Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 10:59:50 +1100 (EST) From: Darren Reed <darrenr@vitruvius.arbld.unimelb.edu.au> To: nate@trout.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Cc: terry@cs.weber.edu, davidg@Root.COM, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Binary compatibility with NetBSDk Message-ID: <199502282359.KAA00727@vitruvius.arbld.unimelb.EDU.AU> In-Reply-To: <199502282116.OAA10502@trout.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 28, 95 02:16:23 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In some email I received from Nate Williams, they wrote: [...] > Should I keep going? The reason FreeBSD and NetBSD both exist is > because neither groups agrees wholly with the goals and directions of > the other groups. This means that there will be two differing versions, > whether you like it or not. Minimizing that is a worthy goal, but if it > means hobbling one group then it's not worth it. > > Nate But that is not a reason to make both versions incompatible, either intentionally or not. I'm not sure of the goals of FreeBSD, but surely it can't take too much effort (as long as you're willing) to ensure that some compatability remains ? Heck, if I can run SunOS 4.1.x binaries on NetBSD (and Sun3/alpha, etc) then it seems rather silly if BSDI/FreeBSD and NetBSD can't work something out between themselves. I don't see it as any one group's fault but a result of the "falling out". darren
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199502282359.KAA00727>