Unix optimized for SPARC?

[Gary Allen]

In article <4722 at vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com> barnett at vdsvax.steinmetz.ge.com (Bruce G. Barnett) writes:
>In article <253 at iconsys.UUCP> ron at iconsys.UUCP (Ron Holt) writes:
>|Of course,
>|there are very machine specific sections of the Unix kernel, the VM code
>|being a good example, but other than that, how could Unix be optimized
>|for SPARC?
>
>I agree with your sentiment. Optimizing it for a RISC machine,
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>along with the other ABI's, should increase the portability of the kernal.
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sorry, I don't understand this at all!

>But that is an old topic. The new one is that OSF plans to
>remove all of the AT&T code			 	eventually.

Not according to any statement made by anyone at OSF. This was/has
been asked of OSF related people here at Apollo on many occasions
and the answer is that while they would love to have a non-AT&T
UNIX, the legal problems were viewed as practically insurmountable.
[.......]
>Methinks the lawyers will be busy for a while. And the programmers.
Nyet, my ex-wives have them all (the programmers too!).

>Maybe after the project is done, you can license OSF UN*X for merely
>twice the price of AT&T UNIX. :-)
Actually, most customers license their OS from their hardware vendor
who, in turn, license it from AT&T or even a software house who licenses
it from AT&T; therefore, most licenses are transitive. What does it matter
to you (if you're a customer instead of a vendor) where the vendor got
it. I think customers are more concerned about what software they'll
get at what quality at what bottom-line cost.

Gary Allen
Apollo Computer
Chelmsford, MA
{decvax,yale,umix}!apollo!gallen

"No man is an island. No man is a potato salad either."