MSDOS 4.01 and SCO Xenix: Bad mix?
Christopher J. Shaker
shaker at dirt.cisco.com
Wed Jan 16 14:41:06 AEST 1991
> Subject: Re: MSDOS 4.01 and SCO Xenix: Bad mix?
> Summary: Yes it's a BAD mixed....
> Expires:
> References: <14 at medicod.UUCP> <'2V^=#^@rpi.edu> <320 at bria.AIX>
> Sender:
> Followup-To:
> Distribution: usa
> Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
> Keywords:
> From: yee at itsgw.rpi.edu (Crimson Avenger)
> Path: yee
>
> Well, boys and girls: I have the answer, YES, it's a bad mixed between
> SCO Xenix/Unix and MS DOS 4.01. First of all, I must apologized for my
> lack of knowledge in SCO products, I spoke with the local dealer and she
> informed me that there are two packages for x386 machines. The first is
> SCO Xenix which is at (2.3.2) for x386 and x286 machines. The other is
> SCO Unix (3.2.2) which is for x386 and conforms to AT&T V. With that straight
> I asked her about MSDOS 4.01. She got back with me in 24 hours and said
> that both products does *NOT* support 4.01 DOS. She mentioned something about
> 4.01 uses some different disk layout scheme to achieve > 32 megabyte
> partitions. Only 3.3 is compatible with Xenix/Unix. She also told me that
> DOS 4.01 will NOT be supported in the future. Well, that's the end of the
> conversation.
Yikes. I have an ALR Business VEISA that I am/was planning to buy some form
of UNIX for. I had no idea that my MS-DOS 4.01 would cause a problem.
> My personal opinion is that it is regrettable........... They just lost
> a sale and a customer.
> -- Robert aka Crimson Avenger (yee at rpi.edu or crimson_avenger at mts.rpi.edu)
Maybe mine, too.
Chris Shaker
shaker at cisco.com
More information about the Comp.unix.xenix.sco
mailing list