From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jan 17 06:33:40 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id GAA13684
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 06:33:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA13677
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 06:33:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id PAA13954; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 15:25:38 +0100
From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Message-Id: <199601171425.PAA13954@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Subject: Re: BSDvs Lxxxxx Flame..
To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard)
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 15:25:38 +0100 (MET)
Cc: hasty@rah.star-gate.com, julian@ref.tfs.com, hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <14694.821887760@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 17, 96 06:09:01 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> Well, I read the letter and it didn't sound THAT bad.  At worst, the
> Linux advocate could be accused of being a little obsolete in his
> information, but I saw nothing that was outright inflammatory enough
> to warrant an impassioned correction.  If I responded to every
> low-grade Linux puff-piece touting some semi-dubious feature of Linux
> over BSD, I'd be writing letters all day! :-)

The point is that Bokhari is not J.Monroy, and he did not even
mention *BSD* (the asterisks are part of a regular expression). As
Amancio points out:

> The problem is that if we let things like that letter go by in a major
> magazine then people WILL believe that the *only* unix alternative
> for Intel platforms is FreeBSD --- excuse me Linux 8)

and I think this is the reason why there ought to be a reply to
the original article. Then, maybe the letter in the Nov.95 issue
is enough to close the discussion.

	Luigi