How Hard is it to Manage Different Unices?

vrmlguy asks: "Where I work has several Unix-based servers, all running the same vendor's OS. We are getting ready to buy another big server, and management wants to get bids from other vendors. However, our staff is only familar with our current vendor's OS. Yes, I know that any two flavors of Unix are more alike than not, and yes, I know about the Rosetta Stone for Unix that makes it easy to transfer skills. I want to know about the down-side: What's the difference in the cost of operations between a mono-culture and a shop running two or more vendors' OSs?"

Comments

the cost is in hardware

[josepha48]

If you are like the shops that I have been in then the biggest cost of running more than one UNIX is the hardware.

1) You can install the same shell on just about all UNIX's. Most people where I am prefer tcsh as it has some nice features.

2) You can standardize on scripts, either use csh (blah) or sh. We prefer sh as it is found on just about EVERY unix (Sun, HP, AIX, BSD's, Linux).

3) Avoid vender extensions to the basic shell. HP has done some aweful things there in its bourne shell and they are not compatible with Sun and in some cases Linux either. I.E. Always use `cat foo` and not $(cat foo) in sh scripts. There are other things like that.

There are problems in supporting more than one UNIX, but there are also workarounds if you do it right.