Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!cs.utexas.edu!natinst.com!hrd769.brooks.af.mil!not-for-mail From: burgess@hrd769.brooks.af.mil (Dave Burgess) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: What happened to these projects ? Date: 29 Apr 1993 08:58:50 -0500 Organization: Armstrong Lab MIS, Brooks AFB TX Lines: 32 Message-ID: <1romuqINN4bs@hrd769.brooks.af.mil> References: <1993Apr26.001822.7537@knobel.GUN.de> <hastyC62oIE.BFH@netcom.com> <RAEBURN.93Apr29005633@cambridge.mit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: hrd769.brooks.af.mil In article <RAEBURN.93Apr29005633@cambridge.mit.edu> raeburn@athena.mit.edu (Ken Raeburn) writes: >What I haven't figured out yet (maybe because I try not to spend too >much time on news every day) is why the two groups are distinct. > Well, from my take on this thing, I think that it would be pretty hard for the groups to be distinct. They are the same people... >Both seem to have reasonable sets of goals, and though some of them >are different, I don't see why they can't be met as part of the same >project. The NetBSD people can work towards their goals, and the >386BSD-0.1.5 people can work towards theirs, and everyone respects all >of the combined goals of the group; what's the problem? Were there >any conflicting goals? WARNING: POINT OF VIEW BIASED OPINION FOLLOWS: I have been reading through the docs for 386bsd (again, and again, and again...) and I really can't find a reason for NOT having NetBSD. One of the stated purposes of 386bsd is for research. From that, I would say that the folks that are putting NetBSD together have looked, found it to be good, and decided to package the existing system as a 'ready to install, stable' platform. NetBSD seems to be a natural extension. BTW. I will try to support BOTH in the FAQ. -- ------ TSgt Dave Burgess NCOIC AL/Management Information Systems Office Brooks AFB, TX