On Wed, 17 Dec 1997, Adam Glass wrote:

> A second option would be to port NetBSD to Win32 so that it runs as a
> process (or series of processes) under Win32.

> Oh I understand that.  I still believe that there is value *even* to you of
> a NetBSD/Win32.  For one thing it is neat.  For another, its a whole lot
> more unix than the posix environment and thus might attract some new users.

What is the point of porting NetBSD to Win32?
Why not port it to the NT Executive/"Microkernel" (which is not really a
microkernel) and run NetBSD as a separate subsystem, along with the
Win32-, OS/2-, Win16/Dos- and POSIX-subsystem?

The question is whether the "API"(?) of the NT Executive is
freely "available" for any developer to use, or is it just closed to MS
and those who pay MS a lot?
(I have to admit I have not checked that out... Did Softway have to pay?)

Yes, I know that the Win32 subsystem is "in charge", but would it be
possible to let another subsystem be "in charge"? (Who really needs a GUI
on a server? And besides, the MS GUI does not suit me.)

And: Softway's OpenNT is commercial, just like BSDI, for instance.

-Roar Thronęs

(I am not saying that I am not in favor of harsh legislations against
monopolies.)