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!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!nntp.uac.net!news.tufts.edu!blanket.mitre.org!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!jraynard.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: james@jraynard.demon.co.uk (James Raynard) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: BSDI compatibility in 2.1-stable ? Date: 3 Jun 1996 22:42:10 -0000 Organization: A FreeBSD Box Lines: 21 Message-ID: <4ovpo2$7gg@jraynard.demon.co.uk> References: <31B2E552.1372@marben.be> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: jraynard.demon.co.uk In article <31B2E552.1372@marben.be>, Jean-Pierre Morant <jpm@marben.be> wrote: >I've heard that the latest 2.1-stable supports BSDI binaries. Is it true >? Actually, support for some BSDI binaries (1.0?) goes back to 2.1-release or perhaps even to 2.0.5. The -stable support is for later BSDI binaries (2.0?) which are in a different format. (Sorry for the vagueness, I'm not too well up on BSDI). >Does anyone have experience with this ? There isn't a FreeBSD version of Netscape, so a lot of people use the BSDI version. I used to use it under 2.1.0 until I got fed up with it (Netscape that is, not 2.1.0 8-) -- James Raynard, Edinburgh, Scotland | http://freefall.freebsd.org/~jraynard/ james@jraynard.demon.co.uk | jraynard@freebsd.org