It's nice to know that Sun's relationship with it's customers is so
constant and never seems to vary much.


On Tue, 24 Nov 1998, Todd Vierling wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Nov 1998, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> 
> : > If there's doc to be had, it's probably not available from Sun.
> : 
> : Not true. It'll be in Documentation Control if it has a part #.
> 
> Then someone needs to tell the Sun techs.
> 
> I "had it up to there" the last time I dealt with Sun techs--on an official
> basis with Lucent's Sun contract.  In one instance, they wouldn't believe
> that Solaris/x86 2.5.1 had a bug that would hang the system with a simple
> socket()/fcntl(O_NONBLOCK)/select() chain.  They finally fixed it, long
> after I gave up, in 2.6, but I don't believe a patch was ever issued for
> 2.5.1.
> 
> And as to Sun3 patches, `grrrr!'.  The unofficial patch site is missing two
> patch revisions needed to fix some bugs... and unfortunately, the company
> didn't want to go to NetBSD unless as a last resort (which they
> did...although I hear the app in question is now migrated to a SPARC, after
> several years on a sun3 and a decade on a 3B2).
> 
> Sun's support, as of 6 months ago (the last time I had to deal with them) is
> outright hostile on a Microsoft scale to non-contract people, and stuffy at
> best to contract people.  I've yet to find a really friendly voice in the
> mess.
> 
> Fortunately, the machinery (not necessarily the software) is as reliable as
> a Volvo, so I don't have to deal with support often.
> 
> -- 
> -- Todd Vierling (Personal tv@pobox.com; Bus. todd_vierling@xn.xerox.com)
>