Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!bounce-bounce From: kolesar@cis.ohio-state.edu (mark anthony kolesar) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: To Merge or Not to Merge *BSD. What does it really mean? Date: 12 Jan 1995 21:50:27 -0500 Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science Lines: 20 Message-ID: <3f4ppkINN1hl@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu> References: <3f253c$es0@agate.berkeley.edu> <3f41piINNq16@python.cis.ohio-state.edu> <3f49s8$k60@dagny.galt.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: boa.cis.ohio-state.edu In article <3f49s8$k60@dagny.galt.com> alex@nine.org (Alex Wetmore) writes: <---- CUT -----> >I don't think that merging the two BSDs is going to get them more press >or make it easier for users to install... > >alex I'm not sure about that. When I first heard about BSD I was confused by all the BSD variants -- NetBSD, FreeBSD, BSD386. Even though there are Linux variants, they are all referred to as Linux. Having the BSD camp unite would at least provide the press with some focus. I like the name somebody else mentioned, OpenBSD. It might even get easier to install, since eliminating some of the duplication of effort would free up time for some of the newly merged team members to work on these issues. Mark