Ultrix and 4.2 and der Mouse

[George Robbins]

In article <1441 at cornell.UUCP> george at cornell.UUCP (George R. Boyce) writes:
>In article <1554 at decwrl.UUCP> aps at decwrl.UUCP (Armando P. Stettner) writes:
>>Regarding the news comment by der Mouse on whether or not Ultrix
[discussion of ultrix vs BSD]
[conclusion: ultrix not for academe]
>Ok, I give. Does someone care to support or attack this thesis? Since
>my job is to support an academic computing environment, The above
>statement strikes close to home. I can get kernel sources cheaply if
>I need them so that isn't the basis. Everything I've tried to port
>from BSD4.2 seems to either run or recompile and run just fine. And that
>does include all the "missing" BSD4.2 programs.
>George Boyce	Academic Computing, Cornell Computing Services

>From the view point of a person trying to use the system, Ultrix is BSD, the
major difference is in packaging.

Ultrix is packaged for people who want to *use* unix, and provides a single
source for machine, software and support.

BSD is packaged for people who want to do things *to* unix, and who are capable
and/or have the time to put all the pieces together and do their own support.

There are some intermediate levels, organizations that offer a prepared release
of BSD, or like Mt. Xinu who offer support for a price.

The problem with your mix and match solution is that you get stuck in the loop.
You have to find the things that don't match up and load up a bunch of sources
that don't really correspond to what you are running.  With BSD, the stuff is
there and you just grant access to appropriate groups.  Do you want to be
involved every time a person wants to see how, say, egrep works?  At 10:00 PM?

My feeling is that anyone who can get a source license for the system they are
actually running, and doesn't had better crawl under the bit bucket and hide!
-- 
George Robbins			uucp:	{unirot|tapa}!grr
P.O. Box 177
Lincoln U, PA  19352	[The ideas herein are not responsible to themselves!]