home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!news.duc.auburn.edu!netman!elling
- From: elling@eng.auburn.edu (Richard Elling)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.admin
- Subject: Re: avoiding Solaris
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.161207.28976@news.duc.auburn.edu>
- Date: 20 Nov 92 16:12:07 GMT
- References: <davecb.722136024@yorku.ca>
- Sender: usenet@news.duc.auburn.edu (News Account)
- Reply-To: elling@eng.auburn.edu
- Organization: Auburn University Engineering
- Lines: 23
- Nntp-Posting-Host: netman.eng.auburn.edu
-
- In article 722136024@yorku.ca, jwa@yog-sothoth.dcrt.nih.gov (James W. Adams) writes:
- > There seem to be several "debates," then. What I think underlies many
- > people's concerns (other than those who are just complaining about *any*
- > change) is the perceived threat of Sun (and some other vendors as well)
- > deciding to eliminate most of the traditional UNIX utilities and
- > functionality as "unnecessary" for shrink-wrap business applications,
- > and unbundling many of the drivers and support libraries which now come
- > with the system.
-
- What I find odd about the [un]bundling in Solaris 2.0 is that some
- unbundled Solaris 1.x products are in fact bundled in Solaris 2.0.
- ASET and bits of Online Backup come to mind here. It seems that the
- real logic behind the decision to unbundle certain parts is based on
- the target customer. For instance many sites don't have C programmers
- (they don't program or use Ada, FORTRAN, Cobol, etc.) so the decision
- to unbundle the C compiler doesn't really affect them. On the other
- hand, parts like ASET and Online Backup are usable by everyone and are
- to be (at least partially) bundled.
-
- ---
- Richard Elling Manager of Network Support
- Auburn University Engineering Administration
- richard.elling@eng.auburn.edu KB4HB [44.100.0.72] (205)844-2280
-