att & osf

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

In article <1275 at sfmag.UUCP> der at sfmag.UUCP (D.Rorke) writes:
>> In article <1988Aug2.171126.17906 at utzoo.uucp>, henry at utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>> > ...  Do remember that there have already been two releases of the SVID,
>> > and nobody seriously believes there won't be more.
>> In article <3396 at vpk4.UUCP> scott at attcan.UUCP (Scott MacQuarrie) writes:
>> >There have not been two versions of the SVID, there have been volumes added
>> >to the SVID to cover developments in various areas, particularly networking.
and I quoted the SVID itself to prove that there _have_ been two releases,
and are _expected_ to be more.

D.Rorke writes at length as if I had attacked the SVID.
I think every UNIX programmer who seriously cares about portability between
various UNIX systems should have a copy and should check things for himself.
I left a lot of stuff out about AT&Ts "future directions", thinking that
anyone who really wants to know should get the SVID and do his own reading.

>To summarize:  Yes, the SVID can be reissued but only in a very controlled
>manner that allows applications developers to know what components
>of the definition they can depend on and for how long.

To summarize:  the SVID is good news for applications developers.  It says
quite clearly what can't be DELETED in a hurry.  But it is nevertheless the
case that AT&T _could_ ADD enormous chunks to the SVID without warning (for
example, streams) which is _not_ good news for UNIX vendors, and that was
Henry Spencer's original point.