Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!hookup!yeshua.marcam.com!uunet!biosci!news.Stanford.EDU!kithrup.com!sef From: sef@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan) Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.0 - a status report. Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Message-ID: <CyMBFF.Kw5@kithrup.com> References: <38j31l$6nf@agate.berkeley.edu> <38to0m$k6d@fw.novatel.ca> <3937bd$l19@masala.cc.uh.edu> <395qr4$msb@pdq.coe.montana.edu> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 02:11:38 GMT Lines: 13 In article <395qr4$msb@pdq.coe.montana.edu>, Nate Williams <nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu> wrote: >The fact of the matter is that to the FreeBSD folks >ibsc2 emulatin is more important than MSDOS FS support. Actually, I started the ibcs2 project because a) I know SCOnix very well, b) it seems obvious to me that BSD on a '386 should be able to run SCO binaries, and c) BSDi did it, so why not FreeBSD? In other words, yes, I did it because it was fun, not because I thought anyone would really want it. Same reason I did the ptrace() rewrite, and the procfs work. ;)