Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!noao!asuvax!mcdphx!estinc!fnf
From: fnf@estinc.UUCP (Fred Fish)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Which one:  Interactive, Microport, Xenix?
Message-ID: <32@estinc.UUCP>
Date: 3 Feb 89 19:51:10 GMT
References: <197722@hrc.UUCP>
Reply-To: fnf@estinc.UUCP (Fred Fish)
Organization: Enhanced Software Technologies, Inc.
Lines: 22

In article <197722@hrc.UUCP> dan@hrc.UUCP (Dan Troxel) writes:
>>   No system call differences with 3B2 and Convergent (shmem(), semctl())
>
>I can't say with your particular application, you'll have to try it out.
>That's the only way to tell. Don't trust unproven promises.

Speaking of shared memory with SCO 2.3.1, our application makes heavy
use of shared memory.  It runs without any problems on all other
systems that implement system V style shared memory, including ones
based on BSD that have added system V shared memory as an enhancement.
However, we occasionally see problems on some SCO systems, that do not
appear to be repeatable.  We are inclined to believe there may be a
subtle bug of some sort lurking the SCO implementation, that we are
triggering.  I would like to hear from anyone else that is in a similar
situation (shared mem code runs fine everywhere but on SCO).  We are
still trying to pinpoint the problem.  It could be our code with some
sort of machine dependent bug, so any additional data would be helpful.

-Fred
-- 
# Fred Fish, 1835 E. Belmont Drive, Tempe, AZ 85284,  USA
# 1-602-491-0048           asuvax!{nud,mcdphx}!estinc!fnf