A/UX just a ploy? (Was Re: Is A/UX viable? Your advice sought)

[Cory Kempf]

vlb at magic.apple.com (Vicki Brown) writes:

>IMHO -
>Apple has a group of Very Good UNIX engineers (not to mention a bunch
>of related support, documentation, etc people) committed to making
>A/UX a UNIX that *we* want to use.  Yes, we allow a "nearly complete"
>MacOS.  Huzzah is right!  Show me any other UNIX system available today
>with as large and varied a collection of readily available, reasonably
>low-cost software!  A/UX is also quite a complete UNIX, and getting
>better with every release.

I have to agree with this.  So far, my biggest complaint about A/UX
is porting other unix applications to it: Since they include SO MUCH
in A/UX, it is often dificult to port things in -- the standard makefiles
want either USG or BSD, but neither is right.  I usually have to define
BSD and then go in and special case a few things back to USG when they
don't work.

It would be nice if A/UX were closer to BSD unix (or better yet, OSF-1,
whenever it gets out) for porting things.  Ah well, I guess you can't 
have everything.  It definately beats out all of the 386 solutions that
I have seen hands down.

It would also be nice though if A/UX allowed access to multiple MacOS
partitions (a 300 MB partition is silly -- five 60MB partitions works 
a lot better) and could support programs that wanted to talk SCSI.  
AppleShare server capability would also be a plus (maybe in A/UX 2.1 
with System 7 extensions  :-) ).

+C

--
Cory Kempf				I do speak for the company (sometimes).
The EnigamI Co.							603 883 2474
email: cory at three.mv.com, harvard!zinn!three!cory
-- 
Cory Kempf				I do speak for the company (sometimes).
The EnigamI Co.							603 883 2474
email: cory at three.mv.com, harvard!zinn!three!cory