Xref: utzoo unix-pc.general:2468 comp.sys.att:5846
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att!cbnews!mvadh
From: mvadh@cbnews.ATT.COM (andrew.d.hay)
Newsgroups: unix-pc.general,comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: Question about windows and processor time (3b1)
Message-ID: <4890@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 16 Mar 89 12:03:52 GMT
References: <356@flatline.UUCP> <450@amanue.UUCP> <1211@lemuria.usi.com> <451@amanue.UUCP>
Reply-To: mvadh@cbnews.ATT.COM (andrew.d.hay)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 17

In article <451@amanue.UUCP> jr@amanue.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) writes:
[]
"System V.5 will have kernel threads and all that neato stuff.  Mach has
"message passing.  V.4 supposedly has a formalized driver interface:
"***Hooray!!!***.  Who knows what will be in OSF/ix.
"
"All of which means el squatto to us orphan 3b1ers.  Sigh.

Mach is (or will be soon) PD, and much of the BSD stuff it didn't
rewrite is now also PD, so why don't we create our own Mach-based
sVr5?

-- 
Andrew Hay		+------------------------------------------------------+
Null Fu-Tze		|		LEARN HOW TO AVOID RIPOFFS!	       |
AT&T-BL Ward Hill MA	|			SEND $5...		       |
mvuxq.att.com!adh	+------------------------------------------------------+