From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Nov  8 09:53:28 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA12760
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:53:28 -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 JAA12755
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 09:53:27 -0800
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA20366; Wed, 8 Nov 1995 10:49:03 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199511081749.KAA20366@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: ideas from netbsd
To: cimaxp1!jb@werple.net.au (John Birrell)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 10:49:03 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, hackers@freebsd.org, jb@cimlogic.com.au
In-Reply-To: <199511080735.SAA22789@werple.net.au> from "John Birrell" at Nov 8, 95 06:38:36 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: 394       
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> So, having said all that, and having listened to argument for the sake of
> argument, I can't see that FreeBSD has anything to gain by adding some sort of
> NetBSD compatibility.

But what it has to "gain" by not doing it is gratuitous incompatability.


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