RFS vs. NFS

[Brandon Allbery]

As quoted from <465 at cimcor.UUCP> by mike at cimcor.UUCP (Michael Grenier):
+---------------
| From article <4566 at megaron.arizona.edu>, by lm at arizona.edu (Larry McVoy):
| > In article <10186 at ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> ekrell at hector (Eduardo Krell) writes:
| >>And AT&T is not trying to lock you into AT&T products by pushing RFS;
| >>there are a lot of non AT&T boxes running System V Release 3 and RFS.
| > 
| > Truth in advertising, please.  How about a list of those boxes?  Maybe 
| > people will see the light and start to take RFS seriously?
| 
| OK, how about any 80386 box running a port of Interactive's Unix which
| includes Interactive, Microport, Bell Technologies, etc. This includes
+---------------

Also Altos System V, which leans rather closer to Xenix than to Interactive's
386 port; not to mention their Unix for the 3068 (68020 box).  I also
understand that Plexus (680x0 boxes) is dropping its proprietary NOS and
going RFS in its V.3 port (if and when it comes out, unless you bought a P/95
which has it now).
-- 
	      Brandon S. Allbery, moderator of comp.sources.misc
       {well!hoptoad,uunet!hnsurg3,cbosgd,sun!mandrill}!ncoast!allbery