerely doubt that.  Maintaining two different versions of "uucico"
would be ridiculous.  (Does Pyramid have two versions of "init", for
instance?  You can't do that.  You have to choose one or the other, or have
a hybrid that reads "/etc/ttys" *and* "/etc/inittab" - if that's even
possible.)  They may have two versions of the "uucp", "uux", etc. commands -
however, if it's possible to have versions that are a compatible superset
of both, *that* would be the correct thing to do, not provide a version that
can do A but not B and a version that can do B but not A.

> By the way, is the new Userfile a feature of SVr2, SVr3, or HoneyDanber
> UUCP?

HoneyDanber.

> SVr3 hasn't had time to make it out through vendors yet, and the
> vendors I have talked to aren't yet sure which of the extra-cost ATT stuff
> such as HoneyDanber their users are really going to want.

From what I've read, S5R3 is already extra-cost.  I think HoneyDanber is now
the standard version of UUCP in S5R3.
-- 
	Guy Harris
	{ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy
	guy@sun.com (or guy@sun.arpa)