Xref: utzoo comp.arch:7606 comp.os.misc:701
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!sugar!ficc!karl
From: karl@ficc.uu.net (karl lehenbauer #)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.os.misc
Subject: BSD vs. Sys V  (was Re: 80386 vs. 68030)
Summary: but if "cat -v" is considered harmful...
Message-ID: <2497@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 19 Dec 88 20:47:33 GMT
References: <3283@mipos3.intel.com> <6360@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> <82195@sun.uucp>
Organization: Ferranti International Controls
Lines: 20
Followups-To: comp.os.misc

In article <82195@sun.uucp>, lm@snafu.Sun.COM (Larry McVoy) writes:
> In article <6360@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green) writes:
> > Sys V sux. I'm typing this from a 3b2 running Sys V.3 (the
 
> I'd have to disagree with that statement.  I've worked on both Sys5 and BSD
> based boxes as a kernel hack for several years.  The Vr3 kernel is fairly
> clean and easy to work with.   I'd like to say the same for the BSD kernel
> but everyone would die laughing.

But if "cat -v" is considered harmful, the original Unix designers must be 
spinning in their graves, in advance, over the megabloat prospects of 
System V/Release 4.

This topic is on thin ice in comp.arch.  Followups have been directed to 
comp.os.misc.

-- 
-- uunet!ficc!karl	"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious
-- karl@ficc.uu.net	encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without 
			understanding." -- Justice Louis O. Brandeis