Subject: Re: /etc/rc vs /etc/init.d, take N
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Rob Windsor <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/10/1996 23:54:25
Verily did der Mouse write:
> > A fair number of things that would indicate that we didn't care about
> > compatibility with "traditional BSD," such as the removal of the BSD
> > tty code, the change in symlink behaviour, etc., CAME STRAIGHT FROM
> > BERKELEY...
> So? As with the POSIX braindamage, just because someone else does it
> is not, in itself, a reason you/we should do it.
Uhmm, and at what point can we no longer call it 'BSD' or 'BSD-flavored'
because we left the beaten-path laid forth by the deities at Berkeley?
Or better yet, should we have set NetBSD up so that we proclaim, 'We're
4.4-Lite based, except for tty handling.' ? Doesn't make much sense.
POSIX braindamage prevents us from touting 'fully POSIX compliant', but
we're not NetPOSIX either.
Internet: email@example.com Life: Rob@Sunnyvale.California.USA.Earth
"Da Web": http://pobox.com/~windsor/
"Ain't much distance 'tween a pat on the back and a kick in the pants."
-- David Lee Roth (1990), `The Dogtown Shuffle'