[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev update

From: Vlad Harchev
Subject: Re: lynx-dev update
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 14:54:33 +0500 (SAMST)

On Wed, 5 Apr 2000, Michael Sokolov wrote:

> Philip Webb <address@hidden> wrote:
> > seem to show that i should have no interest in what you are doing,
> Do you think I care what you have interest in?
> > you admit that Lynx 2-7-2ms not only lacks the many features added
> > by a number of people during the past  2 years ,
> > but may also be open to malicious attacks which Lynx 2-8-3 thwarts,
> Let me put it this way. At the present, I have no time for serious Lynx
> development. Two years ago I did, but not now unfortunately. As far as using
> Lynx, I'm prefectlng happy with it the way it is now, or actually even better
> the way Fote left it two years ago. But before I can use Lynx, I need to build
> it on my system. Not being able to do so is what made me a Lynx developer two
> years ago. Neither TD's current autoconf version nor Fote's static Makefile
> version without my mods will build on 4.3BSD or come even close. So strictly
> speaking I could develop 4.3BSD support for either version. However, two years
> ago on this list I happened to be in a fortunate position to watch two
> competing versions of Lynx, Fote's and TD's. I chose Fote's version as it's
> closer to my personal taste.

  Do you plan to include support for 4.3 BSD in TD's version (I'm not
interested, I'm just curious)?
> Now why am I back on this list now, when Fote's version of Lynx is ancient
> history in everyone else's eyes? No, I'm not trying to persuade you or anyone
> else to use it. I just use it myself, and I believe in Free Computing so
> strongly that I want everyone to be able to use what I'm using if they want 
> to.
> Again, _if they want to_. I'm not doing any propaganda here, I agree that I
> cannot do it now like I did two years ago given how I moved this project down
> my priority queue.
> > otherwise, if you want [...]
> I don't want anything. (From you or from anyone else here, that is.)
> > you do not mention Linux: what do you find wrong with it?
> When was the last time you saw Linux running on a Large Computer, say, a
> VAX-11/780 or even a 750?

  Linux runs on IBM S/390 - is it smaller than ones you mention? (May be it's
smaller geometrically, but have much more computing power?)
> And even if someone got Linux or some other cheap clone running on real
> hardware that UNIX runs on, why would I ever want to use it when I have real
> UNIX? All "Gnu's Not UNIX" software is designed to replace UNIX, but why would
> I ever want to do it when I can just use UNIX? It's like voluntarily going to 
> a
> dentist to have all your natural teeth removed and replaced with prostetics.

  Do you use PCs at all? If yes, do you run MS Windows* on them then (due to
the lack of 4.3 BSD)?

> > why are you developing PureBSD ?
> First, it's called BSD UNIX, i.e., the Berkeley Software Distribution version
> of Ritchie's and Thompson's UNIX timesharing system. Note that the only 
> systems
> that are allowed to carry the name UNIX are those that are legitimate and
> authorized versions of Ritchie's and Thompson's UNIX timesharing system, all
> others are mere clones and workalikes. Similarly, there is no pure or impure
> BSD. BSD stands for Berkeley Software Distribution, and the only system that
> can be called BSD is the actual tape shipped from the Computer Systems 
> Research
> Group at UC Berkeley, or its authorized successor, who is me.
> Second, as I've just said, I'm not developing BSD UNIX. UNIX was developed by
> Ritchie and Thompson 30 years ago and BSD UNIX was developed by Berkeley CSRG.
> I'm just their faithful successor. (Fortunately, with that project I *do* a 
> lot
> of active new development.)

  Just curious: will result of your development be called BSD UNIX too?
> --
> Michael Sokolov                               Harhan Computer Operation 
> Facility
> Special Agent                         615 N GOOD LATIMER EXPY #4
> International Free Computing Task Force       DALLAS TX 75204-5852 USA
>                                       Phone: +1-214-824-7693
>                                       ARPA TCP/SMTP: address@hidden

 Best regards,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]