Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!haven.umd.edu!uunet!psgrain!percy!nerd From: nerd@percy.rain.com (Michael Galassi) Subject: Re: Digiboards and BSDI/386 References: <1993Jun4.094829.6159@spcvxb.spc.edu> <1v45qu$im@urmel.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> <1993Jun11.080552.6234@spcvxb.spc.edu> <1993Jun11.181807.8884@fcom.cc.utah.edu> Organization: /etc/organization Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1993 16:40:32 GMT Message-ID: <C8ryBL.Jyn@percy.rain.com> Lines: 72 *************************************************************************** I do NOT work for BSDI, I don't represent them, these are my thoughts only and BSDI probably does not want them. You can ask them for their thoughts *************************************************************************** [Terry, I apologize for not including all your text, I've tried not to quote out of context, call me on it if I have. -m] terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes: >1) They identify that they are talking about BSDI so that the > answer "update to the newest patchkit and apply patch XXXXXX" > is obviously inapplicable. I don't think there was much doubt left as to which OS I was refering to. >2) People don't get confused that 386BSD and BSDI are synonymous. Both sides will respond here with a loud god forbid. >4) The pollenization goes both ways, and the 386BSD community > also benefits. I think Donn's posting of the BSDI/CSRG's init code (to alt.sources) along with other postings in the past from BSDI and its users should set this fear aside. >5) Question posting does not become BSDI's primary means of > technical support (I despise the idea of someone covertly > reaping financial benefits from the good faith of others > without sharing the benefit. If this and other 386BSD > forums do the work of supporting BSDI's product, they should > be paid technical support fees/salaries). BSDI has an active mailing list, several email addresses, and 800 #s they use as the primary support mechanisms. USENET is a available to anyone who wishes to use it, including those of us who run BSDI. I should point out that BSD/386 is similar enough to 386BSD that many questions asked and answered in the BSD/386 context will also be beneficial to the 386BSD people. >In general, nobody does (1). I did, others have too. > It seems that the BSDI users are the biggest offenders on (2). I don't think so, BSDI is quite specific in the naming of their OS, and there is only one, unlike the Netbsd, 386bsd, and whatever other efforts are under way these days in the JOLIX derived world. > BSDI has been mostly fair about (4), although they have gotten major > benefits (like the ISOFS and console drivers) and 386BSD has reaped > only minor ones. Looking at the iso9660 and console drivers in the current BSD/386 distribution I see a lot of code that is of their own creation. > as we keep (1)-(4) in mind, (5) will fall into place. We need to remember that the net is not owned by anyone, and no special privileges are due to any group of people based on their OS choice. >The 386BSD community, which is in its majority a research community, should >not be a path of least resistance for BSDI technical support. My impresion from the posts I've seen is that the Terry Lamberts, David Greenmans, and Bruce Evans' etc... are the minority, not the majority. Maybe not... -michael