Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA1841 ; Tue, 23 Feb 93 15:00:36 EST Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!hp4at!mcsun!ieunet!dec4ie.ieunet.ie!jkh From: jkh@whisker.lotus.ie (Jordan K. Hubbard) Subject: Re: WFJ's talk last night... In-Reply-To: sef@Kithrup.COM's message of 21 Feb 1993 13: 58:44 -0800 Message-ID: <JKH.93Feb22001902@whisker.lotus.ie> Sender: usenet@ieunet.ie (USENET News System) Nntp-Posting-Host: whisker.lotus.ie Organization: Lotus Development Ireland References: <1m1a0oINN8ds@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> <CGD.93Feb19140552@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU> <C2qyyp.Hn1@sugar.neosoft.com> <fZDtP0x@quack.sac.ca.us> <1m8tukINN3uj@ftp.UU.NET> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 00:19:02 GMT Lines: 20 *I* do. Most people should. All sorts of intelligent, resourceful, and knowledgeable people are using BSDI's product. Quite a few of these people might like to see any code they write made freely available. But if it is only useful to bsd/386, why should they bother? I do too. 386bsd is going into a lot of very creative and interesting directions, but there's no reason why any of them force us to diverge significantly from standards like POSIX or mainstream BSD's like BSDI. I think a common ABI with BSDI would be a fine, fine thing and I, for one, would heartily endorse it. USL shouldn't have any particular beef since only SVR4 compliance is going to affect them at all. Jordan -- Jordan Hubbard Lotus Development Ireland jkh@whisker.lotus.ie 386bsd Patchkit Coordinator All-around nice dude. I do not speak for Lotus as that's not in my job description.