wanted: UNIX or clone

[IT Manager]

In article <24 at metran.UUCP>, jay at metran.UUCP (Jay Ts) writes:
> I think it's just a case of Wordperfect not realizing how similar ISC UNIX
> and ESIX are.  I really doubt there would be any problem that could not be
> easily worked around.

Since upgrading to SCO Unix, we've used the Xenix copy of WP that we have
under Unix with no problems.

> There are a few minor differences, like ESIX calling the virtual terminals
> /dev/vcXX where ISC calls them /dev/vtXX, and ESIX using the AT386-M terminfo
> for the console while ISC calls it AT386.

WP comes with it's own terminal description database, with it's own (often
very different from the OS's default) names for terminal types.  For
instance, WP uses "scocons" and "scoconscol" as the type names for the
SCO console term emulation.

> > How come a text-based
> > application  like Wordperfect can't be made to run under all of the 386
> > plataforms.

I would guess there is a problem in WP 5.0, which is not strictly text based
because of the document preview mode it has, which is cause by the fact that
several unix386 vendors have adopted different ways to address the video
hardware.  I think the new ABI standard worked out recently is supposed
to solve this problem.

> If you are including Xenix, in that case Wordperfect has two different
> products -- one for UNIX and one for Xenix 386.  The Xenix product will
> not run on UNIX, due at least to not having support for the the UNIX
> console in the Xenix product.  Xenix handles the console differently.

WP 4.2 for Xenix works just fine under Unix.  As I mentioned above, WP 5.0
may be a different animal because of the page preview, but if you didn't
use the page preview option, my guess is that it would work just fine.

> It's stupid little things like this that lead people to using phrases like
> "theoretical binary compatibility" when referring to the merge of Xenix
> and AT&T Unix in System V 3.2.

This is the reason we stuck with SCO Unix.  I came to the conclusion that if
any Unix 386 vendor was going to insure backward compatibility with Xenix,
it would be SCO.  This is born out by the fact that we still build and
execute programs using Xenix 286 libraries that were originally bought for
Altos Xenix 286 on our SCO Unix machines.  And, by the fact that SCO Unix
feels very much like Xenix.  I was actually hoping it would feel more like
our HP-UX systems (since those are our main systems), but recent threads in
comp.sys.hp have been indicating that even HP-UX is derived from BSD and
made to feel like Sys V.

------------- 
James B. O'Connor			jim at tiamat.fsc.com
Ahlstrom Filtration, Inc.		615/821-4022 x. 651