🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2968@syma.sussex.ac.uk> stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen Carter) writes:
>
>We have recently got a Sequent S27 which we are getting up and installed
>...
>
>The version of Dynix that has been delivered was 3.0.17.  We have been
>*strongly* advised to go att and ksh throughout because that is more
>System V compatible, and less work would have to be done when we go up
>to the next release of Dynix.
>
>...
>
>I have had some encouragement, from locals and from Sequent, to take an
>early version of Dynix/ptx and implement it before our users go live because :
>
>	1  It will solve some of the current problems of strange
>	   commands
>
>	2  It's nearly here anyway, so if we *start* with ptx on day one
>	   as seen by our users, we'll not have to go through an upgrade
>	   in not too many months time

As someone else has already addressed the issue of using the att
universe, I'll limit my comments to the ptx ones.  First, we have been
repeatedly told that Sequent has no plans to discontinue support for
Dynix (they better not, if ptx is the alternative!).  Indeed, a new
release of Dynix is said to be in the works.

I actually got to play with ptx at one point.  It is billed as a POSIX
compliant System V based OS.  That's fine as far as it goes, which
isn't far enough the last I knew.  My major issue was that we were told
by several different Sequent folks that NIS (nee Yellow Pages) would
not be a part of ptx.  If you've got a single system, so what?  Here,
we've got an S81, a Sun 3/180, an HP 9000/825, two DEC 3602's, and a
Unisys U6000 plus about four dozen work stations, all of which run
their respective flavors of Unix and communicate via TCP/IP *with* NIS
on every one of them.  I don't have the staff to administer these
machines without something that provides the functionality of NIS and
runs on each of these OS's.  (If you want to tell me about the problems
and faults of NIS, fine;  please redirect your message to /dev/null and
go work on something that will do at least everything NIS does *and*
port it to these machines.  I'll happily take a better solution.)

Therefore, I will restate what I've told Sequent:  I will not switch to
ptx nor will I recommend that anyone who has a network environment do
so.  If they choose not to provide the support that is needed in
today's environment (by discontinuing support for Dynix or by freezing
it without providing an adequate ptx), then the next upgrade time will
become an examination of other vendors.  If Sequent has changed its
plans and now intends NIS support in ptx, I would be interested to hear
it (and a bit amused since the subject came up again in discussions
with Sequent folks at USENIX week before last).

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Pyle                                UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!execu!keith
Manager, Data Processing Services Dept.   Internet: keith@execu.com
Execucom Systems Corp.                              execu!keith@cs.utexas.edu
108 Wild Basin Road                            keith%execu.uucp@cs.utexas.edu
Austin, Texas 78746                       Ma Bell: 512-327-7070

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are my own, keep your hands off!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------