From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Nov  8 09:51:02 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA12703
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:51:02 -0800
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA12697
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:51:00 -0800
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA20352; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 10:46:09 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199511081746.KAA20352@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: ideas from netbsd
To: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 10:46:09 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, nate@rocky.sri.MT.net, hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <199511080608.XAA28061@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Nov 7, 95 11:08:34 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 636       
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> That's all.  VM86() code is your holy grail, and you are using it to
> make points that aren't relevant to it.  I'm trying to inject a little
> bit of factual information into the discussion to bring out the fact
> that VM86() is *still* non-trivial to do, even given the NetBSD code.
> {Especially for a non-kernel weenie like myself}

The point I'm making is that NetBSD should be leveraged where possible
to make support less non-trivial.  If this means a COMPAT_NETBSD, then
all the better.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.