*BSD News Article 69095


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!solace!nntp.uio.no!news.cais.net!bofh.dot!rtd.com!dgy
From: dgy@rtd.com (Don Yuniskis)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Mach Microkernel + FreeBSD + PowerMacs
Date: 22 May 1996 01:18:30 GMT
Organization: CICDO
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4ntq16$c8v@baygull.rtd.com>
References: <960520191156-rrwood@io.org> <4nt0en$3j5@linet06.li.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: seagull.rtd.com

In article <4nt0en$3j5@linet06.li.net>,
John W. Carbone <jwc@newshost.li.net> wrote:
>
>Wasn't the orginal personality that CMU wrote Mach with BSD?

There was the BSDSS (BSD Single Server) but that, I think, ran into
some gray areas with the USL issue.  Mach-UX was an encumbered BSD
server (needed BSD license).  Mach-US was an unencumbered BSD multiserver
and, I believe, the "end-of-the-line" as far as development goes...

There are/were, of course, other "token" and "specialty" systems...

>If that was the case, would it not be even easier than the Linux/Mach
>effort was?

Hmmm... depends on how you define "easy"... :>