*BSD News Article 36810


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:13756 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3688
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!wabbit.cc.uow.edu.au!picasso.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au!newshost!chrisb
From: chrisb@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Chris Bitmead)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: How UTTERLY Amazing! (Was Re: FreeBSD vs NetBSD)
Followup-To: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Date: 11 Oct 94 09:53:25
Organization: Telecom Australia - CSSC
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <CHRISB.94Oct11095325@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>
References: <358o3g$p95@umd5.umd.edu> <hart.780959657@apanix.apana.org.au>
	<36hof6$de4@quagga.ru.ac.za> <jmonroyCx11pJ.5nv@netcom.com>
	<36upob$ju6@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <jmonroyCxG197.MqI@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au
In-reply-to: jmonroy@netcom.com's message of Mon, 10 Oct 1994 06:12:42 GMT

In article <jmonroyCxG197.MqI@netcom.com> jmonroy@netcom.com (Jesus Monroy Jr) writes:

>Nate Williams (nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu) wrote:
>: In article <jmonroyCx11pJ.5nv@netcom.com>,
>: Jesus Monroy Jr <jmonroy@netcom.com> wrote:
>: >: FreeBSD 2.0, for instance, is no longer
>: >: based on 386BSD, but is rather based on 4.4-Lite -- if you did a cvs
>: >: checkout of the initial code in our tree you would (if you were lucky)
>: >: get 4.4-Lite back.
>: >:
>: >	And let's say you  have a *current* version and it
>: >	hobbles on a few select machines, there is no chance 
>: >	in hell you can convince me that the *whole* 386bsd
>: >	code tree has been eliminated... 
>
>: Well over 95% of the code has been 'eliminated'.  Considering that
>: 386bsd was over 90% BSD + 10%, I'd say we're doing pretty good.
>
>:
>	I understand that Freebsd plans to use the 
>	4.4 release as it's base. 
>	Don't you feel this will limit the potential of FreeBSD
>	as a development enviroment?
>	
>	I've spoken to many people on this and they feel
>	that Chicago or Mach or maybe OS/2 might offer
>	better resources to applications programmers.
>	Hence, the feeling that *BSD might be on it's 
>	death bed.  Certainly, the lack of interest by
>	programmers in general, especially when compared 
>	to other OSs as a whole, tends to prove my point.

Ok, let's rename the FreeBSD team to the BSD Chicago 95 team and the
NetBSD Team to the OS BSD/2 team.