Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:13863 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3739 Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!nic.tip.net!palantir.p.tvt.se!pp2.smc.south.telia.se!paul From: paul@pp2.smc.south.telia.se (Paul Pries) Subject: Re: How UTTERLY Amazing! (Was Re: FreeBSD vs NetBSD) Message-ID: <1994Oct16.132949.6046@palantir.p.tvt.se> Sender: news@palantir.p.tvt.se (News account) Organization: Swedish Telecom X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4 References: <jmonroyCxqHo8.Kz3@netcom.com> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 1994 13:29:49 GMT Lines: 89 jmonroy@netcom.com (Jesus Monroy Jr) writes: : Paul Pries (paul@pp2.smc.south.telia.se) wrote: [ even more nuked ] : : : Yes, I'll agree with this. : : : With what? The renaming, or the name? There is a difference... : : : I'll agree that 386bsd r1.0 is vaporous. : I'll agree that it might also need to be renamed. : I'll agree that his analogy might be correct. : OK, this is clear. (At last...) : : : : : : Bill and Lynn have just as much at stake here as they : : : next developer. Sure, I've heard tell of other OSs : : : called Toy OSs, but does this stand to warrent that : : : possibly 386bsd R1.0 could be a "Toy OS". : : : : : : Maybe! : : : I never called it a "toy OS", maybe a few other things, but not that. : : What really pissed me off, was the ranting about "developement : : environments" and how bad those are in the different BSD clones. : : I won't comment on the examples you gave, they speak for them selves. : : : OK... you can do that. : Do what? Call the "vapourOS" different names? Get pissed off? Comment on your examples? Or what? Admit it, you are somewhat cryptic, aren't you? : : What I really meant with the name "DOS BSD-1.0" was, that how can *you* : : tell us how great 386BSD-1.0 will be in one breath, and in the next one : : slap the *BSD development environment to the floor, when everybody knows : : (even you, if I recall your own statements) that Bill and Lynne don't : : give shit about _any_ environment (but their own, perhaps). : : The only thing that counts for them is "cutting edge", you said it : : ypurself. : : Please explin this to me, but in plain english, no rantings. : : : OK. You'll have to bring this topic back again if : your really interested... This thread and others : are keeping me going right now and I don't have time : to go on a tangent for a very good question. : : I hope this answer is Ok with you Paul. : What answer? I don't think you answerd anything at all. But what the heck, I didn't really expect you to. [ more nuked suff ] : : Yeah, the silent developers. They who produce code, not vapour. : : Those who speak for themselves when they are ready to show some code. : : Reread the above two lines, and think again what they say. : : : My point is that there are hundreds of developers out : there (commercial and hobby) that don't have time : to get on and listen to you or me blatter on about : XYZ points on LINUX of *BSD. Additionally if they : are of any worth, they wont' argue with any of the : above personel.... Again this refers to my point, : "The silent developer". : I usually don't participate in flamewars, and I'm not known to advocate the pros and cons about different OS'es. That makes me one of those hundreds of silent developers? How about you? ;-) If only worthless assholes argue (this is what you said, isn't it?), then how do you expect any progress will be made in any developmentgroup? While I'm waiting for a good answer on this one, I'll back out and lean back in my chair, and ofcourse get some serious work done... : : : -- : Jesus Monroy Jr jmonroy@netcom.com : Zebra Research : /386BSD/device-drivers /fd /qic /clock /documentation : ___________________________________________________________________________ -- Paul Pries paul@pp2.smc.south.telia.se