On 1/26/21 10:56 PM, Greg A. Woods wrote: > [not replying privately even though this is an old thread from back > in the time when I was still enjoying a care-free summer vacation, > and even though Grant and/or his mailer set "reply-to" to be his > own address, not the list address, It's not me or my mailer setting the Reply-To:. It seems as if the mailing list is setting that on senders who's domain uses DMARC, which mine does. > but because I'm still having rDNS issues and Grant's mailer won't > let mine deliver to him...] I've added central... to my hosts file, so hopefully you can email me directly if you want to. > Note that "Solaris" is a marketing name for a whole OS package > including the kernel, base system, user interface, and even some > applications. That's ... a different explanation than I've heard before. I'm not saying I disagree with it, just that it's completely new to me. > On the other hand "SunOS" the name of the base system OS (i.e. kernel > and userland). Please elaborate. Including using the same terms for both names. How does "userland" compare to "base system" and / or "user interface"? I'm also curious what differentiates between SunOS and a minimal install of Solaris. > The name "SunOS" pre-dated the name "Solaris" but continues on as > the name of the base OS within the Solaris package. I thought the "SunOS" vs "Solaris" was a marketing change around the time SunOS / Solaris transitioned from being more BSD to more Sys V. I also thought that the retention of "SunOS" in the kernel name and versioning was for backward compatibility. > Sun even back-pedaled and re-branded SunSO 4 as Solaris 1.0 before > the switch from BSD to something Sun liked to think was akin to SVR4. I was not aware that some of -- what I'll call -- the naming shenanigans happened to SunOS 4. I was only aware of things at SunOS 5. -- Grant. . . . unix || die