From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Nov 24 09:54:48 1996 Return-Path: owner-chat Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA01050 for chat-outgoing; Sun, 24 Nov 1996 09:54:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA01021 for ; Sun, 24 Nov 1996 09:54:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id IAA08393 for ; Sun, 24 Nov 1996 08:03:12 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA25280; Sun, 24 Nov 1996 08:58:04 -0700 (MST) Date: Sun, 24 Nov 1996 08:58:04 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199611241558.IAA25280@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: jehamby@lightside.com, chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: In Hollywood, nothing is as it seems In-Reply-To: <520.848814781@time.cdrom.com> References: <199611240036.QAA05973@covina.lightside.com> <520.848814781@time.cdrom.com> Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > doubt that our SCO compatibility is that robust (nor is Linux's) to run such > > wonderful programs as Microsoft Word, Foxpro, and Wordperfect for SCO. :-) > > There's one obvious way to find out, of course. Any chances for > testing here? Someone very kindly lent me a copy of SCO-WP (shipped from S. Africa of all places) that I just got in my hot little hands last week. Hopefully I'll get some time to mess with it this week and fix and SCO compatability problems, or at least look at them and tell you whether or not it work. (This means I will hopefully have a better clue why SCO-FlexLM doesn't work). Nate