From owner-freebsd-stable  Sun Jan  7 17:36:27 1996
Return-Path: owner-stable
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA03409
          for stable-outgoing; Sun, 7 Jan 1996 17:36:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from freebsd.netcom.com (freebsd.netcom.com [198.211.79.3])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA03404
          for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 7 Jan 1996 17:36:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by freebsd.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1)
	id TAA07105; Sun, 7 Jan 1996 19:41:45 -0600
From: bugs@freebsd.netcom.com (Mark Hittinger)
Message-Id: <199601080141.TAA07105@freebsd.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Do we want to bring the BSDI 2.x compat code in? (fwd)
To: stable@freebsd.org
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 1996 19:41:45 -0600 (CST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-stable@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> Jordan K. Hubbard:
> Subject says it all.  Feedback?

Some commercial binary only packages ship with bsdi compat binaries.  
Livingston portmaster utilities are one, Netscape server is probably another.

Yes.  Is it in 2.2?  If so this reduces it priority in my view.  I'm not
sure that us "outer" guys have a clear picture of the plans for -current
now.  

Maybe its time for a FreeBSD con with sessions and stuff.

Regards,

Mark Hittinger
Netcom/Dallas
bugs@freebsd.netcom.com