Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:43:26 +0200
From:      Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org>
To:        Glenn Sieb <ges+lists@wingfoot.org>
Cc:        freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Questionable statement in article
Message-ID:  <4116906E.8060408@elvandar.org>
In-Reply-To: <41168DF7.2090601@wingfoot.org>
References:  <1091989450.570.2.camel@dude.automatvapen.se> <20040808202351.GV87690@submonkey.net> <41168DF7.2090601@wingfoot.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> But this only holds as long as code(bsd) > code(linux) to begin with.... 
> no? Do we know for a fact that code(bsd) > code(linux)? I know I've been 
> hard pressed to find software from vendors that was marketed as being 
> developed for BSD, as opposed to Linux or Solaris, etc....
> 
> Best,
> G.

You dont see the point i think, BSD can execute it's own code, and thus 
any software written for BSD itself, AND it has the power to execute 
Linux code, so that makes

BSD (BSD+Linux) vs Linux (Linux)

And since there is at least one product more on BSD then for Linux it is 
a correct statement....

> 

-- 
Kind regards,

Remko Lodder                   |remko@elvandar.org
Reporter DSINet                |remko@dsinet.org
Projectleader Mostly-Harmless  |remko@mostly-harmless.nl



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4116906E.8060408>