Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 02:19:06AM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
>>> You seem to believe there are pure 4.2 stacks still out there, but
>>> there aren't.
>> I don't believe you have the evidence to back that up.  I don't believe
>> anyone can.  There simply is no way to know what is still running in
>> legacy applications.  There are PDP-11s still out there; heck, I think
>> there are still PDP-8s out there.  I'd be astonished if there weren't
>> 4.2 stacks still in live use.
> 
> I think it's quite possible. Especially if these have a special communication
> board that can not be used in newer systems.
> It's not uncommon to see very expensive equipements (e.g. in physic or chemic
> labs) connected to a computer via a custom communication board, for
> which a PCI version doesn't exists (and you wouldn't have the driver
> anyway).
> 
It seems to me that now others are using proof by assertion.

My understanding of the goals of this project are to run it on as many
platforms as possible.  So, the answer to the above possible issues are
to port NetBSD to PDP-8 and PDP-11.

If the goal is to support museum exhibits running their original OS, then
why don't we have COMPAT for every other variant (or buggy) implementation,
such as XINU, Ultrix, various insecure (Kent) flavors of IPsec?

There were millions of those IPsec boxen sold, as opposed to mere hundreds
or thousands of PDP- or Perkin-Elmer (my first port) or what-have-you....

I don't run 386bsd on my old 60 MHz Pentium anymore, either!