Binaries needed

[Thaddeus P. Floryan]

In article <1991Mar15.025846.26031 at daffy.cs.wisc.edu> sparkie at picard.cs.wisc.edu (Mark J. Horn) writes:
> [...]
>Ah, Thad...?  I hate to possibly humiliate myself by disagreeing with a
>net.god, BUT! I did NOT get vi in my Encryption Set.  I have a set of disks
>called "Enhanced Editors"  I spent about two months having to use ed before
>I found someone who would sell me these disks!  Did I spend those 2 months in
>vain?  
> [...]

PLEASE do NOT use that phrase "...net.god...".  I am the LAST person who
would ever pretend such exalted status.  Since I restrict the Users' Group
postings to ``ba'', I suppose most of you don't see my very-clearly worded
"...I don't claim to be a UNIX guru" which also appears on each meeting's
TeX printed agenda.

For over a decade I thought UNIX was crap because I listened to others
whose opinions I respected .... then came the 3B1 "fire sale" back in 1987
at which point I was able to afford my own UNIX system.  I taught myself
UNIX, and now have over 10 systems, and am picking up a SVR4 68030-based
system this coming Monday (company is footing the bill) on which I'll be
porting my company's major product (since the A/UX systems simply have been
too much hassle, what with bug after bug after bug, esp. since the 3B1 is
by FAR a better UNIX system than anything from Apple (and I have A/UX 1.*,
2.0 and 2.0.1 so I do know what I'm talking about))); the new system is the
Commodore Amiga A3000UX which, from all reports I've seen, is ``THE'' 680x0
version of UNIX SVR4.   I'm going to convert the two Mac ][ A/UX systems to
printer servers for the office secretaries since they (the A/UX) aren't even
adequate as uucp servers.  Sheesh, more $$$ down the drain on Apple junk. :-(

I have NO intention of getting rid of any of my 3B1 systems, and, in fact,
am always on the lookout for more simply because they ARE good.

In any event, Sparkie, I clearly said the "3.51 ENCRYPTION SET" and not the
"Enhanced Editors" in reference to EVERYONE (with 3.51) having "vi".

True, the "Enhanced Editors" package does have "vi", but that's part of the
Development Set.

The "Encryption Set" is part of the Foundation Set.  I do NOT know if the
Foundation Set prior to 3.51 had "vi" in the Encryption Set since 3.51 was
the release version in 1987 (when I bought my first 3B1).

Thad Floryan [ thad at btr.com (OR) {decwrl, mips, fernwood}!btr!thad ]