[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OFFTOPIC: OpenBSD
Eli Marmor <marmor@elmar.co.il> writes:
>
> ::::::::::::::
> /tmp/mm.a27107
> ::::::::::::::
> > > > > > I'm interested in borrowing an OpenBSD CD or a binary/source
> > >
> > > > > What bad with FreeLSD ?
> > >
> > > > Nothing bad, actually - purely a religious matter. FreeBSD is a
> > > > single-architecture beast and I'd like to see how some things are
> > > > different for other architectures. Apart from it, I happen to like the
> > > > ideas behind OpenBSD.
> > >
> > > If I don't confuse things, the multi-platform is NetBSD and neither
> > > OpenBSD nor FreeBSD.
> >
> > Yes you do. :-) OpenBSD IS multi-platform. Moreover, it started as a
> > NetBSD branch! :-)))))
>
> No I don't. NetBSD is indeed multi-platform. As an owner of NetBSD
> installation, and as one who saw today a non-Intel NetBSD, it was
> strange to read about my confusion (although I was the first one to
> suggest this confusion), so I checked it again before sending this
> message, and the following is quoted from "SunExpert Magazine", August
> 1997, pp.34:
>
> "NetBSD, in contrast, has always been a multiplatform family of
> ports. It currently supports more than a dozen architectures."
>
Eli, we are talking about different issues. I never claimed NetBSD is
not multi-platform. On the opposite, I am aware of NetBSD's reputation
as a very portable OS. I just tried to say, that OpenBSD was
multi-platform too... :-)
--
Alexander L. Belikoff
Bloomberg LP / Berger Financial Research Ltd.
abel@bfr.co.il