SYS V R4 - When will it be released for Generic 386 boxes?

[Evan Leibovitch]

In article <[2553c481:416.2]comp.unix.i386;1 at vpnet.UUCP> lisbon at vpnet.UUCP (Gerry Swetsky) writes:
>
>> EE TIMES, 30 Oct 1989, page 1 indicates that the generic port
>> of UNIX System V.4/386 and /486 will be available soon...
>> AT&T/Intel reportedly plan to demo it at UNIX EXPO.
>
>    If it was there, I didn't see it.

Were you there? When the lights were on? :-)

It was being shown at the booths of

- AT&T
- Interactive
- Intel
- Unix International

Also, though SCO and ESIX were not displaying it, staff at both
companies were talking about it.

At the UI booth, at least six different companies were showing off SysVr4,
including Olivetti on a 486 system (with a co-processor socket for an i860!)

>    I wouldn't look for this product anytime soon.

Intel (which after buying Bell Technologies plans to get into selling
Unix itself) has announced that V.4 shipments will start in 2nd quarter
1990. Interactive and AT&T said theirs wouldn't be far behind. ESIX said
3rd quarter 1990, tentative. SCO's still trying to get out 3.2 :-)

>    Interactive plans a
>    new release though - Release 2.2.  This WON'T be ATT V.4, but an
>    interim release.  I couldn't get anyone to tell me the reason for
>    the release or what all it will contain.

Bug fixes? ;-)

>    Interactive's V.4 package
>    will be labelled 486/ix unless they change their minds.  NOTE - the
>    486 is to refer to release V.4 and not the 486 chip!

I was at the Intel announcements. They said that there are no plans for
any software especially for the 486. Everything for V.4 will be done in
386 code and will treat the 486 as just a fast 386.

>    I look for them to change their minds regarding this confusing 
>    labelling!

Don't count on it. If SCO could call its Xenix product System V,
anything is fair game...

-- 
  Evan Leibovitch, Telly Computing, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
                 evan at telly.on.ca / uunet!attcan!telly!evan
If you're smart enough to be a programmer, you're too smart to be a programmer