Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!Starbase.NeoSoft.COM!nobody From: peter@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: 4.4-lite? Date: 20 Jul 1994 21:59:14 -0500 Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services +1 713 684 5969 Lines: 24 Message-ID: <30koa2$ie7@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> References: <2vgvc7$3tg@spruce.cic.net> <michaelv.774429899@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> <30fh47$94i@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <MYCROFT.94Jul20043542@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: starbase.neosoft.com In article <MYCROFT.94Jul20043542@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu>, Charles M. Hannum <mycroft@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> wrote: >In article <30fh47$94i@pdq.coe.montana.edu> nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu >(Nate Williams) writes: [ who is or is not the purest 4.4 system deleted ] Gyargh. FreeBSD and NetBSD aren't opposed camps. They're loose associations of like-minded people who are all working on pretty close to the same code for the same reasons, with some minor differences in philosophy. One's pushing the limits on the kernel and working on portability, the other's concentrating on having a system that's reliable and easy for novices to install and use. Both of these are GOOD THINGS. For that matter the enemy isn't Linux, or even System V. It's Bill Gates. All this internal bickering is daft. Philosophically I like the FreeBSD approach of starting over with the 4.4 code. Practically I sorta wish they'd gone the way NetBSD did. Of the two FreeBSD is the one that's more ready for prime time on the end- user's desktop, and starting over is a bit of a risk. Hopefully it will work out in the long term.