Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!blake!ogccse!littlei!uunet!pdn!boake2!jc3b21!crash
From: crash@jc3b21.UUCP (Frank J. Edwards)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt
Subject: Why is AIX not "useful"? (was "Re: BSD Unix on 6150-135?")
Message-ID: <583@jc3b21.UUCP>
Date: 26 Feb 89 21:20:45 GMT
References: <2650@spdcc.SPDCC.COM>
Organization: St. Petersburg Jr. College, FL
Lines: 21

From article <2650@spdcc.SPDCC.COM>, by dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer):
> In article <1966@nmtsun.nmt.edu> peter@hydrovax.nmt.edu writes:
>>   We have been toying for some time with the idea of running 4.3 BSD on
>>our RT, being as RT-AIX is not a useful operating system.
>> [much deleted]

Question:  why is AIX not "useful"?  I have found it to be very robust
(to the point of requiring 30MB to install 2.1.2 with DS!) and I am
quite pleased with the way that *most* BSD code compiles and runs with
little or no problems (read that as 90-95% of BSD code).

Having seen AIX go from 2.1 to 2.2.1 I have experienced the "painless"
upgrades (compared to what I've heard about some BSD boxes :-) except
that installing from floppy is ridiculous.

Anyway, I anxiously await your reply...

Frank "Crash" Edwards
-----
"Mr Spock, where is that power you promised me?"
"One *damn* minute, Admiral!"