by redmail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 16 Mar 1999 10:32:30 -0000
	id xma009462; Tue, 16 Mar 99 10:27:28 GMT
	id AA28370; Tue, 16 Mar 99 10:29:57 GMT
	id KAA28341; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:29:50 GMT
	id KAA16411; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:29:44 GMT
Message-Id: <199903161029.KAA16411@sun52.NIS.cambridge>
To: Hubert Feyrer <hubert.feyrer@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
Cc: "Scott R. Burns" <Scott.Burns@Netcontech.Com>,
        "'netbsd-advocacy@netbsd.org'" <netbsd-advocacy@NetBSD.ORG>,
        "'port-arm32@netbsd.org'" <port-arm32@NetBSD.ORG>
Cc: richard.earnshaw@arm.com
Reply-To: richard.earnshaw@arm.com
Organization: ARM Ltd.
Subject: Re: Intel Web Pages 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:08:56 +0100."
             <Pine.GSO.4.00.9903160008080.19386-100000@rfhs8036.fh-regensburg.de> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:29:44 +0000
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>

> 
> On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Scott R. Burns wrote:
> > I see that the NetBSD OS is posted on the Intel Web Site under the Strong Arm pages. I also see quite a bit of traffic on the lists about people running this release. Under the Development Toolks and OS/s pages on the Intel site it still shows as Porting, where as some operating systems and tools show as "Beta - Available" or "Available". Would one of those not be more appropriate ?
> 
> Tell them it's fully up and running. :-)
> 
> I'm sitting at Shark (NC with StrongARM) right now, running X and PPP
> connection to the world. :)
> 

The PDF document I downloaded on this had NetBSD as "available", but linux 
"in development" or some such.

Richard.