From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jan  3 20:26:05 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA07521
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 20:26:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA07516
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 20:25:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA26432; Wed, 3 Jan 1996 20:23:54 -0800
To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>
cc: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de>,
        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Demand loading (Re: FreeBSD, Zappa & PCI) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 03 Jan 1996 21:35:59 EST."
             <Pine.SUN.3.91.960103213250.12408D-100000@mocha.eng.umd.edu> 
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 20:23:54 -0800
Message-ID: <26430.820729434@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> Jordan, I can understand your first argument, but since SVR4 has been 
> running ELF for quite some time now, well, the second argument is a 
> little harder to see, for me.  Does ELF really still qualify as new 
> technology?

Chuck, think a moment here.  What *technology* to implement ELF
executables was used by SVR4?  Is it the same technology we have
available to us?  No.  Then what?  The GNU stuff.  Has the GNU
stuff been speaking ELF for long?  No.  I rest my case.

					Jordan