Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.eng.convex.com!newshost.convex.com!bcm.tmc.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!cygnus.com!kithrup.com!sef From: sef@kithrup.com (Sean Eric Fagan) Subject: Re: FBSD Future... Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Message-ID: <DzA1z6.Gyp@kithrup.com> References: <Dz37x9.7vC@news2.new-york.net> <199610111548.JAA29164@trout.mt.sri.com> <Pine.BSF.3.91.961011121248.28443A-100000@main.put.com> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 17:59:30 GMT Lines: 20 In article <Pine.BSF.3.91.961011121248.28443A-100000@main.put.com>, Louis Epstein <le@main.put.com> wrote: >> >(64-bit 3.x is presumably years away still). >> 64-bit is probably more like 6.x or something. >Hmm,isn't SCO(which the non-commercial UNIXes are supposed to be years >ahead of) already doing a 64-bit version? There is already a 64-bit version of *bsd -- NetBSD on the Alpha. FreeBSD (and all other 4.4-derived *bsd's) already support 64-bit file offsets (to varying degrees, admittedly). Since the x86 is not a 64-bit platform, there will never be a "64-bit unix" for it. The stuff SCO is doing, along with HP, is for the PA8k and other 64-bit processors. And I'm sure that, as soon as a spec is finalized, people will start working on making teh 64-bit free unices compatible with the spec as defined by SCO and HP. Cyberpromo delenda est.