Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:8248 comp.mail.uucp:1283
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!bbn!rochester!udel!burdvax!psuvax1!gondor.cs.psu.edu!schwartz
From: schwartz@gondor.cs.psu.edu (Scott Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: real bsd (was Re: UUCP over SunLink X.25, unbundled products)
Message-ID: <3535@psuvax1.psu.edu>
Date: 4 May 88 19:41:19 GMT
References: <822@srs.UUCP> <766@onion.cs.reading.ac.uk> <21868@pyramid.pyramid.com> <44300@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>
Sender: netnews@psuvax1.psu.edu
Reply-To: schwartz@gondor.cs.psu.edu (Scott Schwartz)
Organization: Penn State University
Lines: 21

In article <44300@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes:
>A non-trivial number of customers are surprised when they find things like
>that are not supported. Especially those who also have a "real" BSD system.
>
>Some of the vendors rationalize it by saying that they are 4.2BSD compatible.
>(including all of the 4.2bsd bugs in some cases). 

Are we still talking about Sun? :-)

On one occasion, I noticed that vi couldn't handle fullscreen
shelltools with small fonts.  It's buffer was too small.  Sun tech
support told me that they didn't want to make the buffer bigger in
order to maintain compatability with Berkeley!


Let's not even mention subnetting.


-- Scott "desperately seeking 4.0" Schwartz


-- Scott Schwartz     schwartz@gondor.cs.psu.edu    schwartz@psuvaxg.bitnet