[Info-vax] misstatement of Unix origin [was Re: A portable VMS, was: Re: OS Ancestry]

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 5/24/2021 9:14 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 5/24/21 7:59 PM, chris wrote:
>> On 05/24/21 14:59, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> That had a lot more to do with deliberate proprietariness than
>>> anything else. AT&T saw itself losing what little bit of the
>>> market they had grabbed and decided making theirs different and
>>> incompatible was good business. Eventually SYSV versions ended
>>> out including BSD compatibility libraries because it was obvious
>>> which way was better. I don't remember seeing any BSD product
>>> coming with a SYSV compatibility library.
>>
>> That's quite true, though Sun started off with a BSD flavour unix,
>> (SunOs) then incorporated the more useful bits of SysV when later
>> editions of Solaris were released. Streams being one such idea, but
>> there were others as well. Quite a bit of cross fertilisation...
> 
> I don't remember any SYSVisms in SunOS.  Certainly not STREAMS.
> And Solaris was Suns attempt to abandon BSD in favor of SYSV.
> For those of us who had been with SUN since M68000 days this
> was pretty disastrous. Early Solaris performed badly and as you
> might expect existing SunOS code could not be compiled to run
> on Solaris without heavy modification.  Even with all of the
> BSD compatibility stuff included.  It resulted in the University
> I was working at beginning its migration away from SUN.  I
> expect the same happened elsewhere as well.

SunOS 1.x - 4.x was BSD (wiki claims some SysV stuff from
3.0 specifically IPC).

SunOS 5.x was SysV.

SunOS 4.x = Solaris 1.x and SunOS 5.x = Solaris 2.x.

Arne