Someone needs to do a recursive diff between 0.1 and 1.0. I wonder if they took any of the patches that were sent to them before everyone gave up and forked NetBSD and FreeBSD?
NetBSD and FreeBSD absolutely were forks of 386BSD, which itself was largely derived from the Berkeley Net 2 code base – Bill Jolitz just filled in the missing pieces.
(FWIW, I actually ran 386BSD, and later FreeBSD, on my home machine.)
For various legal reasons FreeBSD pretended it was based on 4.4BSD-Lite for a long time. The NetBSD guys went as far as settling out of court and deleting 386BSD stuff from their cvs history. See eg. http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdwe... [netbsd.org]
Why bother? (Score:0)
ROTFLMAO.
Someone needs to do a recursive diff between 0.1 and 1.0. I wonder if they took any of the patches that were sent to them before everyone gave up and forked NetBSD and FreeBSD?
Re: Why bother? (Score:0)
Forked? afaik non of them are forks of 386bsd but of sysv unix, hence the lawsuit from att
Re: (Score:2)
Not forks of System V Unix, but of the various NET BSD releases Berkley made, at the end of the CSRG.
Re: (Score:0)
What you "know" is incorrect.
NetBSD and FreeBSD absolutely were forks of 386BSD, which itself was largely derived from the Berkeley Net 2 code base – Bill Jolitz just filled in the missing pieces.
(FWIW, I actually ran 386BSD, and later FreeBSD, on my home machine.)
Re: (Score:1)
For various legal reasons FreeBSD pretended it was based on 4.4BSD-Lite for a long time. The NetBSD guys went as far as settling out of court and deleting 386BSD stuff from their cvs history. See eg. http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdwe... [netbsd.org]
Re: (Score:0)
There's a radio interview with the Jolitzes [archive.org] in which they describe how they got involved with BSD.