instability in Berkeley versus AT&T releases

[Peter da Silva]

> > IBM is pretty braindamaged but even they don't require you to run MVS on
> > your XT.
> 
> That's a remarkably irrelevant example, considering 1) it has nothing to do
> with internal vs. external releases and 2) since MVS is written in 360
> assembler and PL/S, and since the former *can't* run on an 8088 without a
> slow simulator and the latter probably has lots of 360-dependent goo in it,
> you couldn't run MVS on a PC anyway.

OK. Take any IBM operating system and stick it in there. I'm not an expert
on IBM.

> > Also most "non AT&T" UNIX systems predate System V. The ones that claim to
> > be System III are almost all Microsoft or Unisoft releases
> 
> The HP ones?  The CCI one? (more on that one later)  The Plexus one?

No, just most. A goodly percentage are TRS-80 model 16s.

> > and are V7 with SIII patches
> 
> So what?  The TTY driver seems to be your primary source of dyspepsia; I
> suspect most systems which are "V7 with S3 patches" have S3 libraries and a
> kernel which started out as a V7 kernel and got changed to resemble S3,
> including having the S3 tty driver dropped into it (I know that's how the
> CCI system was done, since I was one of the people who did it).  As such,
> well, if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a
> duck, who cares if it's a goose with duck patches?

It doesn't quack like a duck since I took a program from V7 to Unisoft SIII
and compiled it and it ran. No problems.

> > (which is why I didn't have to know about MIN & TIME when I was working
> > on Xenix 3.0. Nice of Microsoft to tell me).
> 
> This has been explained to you elsewhere, but if you're clearing the ICANON

Yes, it was explained by the OEM the "SIII" came from, after I asked him
why the SIII wasn't SV compatible.

> bit, you either have to set MIN and TIME to get reliable results or they
> botched the tty driver.

They didn't appear to have attempted to convert the TTY driver. VMIN and
VTIME should never have been part of c_cc[] in the first place, so if they
had converted it and made them seperate somewhere I'd hardly call it a botch.

> 	Guy Harris

Peter da Silva (wondering why he's still flaming me over VMIN and VTIME).

PS: I don't know what current Xenix3 or Uniplus+ are like, so if they have
"fixed" these "bugs" since the systems I was trying to port things between
were released don't flame me for that. I get enough of it from Guy & Bill.
-- 
	Peter da Silva (the mad Australian)
		UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter
		MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076