Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 06:39:09 -0800 From: Cy Schubert <cschuber@uumail.gov.bc.ca> To: obrien@NUXI.com Cc: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Next release should be called 5.0 (was:4.4 BSD forever?) Message-ID: <200001131439.GAA49551@passer.osg.gov.bc.ca> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 12 Jan 2000 21:23:12 PST." <20000112212312.F17687@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000112212312.F17687@dragon.nuxi.com>, "David O'Brien" writes:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2000 at 08:48:08AM -0800, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Gro
> up wrote:
> >
> > UCB and AT&T had agreed that there were to be no new releases of BSD
> > and that 4BSD was the final release. 4.1BSD - 4.4BSD were named such
> > because they were "officially" only modifications to 4BSD and as such
> > were not full releases. In fact they contained more new features than
> > previous releases and were modifications to 4BSD in name only.
>
> This is a quote from McKusick on a previous post. It doesn't seem to
> back up your statements.
>
> > As I understood it, 4BSD was to be the last release based on 32V
> > and AT&T wouldn't license anything newer on agreeable terms, so
> > Berkeley released 4.1. 4.1c (later renamed to 4.2) was released to
> > fullfil their contractual obligation to DARPA. At least that's the
> > scuttlebutt at the time, which likely suffered from at least some
> > "telephone game" syndrome.
>
> AT&T kept wanting Berkeley to move forward to a newer license, but
> we resisted because the newer licenses were considerably more
> expensive. That had nothing to do with the naming. The 4.1 release
> was called that because AT&T was concerned that there would be
> confusion in the marketplace if there were System V and 5BSD, so
> we agreed to call it 4.1 instead of 5.0. The 4.1c release was never
> renamed 4.2. The 4.2 release followed 4.1c. The 4.1c release was
> what would probably be called an alpha release of 4.2 today.
>
>
> > It's all in Kirk's book the Design and Implementation of 4.4BSD.
>
> What page numbers?
Rereading the first 17 pages where Kirk discusses BSD history, he doesn't
even mention any licensing issues between UCB and AT&T until 4.4BSD.
As a matter of fact page 9 discusses 4BSD as a project which had a number
of releases.
I obvously stand corrected. It's been a while since I read the book.
If I've fogotten this much, I should read it again.
>
> --
> -- David (obrien@NUXI.com)
You argue like Tom Leykis. Because of that you've earned my respect.
Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766
Sun/DEC Team, UNIX Group Internet: Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca
ITSD
Province of BC
"e**(i*pi)+1=0"
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200001131439.GAA49551>