Xenix Executables

[Scott Amspoker]

In article <857 at jetsun.WEITEK.COM> brothers at jetsun.WEITEK.COM (bill brothers) writes:
>>Could someone tell me, why on earth would SCO not simply recompile these things
>>to take advantage of the 80386 ? SCO ?? I almost can't believe my eyes. This is
>>quality control ? 
>>
>
>It is pretty simple: If it works, don't fix it. There are many utilities
>that will never need more data space, etc.  Besides, anytime you touch a
>program it tends to break. An added benefit-- You don't have to have a
>somebody run 47 tests on the program if it hasn't changed. It was a
>concious, deliberate decision process on which programs to migrate to
>higher planes. Just because the module is marked 386 doesn't make it any
>better program than 8086. It just means it won't run on older platforms.

I'll second that.  At first glance it seems like the proper thing to do
just to keep everything nice and tidy.  But when you have as many different
environments to support as SCO, recompiling/testing/imaging the 'cat' command
for no worthwhile reason would be rather low on the priority list.  In the
long run this probably improves quality control as well as keep the
price down.

-- 
Scott Amspoker
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM
(505) 345-5232
unmvax.cs.unm.edu!bbx!bbxsda!scott