From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug  8 20:43:36 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D64816A4CE
	for <freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>; Sun,  8 Aug 2004 20:43:36 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from redqueen.elvandar.org (cust.94.120.adsl.cistron.nl
	[195.64.94.120])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EACF43D41
	for <freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>; Sun,  8 Aug 2004 20:43:33 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from remko@elvandar.org)
Received: from [10.0.2.122] (nimrod.elvandar.intranet [10.0.2.122])
	by redqueen.elvandar.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A51B010685E;
	Sun,  8 Aug 2004 22:43:26 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4116906E.8060408@elvandar.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 22:43:26 +0200
From: Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org>
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Glenn Sieb <ges+lists@wingfoot.org>
References: <1091989450.570.2.camel@dude.automatvapen.se>
	<20040808202351.GV87690@submonkey.net> <41168DF7.2090601@wingfoot.org>
In-Reply-To: <41168DF7.2090601@wingfoot.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at elvandar.org
cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Questionable statement in article
X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Documentation project <freebsd-doc.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>,
	<mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-doc@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-doc>,
	<mailto:freebsd-doc-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 20:43:36 -0000


> 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