Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!cbosgd!mandrill!hal!oxtrap!rich
From: rich@oxtrap.UUCP (K. Richard Magill)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: Query about the quality of UNIX/PCs and 3b1's (really 3b1 unix)
Message-ID: <2420@oxtrap.UUCP>
Date: 24 Dec 87 03:56:57 GMT
References: <9691@shemp.UCLA.EDU> <18017@clyde.ATT.COM> <997@bakerst.UUCP> <1146@mtunb.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: rich@oxtrap.UUCP (K. Richard Magill)
Distribution: na
Organization: Oxford, Ann Arbor
Lines: 18

In article <1146@mtunb.ATT.COM> csf@mtunb.UUCP (C. Furchner) writes:
>In article <997@bakerst.UUCP> kathy@bakerst.UUCP (Kathy Vincent) writes:
>>In article <18017@clyde.ATT.COM> rcj@moss.UUCP (Curtis Jackson) writes:
>>>In article <9691@shemp.UCLA.EDU> coleman@CS.UCLA.EDU () writes:
 [ Lots about whether the 3b1 is really sV.

The bottom line is that there is no System V unless you mean the one
from at&t and you better give a date or we still won't know which one
you mean.

3b1 Unix was written by Convergent Technologies.  The C compiler is
the most obvious clue.

In other words saying system V is about as specific as saying UNIX.
Agreed, they are a standard of sorts but there are *so* many of them.
Like, SVID, SVVS, sV, sV.0, sV.1, sV1.0, etc, etc, and of course the
3b2 version of each of these is different from the 3b5 version is
different from the....