Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell
From: Robert Melson (melsonr_at_NOSPAM.earthlink.net)
Date: 06/16/04
- Previous message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- In reply to: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- Next in thread: Steve O'Hara-Smith: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- Reply: Steve O'Hara-Smith: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:30:11 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 16 June 2004 11:15, Bill Vermillion wrote:
<snip>
>
> The AIX in Intel was about the most painful install I ever went
> through. It was easily and 8-hour job.
Yeah. I was one of the release testers for AIX-1.{2,3} and absolutely
hated the install. It wasn't that it was _hard_, just that it took
forever and, as you point out, required multiple passes for the floppy
set. Given the state of storage technology for ps/2's and other intel
boxes at the time, I suppose they did the best they could, but you
could grow old and grey pumping floppies through the system.
>
> You install from a large set of floppies in pages of a 3-ring
> binder. Then you install the patches. And you had to insert
> each floppy for each patch update.
>
> That meant that some floppies had to be inserted 3 or 4 times.
>
> I guess no one ever considered a method for reading each floppy
> once, and storing what was needed so the machine could do the rest.
I've forgotten the name of the s/w house that did the actual coding -- I
want to say Logitech but that doesn't feel right. Anyway, IBM didn't
actually write the code for intel AIX; they contracted it out and did
multiple levels of testing on the code as it came in. They were busy
at the time getting AIX-3 ready to hit the streets and had committed
most of their programming resources to that. And the stories to be
told about _that_ goat-rope are legion, lemme tell ya.
>
> I will say the AIX for Intel had some of the best manuals I've ever
> seen. And that's about all the good I can say about that.
Joke current at the time I was at the Austin labs was: You know what
IBM stands for, don't you? I Bring Manuals.
Of all the systems I've worked on in the past mumble years, I think IBM
is far and away the champ when it comes to documentation. It goes
beyond the basic manual set and includes the famed (?) redbooks and
other docs that make adminning an AIX system almost pleasurable.
>
> Bill
> --
> Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Bob
- --
Robert G. Melson Nothing is more terrible than
Rio Grande MicroSolutions ignorance in action.
El Paso, Texas Goethe
melsonr(at)earthlink(dot)net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFA0IOgGX60pjRVDrMRAlLxAKDNflRRTuzFPtRncsVqg1qu2KC5DgCgjUbm
/nRrgg4O63RFAXFlaE8hjts=
=QlRv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- In reply to: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- Next in thread: Steve O'Hara-Smith: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- Reply: Steve O'Hara-Smith: "Re: Is there something wrong with my small program or is there something wrong with the shell"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|