Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!spf
From: spf@clyde.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: is xenix unix....
Message-ID: <6611@clyde.ATT.COM>
Date: Tue, 17-Feb-87 10:44:21 EST
Article-I.D.: clyde.6611
Posted: Tue Feb 17 10:44:21 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Feb-87 05:47:06 EST
References: <3108@gitpyr.gatech.EDU>
Sender: nuucp@clyde.ATT.COM
Reply-To: spf@bonnie.UUCP (Steve Frysinger)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany NJ
Lines: 24
Keywords: xenix, unix, pc/ix...

In article <3108@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> eeproks@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (Ken Seefried iii) writes:
>I would like the machine that I use at 
>home to provide the same environment that I am use to at work.
>1)  Is SCO and IBM Xenix the same as AT&T Unix System V.2.

I run XENIX System V on an AT&T PC 6300 at work, and often use
(through cu) Unix System V on VAXes and 3B20s.  I have set up
all of my .profiles to put the system name in my PS1 prompt,
**SO THAT I CAN TELL WHICH SYSTEM I AM CURRENTLY ADDRESSING**!
Enough said?  Yeah, when you write LOW-level or large C programs
(not the usual kind) you might be able to tell, mostly because you're on
a 16-bit machine -- if your minis were PDP-11s you would probably
not even notice that.  Except for big programs (> 64K) EVERYTHING
I have tried to port went without a hitch.  I have a common shell
script library across machines.  You do, however, get an additional
advantage: you can READ and WRITE MS-DOS files, and you can develop
(cross-compile) programs to run under DOS.

It doesn't even perform too badly for one or two people, unless you
have nroff, make, or uucico running in the background...

Steve
***
Why would I waste my time expressing someone else's opinion?