On Mar 19, 12:02pm, seebs@plethora.net wrote:
} In message <199903190723.XAA16362@cue.bc.ca>, John Nemeth writes:
} >     BSD, is a standard in its own right.
} 
} Please advise where the standard is defined.  For instance, if two vendors

     The last release from CSRG.  Where are the standards for NIS,
NIS+, RFS, PAM, or any number of other things defined?  I don't
believe that "standards" are only in the domain of "official standards
bodies".

} of "BSD" systems (say, FreeBSD and NetBSD) disagree, how do I tell whether
} either of them is wrong?

     Both of these are derivatives and not the real thing.  Of course,
the real thing isn't particularly useful, since it is incomplete.  It
is up to the individual to decide which of FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD,
and BSD/OS are doing things in the BSD way, when a conflict occurs.

} >Where there
} >is a conflict, I want BSD to come out on top.  If I wanted a system
} >that was POSIX first and others second, I would be using Linux.
} 
} I wouldn't.  It's irritating to work with, and for reasons other than "POSIX"
} vs "BSD".

     Granted.  If I wasn't using NetBSD, I would probably be using one
of the other *BSD's.  However, the Linux camp tends to be POSIX, SysV,
and BSD (in that order).  Whereas NetBSD is very much in the BSD mold.

} I really like the idea of NetBSD being a system where someone who doesn't
} know anything specific about it, but is familiar with Unix, can pretty much
} sit down, read a few man pages, and be ready to use the system.

    I've used (and admined) so many different versions of UNIX that I
could use pretty much anything.

}-- End of excerpt from seebs@plethora.net