Article View: comp.sys.intel
Article #334Re: INTEL 310
From: Tom Neff
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1989 23:05
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1989 23:05
19 lines
1346 bytes
1346 bytes
In article <2484@auspex.auspex.com> guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) writes: >>Also Intel XENIX is not UNIX... > >Most other systems derived from UNIX aren't, in the strict legal sense, >UNIX, but so what? So not much, except Intel XENIX has nothing to do with *386* UNIX which was the original suggestion. It was not my intention to fan the general is-Xenix-Unix flames. There are two kinds of problems that can crop up on an Intel 310 XENIX box: the ones that are caused by the 310 being such a weird beast, and the ones caused by XENIX being such a weird beast regardless of platform. What I am suggesting is that if it's a 310 question it belongs here; if it's a XENIX question it belongs in c.u.x. If the questioner isn't sure, crosspost. -- "Nature loves a vacuum. Digital \O@/ Tom Neff doesn't." -- DEC sales letter /@O\ tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<14724@bfmny0.UU.NET>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!bfmny0!tneffReferences:
<124864@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <806@sdrc.UUCP> <124935@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <818@sdrc.UUCP> <14716@bfmny0.UU.NET> <2484@auspex.auspex.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!bfmny0!tneff From: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: INTEL 310 Keywords: intel 310 ipsc Message-ID: <14724@bfmny0.UU.NET> Date: 23 Sep 89 23:05:47 GMT References: <124864@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <806@sdrc.UUCP> <124935@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <818@sdrc.UUCP> <14716@bfmny0.UU.NET> <2484@auspex.auspex.com> Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) Distribution: na Organization: ^ Lines: 19