From owner-freebsd-alpha Sat Dec 4 20:53:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from lestat.nas.nasa.gov (lestat.nas.nasa.gov [129.99.33.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424EF14C4C; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 20:53:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from thorpej@lestat.nas.nasa.gov) Received: from lestat (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lestat.nas.nasa.gov (8.8.8/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA18303; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 20:52:58 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199912050452.UAA18303@lestat.nas.nasa.gov> To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: Mike Smith , Andrew Reilly , alpha@FreeBSD.ORG, port-alpha@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Q: Compaq, *BSD and 'Linux-only' AlphaBIOS (fwd) Reply-To: Jason Thorpe From: Jason Thorpe Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 20:52:57 -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 4 Dec 1999 17:29:35 -0800 (PST) Matthew Jacob wrote: > Nope, but I can't speak for their choices or business model. Do they have > a machine that is an absolute *must have* for *BSD? It's not clear that it's really Samsung/API's choice, actually. As I recall, before Compaq bought DEC, DEC wanted to make sure that no company except DEC could produce an Alpha system capable of running Digital UNIX. Hence "no SRM for the Samsung boards". Yet another example of DEC having their head in the wrong place, I suppose. Maybe Compaq will have a better attitude towards the whole thing (sell more Tru64 licenses!). -- Jason R. Thorpe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message