5400 binary and 3100 binary, are they compatible both ways?

[Steve Simmons]

In article <1990Jul20.162904.3793 at Neon.Stanford.EDU> farhad at CS.Stanford.EDU (Farhad Shakeri) writes:
> When I installed our 3100s I just NFS mounted the /usr form
> out 5400 to save time and space.  All of the binaries on
> the 5400 were fine and we never had any problem with them. but 
> the moment I and other users tried to use these binaries:
> X11R4 binaries, gnuemacs, tcsh, MH...  they all acted
> strange...

grr at cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) writes:
>I'm doing essentially the same thing with a 3100 and a 5800 with
>3.1c and haven't noticed any problems of this sort.

Hmm . . . DEC went out of their way to tell us *not* to run Ultrix 3.1c
binaries on 3100s -- they didn't know of any problems, just said it
hadn't been tested.

Our experience between 3100s and 5810s has been 100% binary compatability.
If we could compile and run it on one, the binary would work on the other.
It's been a real plus to use a 3100 as a test bed for new software
development.  Lets us shake the bugs out in live use before putting it
on the 5810 to screw up all the users.  :-)

Another local site with a 5400 and 3100s reports no problems with
interoperability.