From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jun 15 9: 7:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from angel.double-barrel.be (mail.double-barrel.be [194.7.102.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 316B715243 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 09:06:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mvergall@double-barrel.be) Received: from ws3.double-barrel.be (ws3.double-barrel.be [194.7.102.30]) by angel.double-barrel.be (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA27100; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:06:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost (mvergall@localhost) by ws3.double-barrel.be (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id SAA00552; Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:06:33 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: ws3.double-barrel.be: mvergall owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 18:06:33 +0200 (MEST) From: "Michael C. Vergallen" To: Alexander Langer Cc: gkshenaut@ucdavis.edu, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux not FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <19990615175138.A2300@cichlids.cichlids.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 15 Jun 1999, Alexander Langer wrote: > Thus spake Michael C. Vergallen (mvergall@double-barrel.be): > > > Yes but unfortunatly this could happen because the FreeBSD community does > > not have "Big commercial names" behind them and no commercial entity > > behind them to promote it as a viable alternative...I personally find this > > to be rediculous but... > > Does the FreeBSD community want this? Personally I would say that the FreeBSD community does not need it. > > Such a user hype as there is on linux brings much people who never > think of reading a handbook etc. This is only one of the reasons why I don't like to see this happen the other is all the commercial interests will eventually be detremental to Linux as a OS. Michael To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message