Re: The future of NetBSD

2006-08-31 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Marc G. Fournier dixit: (Please don't keep individual persons in the Cc, only the lists, otherwise people will get the mails several times.) Put together a *BSD core ... representative from each camp and try and steer the *kernel* itself towards a more common BSD ... BSD is about an operating

Re: The future of NetBSD

2006-08-31 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Please don't Cc: people when you respond to mailing lists *sigh* Marc G. Fournier dixit: for us, they need to write 1. Companies don't write drivers for BSD 2. Companies don't even release specs so that people can write drivers for BSD //mirabile -- I believe no one can invent an

Re: The future of NetBSD

2006-08-31 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Marc G. Fournier dixit: If the vendor is bought up, bankrupt, out of business, dead (like that person who ported g++ to Plan 9, whose window managers' copyright is now set in stone), etc... you're SOL¹. //mirabile ¹) wtf knows it -- I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just happens

Re: The future of NetBSD

2006-08-31 Thread Thorsten Glaser
(When do you stop putting people into Cc instead of just the lists?) Marc G. Fournier dixit: source code drivers provided by a vendor, and supported by them Yeah, and what if the vendor goes out of business, is bought or simply bankrupt? You're pretty much SOL then. //mirabile -- I believe

Re: The future of NetBSD

2006-08-31 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Marc G. Fournier dixit: I'm curious here, but why did the *kernel* diverge for each project? Because kernel, userland, ports and attitude come as a package, they cannot be separated, for together they are the operating system. //mirabile -- I believe no one can invent an algorithm. One just