From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Feb 9 10:18:42 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id KAA29453 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 10:18:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from gdi.uoregon.edu (riley-net170-164.uoregon.edu [128.223.170.164]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA29443 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 10:18:36 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dwhite@localhost) by gdi.uoregon.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA04254; Fri, 9 Feb 1996 10:16:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 10:16:04 -0800 (PST) From: Doug White Reply-To: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu To: Greg Kopp cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: curious In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 9 Feb 1996, Greg Kopp wrote: > I'm just a bit curious. I know FreeBSD is based on 4.4BSD-Lite, but how > close are either of these to the current commercial release of BSD/OS 2.0? FreeBSD IS 4.4-lite based. however, we had to make some changes so BSD/OS 2.0 binaries would work (I believe they are in -current, no?). > I'm sure the underlying code is much different, but what about the user > interface? The reason I ask is I'm considering buying BSD/OS 2.0, but I Why not just use FreeBSD all the time? Just as good an OS and a heck of a lot cheaper. :) Doug White | University of Oregon Internet: dwhite@gladstone.uoregon.edu | Residence Networking Assistant http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | Computer Science Major