From owner-freebsd-emulation  Wed Sep 10 18:48:02 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-emulation>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA14308
          for emulation-outgoing; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 18:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.com (pegasus.com [206.127.225.31])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA14268
          for <emulation@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 18:47:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pegasus.com (8.6.8/PEGASUS-2.2)
	id PAA16428; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 15:47:36 -1000
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 15:47:36 -1000
From: richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk)
Message-Id: <199709110147.PAA16428@pegasus.com>
In-Reply-To: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@Kithrup.COM>
       "Re: Net posting: SCO gets Linux emulation" (Sep 10,  6:05pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: emulation@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Net posting: SCO gets Linux emulation
Sender: owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

} >> Well, its somewhat interesting because it runs entirely in userland
} >> and traps system calls via a SEGV handler.
} >Ugh.  Is this what we have come to expect of SCO?
} 
} That is both unfair and rude.  (Bit of a warning here... I've known the
} author ever since I interviewed at SCO, and I happen to like him.)
} 

It is NOT rude and unfair.  What SCO has done to Unix is rude.  Complaining
when someone points this out is unfair.

If your friend works for SCO then we can all feel sorry for him.  If he
has created some of the horrid code that SCO has shipped over the years,
then perhaps not.


Richard