From owner-freebsd-current Wed Sep 25 13:31:03 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA12259 for current-outgoing; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:31:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA12223 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id NAA06624; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:25:04 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199609252025.NAA06624@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: install on {Net,Open}BSD vs install on FreeBSD To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 13:25:04 -0700 (MST) Cc: jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, terry@lambert.org, current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199609251839.MAA12703@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Sep 25, 96 12:39:28 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > One feature does not make a system into SYSV. > > But it also implies that the system can't be considered a 'pure BSD' > system, since it obvious incoroporates various SYSV features, which up > to this point have been the inclusion of 'install -d' and the above > mount changes. That it is an impure system is the point. It is therefore not a valid reference model for "this is BSD, that is not BSD". I suspect the NetBSD inclusion of the "-d" was for reasons of commercial product installation (such as license managers, which work over Garrett's theoretical objections), since they have SunOS ABI compatability in their SPARC port. It follows that they will want the commercial install scripts to operate, even if they aren't strictly BSD-utility-compatible. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.