OPENMPE Archives

October 2002

OPENMPE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Chuck Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Chuck Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:30:23 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VANCE,JEFF (HP-Cupertino,ex1) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:19 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: POSIX on MPE (was: PA-RISC Emulator)
>
>

<snip>

> No.  As of late we in CSY R&D have been interested in "borrowing"
> from HP-UX, esp. in the area of IO drivers, etc. But, even that has
> been less than optimal, as we usually have to modify their code to
> fit into MPE. One example would be adding more/better diagnostic
> support.
>

That made me think.

Perhaps HP would consider releasing the source to an earlier version of MPE?
Version 5.5 or 6.0 would be a great starting point for future development
and would take care of eliminating STM and some of the other "enhancements"
we have seen of late.

In the past I had always kept up to date with the OS release. Even if there
was no compelling reason for me to upgrade, there was never really a reason
to NOT upgrade, it made future upgrades that had a feature I wanted that
much easier. But with 6.5 I saw nothing that made me want to upgrade and a
few things, like STM, that made me hesitate.

I am currently still running 6.0 pp2 and, as my final support contract with
HP has expired as of 9/30, it is where I will be from this point forward.


Comments are my own, not my employer's... etc.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2