Why DEC doesn't need an ABI

[Chris Lewis It's loose again!]

In article <8185 at ncoast.UUCP> allbery at ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
| .... But I contend that DEC has no need
|for a VAX ABI.
 
|An ABI exists so that different manufacturers porting UNIX systems to a
|particular processor can run the same programs, simplifying things for
|applications developers.  Now:  it makes sense to do this for the plethora
|of 80386 machines and 680x0 machines out there -- but for a VAX?  Consider
|that (a) DEC does not license the VAX processor for anyone else's use, and
|(b) DEC sells the only true commercial VAX UNIX.

Generally speaking I agree.  If there is only one O/S vendor for
a given machine, then that O/S vendor has the defacto ABI anywho.

And I agree that most of the other versions of UNIX you mention aren't
"commercial".  But, what about HCR's SVR3 for VAXen?  They've been shipping
for several months now (I think).  That I would consider "commercial"...
-- 
Chris Lewis, Spectrix Microsystems Inc, Phone: (416)-474-1955
UUCP: {uunet!mnetor, utcsri!utzoo, lsuc, yunexus}!spectrix!clewis
Moderator of the Ferret Mailing List (ferret-list,ferret-request at spectrix)