From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Dec 19 13:48:02 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA08813
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 13:48:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from westhill.cdrom.com (westhill.cdrom.com [192.216.223.138])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA08798
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 13:47:58 -0800 (PST)
From: gpalmer@westhill.cdrom.com
Received: from localhost.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1])
          by westhill.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA05789
          ; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 13:47:38 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: westhill.cdrom.com: Host localhost.cdrom.com didn't use HELO protocol
To: peter@haywire.dialix.com (Peter Wemm)
cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: SPRY Safety Server for BSDI 
In-reply-to: Your message of "20 Dec 1995 04:39:31 +0800."
             <4b77u3$142$1@haywire.DIALix.COM> 
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 13:47:37 -0800
Message-ID: <5785.819409657@westhill.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Peter Wemm wrote in message ID
<4b77u3$142$1@haywire.DIALix.COM>:
> I've just implemented binary compatability for BSD/OS 2.0 in -current
> about a week or so ago..  That might not be much help for you if you
> are using 2.1 though...

Would anyone object to this change being brought onto the 2.1 branch?
It sounds like it wouldn't be a `risky' change, and also is a win.

Gary