Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 11:07:56 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> Cc: Tyler K McGeorge <treznor@sunflower.com>, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSD history Message-ID: <20001222110756.T53393@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <14913.13535.887486.212993@guru.mired.org>; from mwm@mired.org on Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 04:38:23PM -0600 References: <55810272@toto.iv> <14913.13535.887486.212993@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 20 December 2000 at 16:38:23 -0600, Mike Meyer wrote: > Tyler K McGeorge <treznor@sunflower.com> types: >> University of California at Berkeley at one point in time bought the = >> rights to work on UNIX from Bell Systems back in 1978. They shortly = >> thereafter forged their own variant of UNIX which they called BSD = >> (Berkeley Software Distribution). Soon after came 2BSD (which shipped 75 = >> copie, as opposed to the 30 shipped of BSD.) 2.8.1BSD gave way to many = >> enhancements, and is more important than 3BSD in that aspect.=20 >> 4BSD was released in 1980, 4.1BSD in 1981 (which has revisions made = >> between 82 and 83), 4.2 in 83, and finally 4.4BSD in 93. (I think some = >> of those dates are inaccurate, but I only have one source on this at the = >> moment.)) After 4.4BSD, UCB was forced to become BSDI, which is now a = >> major non-free Unix. Using 4.4BSD, there have been multiple offspring. = >> OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD and BSD Lite. Open referring to Open source, = >> Net referring to Networking based and Free being without cost. BSD Lite = >> is a small version of BSD (never really had much experience with = >> anything but FBSD.) > > Some corrections: > > <snip> Some corrections: > In any case, after 4.3 the federal funding vanished (the project was > pretty much finished). 4.3 came in two different versions: 4.3 BSD > and 4.3BSD Lite (aka Net). 4.3BSD was released in 1986. The Net/1 and Net/2 tapes came a lot later, after releases like Tahoe and Reno respectively. > The latter was supposedly free of AT&T code, and hence didn't > require a license from AT&T to use or sell. Many of the people at > CSRG formed BSDI, to market the software they had written - without > getting a license from AT&T. 386BSD was also derived from that code, > and release as an open source project. AT&T objected, there was a > lawsuit, AT&T got zapped for violating the BSD license, No, the case was settled out of court. > and the end result was that most of the BSD source was available for > others to use. A final BSD distribution was done - 4.4BSD (requiring > an AT&T license) and 4.4BSD Lite (which didn't). No, 4.4BSD was already under way when the court case started. Many of the terms of the settlement are unknown, but one was that the code base of the free BSDs, then based on 4.3BSD Net/2, would migrate to 4.4BSD, about which there had never been any dispute. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. If you don't, I may ignore the reply. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001222110756.T53393>