Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt
Article #1581Why is AIX not "useful"? (was "Re: BSD Unix on 6150-135?")
From: Frank J. Edwards
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1989 21:20
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 1989 21:20
21 lines
1370 bytes
1370 bytes
From article <2650@spdcc.SPDCC.COM>, by dyer@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer): > In article <1966@nmtsun.nmt.edu> peter@hydrovax.nmt.edu writes: >> We have been toying for some time with the idea of running 4.3 BSD on >>our RT, being as RT-AIX is not a useful operating system. >> [much deleted] Question: why is AIX not "useful"? I have found it to be very robust (to the point of requiring 30MB to install 2.1.2 with DS!) and I am quite pleased with the way that *most* BSD code compiles and runs with little or no problems (read that as 90-95% of BSD code). Having seen AIX go from 2.1 to 2.2.1 I have experienced the "painless" upgrades (compared to what I've heard about some BSD boxes :-) except that installing from floppy is ridiculous. Anyway, I anxiously await your reply... Frank "Crash" Edwards ----- "Mr Spock, where is that power you promised me?" "One *damn* minute, Admiral!"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<583@jc3b21.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!blake!ogccse!littlei!uunet!pdn!boake2!jc3b21!crashReferences:
<2650@spdcc.SPDCC.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!blake!ogccse!littlei!uunet!pdn!boake2!jc3b21!crash From: crash@jc3b21.UUCP (Frank J. Edwards) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.rt Subject: Why is AIX not "useful"? (was "Re: BSD Unix on 6150-135?") Message-ID: <583@jc3b21.UUCP> Date: 26 Feb 89 21:20:45 GMT References: <2650@spdcc.SPDCC.COM> Organization: St. Petersburg Jr. College, FL Lines: 21