Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!agate.berkeley.edu!cgd
From: cgd@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Chris G. Demetriou)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: FAQ_01. First Draft.
Date: 13 Apr 93 16:43:03
Organization: Kernel Hackers 'r' Us
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <CGD.93Apr13164303@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
References: <CGD.93Apr3193340@erewhon.CS.Berkeley.EDU> <1pplq5$f6b@agate.berkeley.edu>
<1993Apr5.184733.26883@coe.montana.edu> <1qfbes$lmc@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eden.cs.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu's message of 13 Apr 1993 21:31:08 GMT
[ here we go again... ]
In article <1qfbes$lmc@agate.berkeley.edu> wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes:
=>Perhaps I'm not communicating concisely on this topic, so I'll take the
=>time to do it justice. If any of you continue to have trouble with this,
=>please call me directly and I'll explain in detail.
if you can't communicate it sensibly in writing, talking about it
surely won't help; interactive fora do little to allow a clear
statement of one's points.
=>We have not seen the last of the "legal" battles by any stretch. In fact,
=>there is a considerable number of "quiet" battles underway at the moment,
=>partly because of the good judge's decision. If you think they are all
=>motivated out of altruism, you are very naive. And if you think that the
=>outcome won't affect your access to this basic technology, stop reading
=>this and go stick your head back into the ground.
there have been a considerable number of quiet battles going on
forever, or so you've been telling the world.
i've see all of one battle, and that wasn't so quiet (i.e. the USL
suit). i can only comment on what i see.
=>There's quite a bit at stake at the moment, and from the attempts I've
=>made at dealing with the combatants, I consider that the situation is
=>more polarized than ever, that the degree of lobbying and rewriting of
=>history is at an all time high.
Frankly, from what i've seen, you and Lynne have done more to polarize
the situation than anyone else.
I, for one, think it's rather sad, and has done very much to
tarnish 386bsd...
=>[ stuff about injurious practices of various companies... ]
=>Even better, some members of the press have been silently
=>noting them over the last few years.
then they should be very easily documentable, and i'd like to
see said documentation.
frankly, for the last year, we've seen the mouth. it'd be
nice to see the money, so to speak.
=>If you happen to be on one of these sides, be my guest, cheer them on and
=>listen lovingly to the lies they feed you. I have no trouble with this,
=>you've a right to choose your own poison. However, don't expect us to
=>upend the bottle with you.
i've a question for you:
is anyone with even a slightly different set of goals than your
own necessarily "not on your side"? with a vastly different set,
perhaps, but how about a "slightly different" set?
how about if those goals are to create a good, solid, working system,
and not be forced into political flame wars?
=>Perhaps we have been too quiet recently, since we've been busily working
=>on a new release (more fun than answering this claptrap), but be forwarned:
=>we are quite aware of the situation. But the releases will continue,
=>and that's final.
"oh my god, i'm so scared. i'd hate to see this thing actually
make it big time." (so says he who found 386bsdd its first ftp site...)
what exactly is the situation, as you see it?
do you have something against speaking in a straightforward manner?
=>BTW, I sure hope that much of the sealed testimony is unsealed eventually.
=>I'm sure it will make interesting reading.
can't argue with that.
=>ABTW, as to the parenthetical comment about making money, that was just
=>irony, in reference to that company's original "noodle-brained" reaction to
=>386BSD 0.0. They decided to make up a scare story about viruses to avoid
=>needing to put up the release when I asked them to.
'scuse me? i don't recall anything ever said about that?
their statements indicated, from day one, that they simply did not
have the disk space to deal with keeping binaries around.
when that changed, 386bsd went up.
<sigh>
chris
who's buried 10 feet deep in release engineering, and has better
things to do than this...
--
Chris G. Demetriou cgd@cs.berkeley.edu
"386bsd as depth first search: whenever you go to fix something you
find that 3 more things are actually broken." -- Adam Glass