Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:42:36 -0400
From:      "Thomas M. Sommers" <tms2@mail.ptd.net>
To:        Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
Cc:        chat@FreeBSD.ORG, advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?)
Message-ID:  <396A97AC.CEB9CBE9@mail.ptd.net>
References:  <4.3.2.7.2.20000706190244.0483ad70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000706201218.04a99100@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000706222258.046d9c00@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000708105237.0448ca90@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000708162010.050e5da0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000709002932.04980100@localhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brett Glass wrote:
> 
> At 12:17 AM 7/9/2000, Thomas M. Sommers wrote:
> 
> >So the absence of Linux binary support will not necessarily mean more
> >native ports, and will mean that programs that don't have native ports
> >will not run.  Which means fewer applications for FreeBSD.  Which means
> >fewer users for FreeBSD.  Which means fewer native ports for FreeBSD.
> >...
> 
> Again, you appear to be intentionally misconstruing or ignoring what
> I've said in earlier messages. I'm afraid that I can't take the time
> to educate you about strategies and tactics if you simply can't (or
> won't) get it.

No, I'm not.  I haven't mentioned your proposed FreeBSD emulation for
Linux (if that's what you mean by ignoring your posts) because I was
questioning your premise (and because it makes no sense).

> >But these market forces will probably still not be strong enough to
> >produce native ports.
> 
> Yet again you ignore what I've written. If developers see a common API
> and ABI which lets them develop for all of the many Linux distros AND
> FreeBSD, they will jump at the chance to use it.

They see one now; if they write for Linux, it will run on FreeBSD
(mostly).  If vendors are presented with the choice of writing for a
large audience (Linux) and having a small audience (FreeBSD) be able to
use the product under emulation, or writing for a small audience and
having the large audience be able to run under emulation, which will
they choose?  If programs running under emulation are as bad as you say
(not suitable for "mission-critical" uses), they would be fools to do as
you suggest.  If emulation is not as bad as you say, then it just
doesn't matter that they now write for Linux and not FreeBSD.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?396A97AC.CEB9CBE9>