Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-unix!quintus!sun!decwrl!pyramid!voder!kontron!optilink!cramer
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: SCCS vs. RCS
Message-ID: <1867@optilink.UUCP>
Date: 21 Jan 88 22:55:13 GMT
References: <720003@hpclskh.HP.COM> <580@dsacg3.UUCP> <377@mks.UUCP>
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA
Lines: 26

> In article <580@dsacg3.UUCP>, ntm1458@dsacg3.UUCP (John Darby) writes:
> > We have both SCCS and RCS here at DLA and we are trying to decide
> > which to use.
> > 1. SCCS is supported by the vendor as part of the contract.
> > 2. RCS is public domain.  Support from netland seems very reliable.
> >    I think RCS is easier to use.
> 
> Is it public domain? I don't think so, but I don't have any hard
> evidence one way or the other. 

No, it's not public domain -- but you can ask Mr. Tichy for permission
to get it from someone who does it have it, and it's only a minor 
nuisance to do so, and there's no charge.

> Another point in RCS's favour (for those who have to use more than one
> operating system) is that it is now available for MS-DOS too.  The RCS
> files generated by the two versions are identical, so they can be ported
> directly from one system to the other. 
> 
>      Gerry Wheeler                           Phone: (519)884-2251
> Mortice Kern Systems Inc.               UUCP: uunet!watmath!mks!wheels

Interesting!  Does MKS offer RCS as a product for MS-DOS?  If so, how
much?  This might be of general interest to PC users.

Clayton E. Cramer