Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!csg
From: csg@pyramid.UUCP (Carl S. Gutekunst)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: UUCP USERFILE
Message-ID: <539@pyramid.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Jul-86 04:48:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyramid.539
Posted: Tue Jul 29 04:48:51 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 29-Jul-86 18:58:07 EDT
References: <1759@brl-smoke.ARPA> <976@decuac.DEC.COM> <459@oracle.UUCP>
Reply-To: csg@pyramid.UUCP (Carl S. Gutekunst)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 22
Summary: It's a question of cost.

In article <459@oracle.UUCP> bradbury@oracle.UUCP (Robert Bradbury) writes:
>I don't want to get huffy either (:-)), but why do vendors (DEC,PYRAMID and
>HCR come to mind) continue to distribute the old V7 UUCP code instead of
>new AT&T uucp?  Is there some licensing issue I'm unaware of or a desire
>not to disturb the installed (deficient) program base?

By "new AT&T uucp" do you mean HoneyDanBer? Up until System VR2.4, it has been
an extra cost item, over an above the stock UUCP that comes with SVR2. HDB's
internal structure is also incompatible with the v7-derived UUCPs, and AT&T
has not bothered to provide transition aids, so there's been good reason to
not disturb the installed base. 

And who says the installed base is deficient? Practically no one ships plain
V7 UUCP any more; Berkeley in particular has enhanced it a *LOT* with capabil-
ities like X.25 PAD and TCP/IP, and multiple dialer support. (See my previous
posting about the current versions Pyramid is shipping.)

However, now that AT&T is providing HDB standard, you'll see a lot more
vendors supporting it. It has a *lot* to offer in security, reliability,
friendliness, and maintainability.

<csg>