merging 4BSD and SysV utilities

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <2000042 at ccvaxa> wombat at ccvaxa.UUCP writes:
>... but compiling something that wants
>both BSD and ATT library routines is tricky.

Yes!  That's the worst single problem we have with split environments at BRL.
One has to maintain two versions of most libraries, since for example the
data structures included via <stdio.h> differ between the two environments.
If one acquires a commercial package, for instance a data base manager, in
just one environment, then it may be difficult or impossible to use it from
the other environment.  We actually run through this exercise about once a
quarter when we get source software from a System V environment that uses a
commercial DBMS which we have only in a 4.2BSD environment.

Another, relatively less severe, drawback to split environments is the
extra storage space required to maintain two copies of everything.

Split environments are a relatively painless way for a system implementor
to quickly get into a position to support both System V and 4BSD customer
bases, but the long-term goal of the UNIX community should be to merge
the strengths of these environments while gradually leaving their
weaknesses behind.  As I said previously, no single vendor (other than
AT&T and possibly Sun) is in a position to accomplish this merger on their
own.  I would like to see 4BSD-based system vendors pick up Sun's merged
system as a basis for theirs, if Berkeley doesn't take back the result;
clearly Sun's direct competitors have a problem with this, but if Berkeley or
Sun will cooperate with this approach, we'll all be better off in the near
term.  Once the systems are effectively merged throughout the industry, other
vendors can again go their own way (but if they want to sell to me they
better support the standard environment, no matter what else they offer).