Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 12:57:11 +0200 From: Alex de Kruijff <freebsd@akruijff.dds.nl> To: Todd Stephens <tbstep@tampabay.rr.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat Message-ID: <20031002105711.GH16713@dds.nl> In-Reply-To: <200310012323.37963.tbstep@tampabay.rr.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.50.0310012040460.811-100000@cdm01.deedsmiscentral.net> <1065064046.14liecjf9d9c@www.sweetdreamsracing.biz> <3F7B96CE.2020702@hawton.org> <200310012323.37963.tbstep@tampabay.rr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:23:37PM -0400, Todd Stephens wrote: > On Wednesday 01 October 2003 11:09 pm, Daniel Hawton wrote: > > > 4.4BSD Lite 2 is BSD.. which is from SysV.. heh That's what I said. > > Let me give acknowledgment to Greg Lehey ahead of time for this as this > bit that follows comes from _The Complete FreeBSD_. > > ".. by the mid-80s, there were four different versions of UNIX: the > Research Version ... the Berkeley Software Distribution ... System V > .. and XENIX, " > > Sorry for omitting parts, but the overall idea of the passage remains > intact. > > I believe, and someone correct me here, that BSD was a modification of > the /original/ UNIX code which existed prior to Sys V in 1983, > indicating that BSD and Sys V are different branches from the same > trunk. The history is rather confusing though, so I expect to be wrong > on this. I think this is pritty much correct. Berkeley original started with this because the original UNIX wasn't able to handle two HD on one contoler. This got the BSD history written down: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/kirkmck.html -- Alex Articles based on solutions that I use: http://www.kruijff.org/alex/index.php?dir=docs/FreeBSD/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031002105711.GH16713>