From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Feb 28 11:58:16 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id LAA00986 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 28 Feb 1995 11:58:16 -0800 Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA00980 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 1995 11:58:15 -0800 Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA07715; Tue, 28 Feb 95 09:55:28 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Message-Id: <9502281655.AA07715@cs.weber.edu> Subject: Re: Binary compatibility with NetBSD To: nate@trout.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 95 9:55:27 MST Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199502280100.SAA08167@trout.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 27, 95 06:00:37 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52] Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Ahh, this assumes that you have read access to the RAW CVS tree. This > is *NOT* the case with the NetBSD sources. I'm coming from the > assumption which affects me. I *don't* have access to the raw > NetBSD-CVS bits, and I doubt highly you would get access to them for the > purpose of taking them for FreeBSD. No, it assumes you have read access to a CTM mirror of the RAW CVS tree. And you can't make your other assumption unless you ask. I'm suprised we haven't seen a response from Chris or Charles yet; it's either that they agree with you or that they (wisely, apparently) don't want to be involved in the discussion. Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.