Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:12867 comp.os.386bsd.development:1388 comp.os.386bsd.questions:6487 comp.os.386bsd.misc:1373 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!mycroft From: mycroft@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: WILL ???BSD DIE? Date: 04 Nov 1993 17:51:23 GMT Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Lines: 35 Message-ID: <MYCROFT.93Nov4125123@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> References: <jmonroyCFv39C.Iv1@netcom.com> <2b64ce$l4o@zip.eecs.umich.edu> <2b6o4p$15s@pdq.coe.montana.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: duality.ai.mit.edu In-reply-to: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu's message of 2 Nov 1993 22:48:57 GMT In article <2b6o4p$15s@pdq.coe.montana.edu> nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: I have no idea where this comes from. Other than some changes which have made it difficult to run these releases on some hardware that ran 386BSD, in EVERY aspect the newer releases are more stable and usable than any version of 386BSD available. To be completely fair, this is untrue. There are a couple of long-standing bugs in both FreeBSD and NetBSD which must be resolved before any such claim can be honestly made. I'm sure Chris would agree that sun-lamp is much more stable under NetBSD than it was under 386BSD, No doubt about that. and freefall just doesn't have anything bad happen to it anymore, [...] Um, can we put the politics aside for a moment? Freefall *does* crash periodically. And I don't get paid for any of this. So, those are my 'lame' excuses. Who cares? You should be chained to your desk and read news and mail all day answering questions. [;-) for the humor-impaired] It isn't quite so cut-and-dried as it sounds to have the development going on in the newsgroups. In practice, little except politicking and flaming occurs on USENET.