Re: INTEL 310

Article View: comp.sys.intel

Article #333

#333

From: Guy Harris
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1989 19:59

7 lines
816 bytes

>Also Intel XENIX is not UNIX...

Most other systems derived from UNIX aren't, in the strict legal sense,
UNIX, but so what?  Better reasons for discussing it in "comp.unix.xenix"
rather than "comp.unix.i386" are that 1) it's not specifically a 386
UNIX and 2) "comp.unix.xenix" is probably better focused on Xenix
issues than "comp.unix.i386" is.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <2484@auspex.auspex.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!auspex!guy

References: <124864@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <806@sdrc.UUCP> <124935@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <818@sdrc.UUCP> <14716@bfmny0.UU.NET>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: INTEL 310
Keywords: intel 310 ipsc
Message-ID: <2484@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 23 Sep 89 19:59:03 GMT
References: <124864@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <806@sdrc.UUCP> <124935@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <818@sdrc.UUCP> <14716@bfmny0.UU.NET>
Reply-To: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Distribution: na
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 7

Reply to Parent Message