From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Feb 28 12:05:55 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id MAA01276 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 28 Feb 1995 12:05:55 -0800
Received: from deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk (deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk [129.215.144.7]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA01269 for <freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 1995 12:05:51 -0800
Received: (from richard@localhost) by deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk (8.6.10/8.6.9) id OAA23698; Tue, 28 Feb 1995 14:55:59 GMT
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 14:55:59 GMT
Message-Id: <199502281455.OAA23698@deacon.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
From: Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility with NetBSD
To: Paul Richards <paul@isl.cf.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: Paul Richards's message of Tue, 28 Feb 1995 00:22:18 +0000 (GMT)
Organization: just say no
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > This suggest that we have a /usr/shlib/NetBSD
> > /usr/shlib/iBSC2-SCO
> > /usr/shlib/Linux
> > /usr/shlib/FreeBSD-1 for the compat stuff.

> I like this plan.

So do I.  My only question is whether compatibility with some systems
might involve more than shared libraries, so that it would be better
to have /compat/NetBSD/usr/lib etc.  That would also allow you to
use a chroot()ed environment for more complete emulation.

-- Richard