>>I'd like to get to the point, soon, that we can run on all '020+MMU and
>>'030 Macs...  We'll see how realistic that is...
>
>Yay!  Maybe finally there will be something good to be said for my mistake
>of buying a IIvx three months before the Centris 650 came out.  ;)
>
>Out of idle curiosity, though, I've got a few questions:
>
>(1) Wouldn't it be easier to make a version of MacBSD that runs on *top* of
>the Mac OS?  There's already a commercial Unix for the Mac that does this;
>wouldn't it make life a heckuvalot easier to use Mac filesystem calls
>instead of rewriting the file system from scratch, and to use all the
>normal toolbox graphics calls instead of rewriting graphics from scratch?
>An application that let me roam my Mac with a tcsh, run Unix shell scripts,
>open multiple shell windows, and multitask between then within the
>application would be very handy indeed -- even better than a full-blown
>replacement operating system in some ways, because there wouldn't be any
>need to worry about being able to run normal Mac software too.
>
>I have the feeling that the answer will be "no, it wouldn't be easier" --
>why not?  Inquiring minds want to know.  ;)  I have the feeling that I'm
>missing an obvious point here.  What's the reason that MacBSD is being
>written to replace the Mac OS, instead of running on top of it?

Please don't do this. (or if you do, make it an option.)

I left MacMiNT behind because it uses the MacOS. I want real unix; this is
not possible using the mac file calls. UNIX is case sensitive; MiNT is not
since it uses mac file calls. Configuring and compiling gcc is dificult
without case sensitivity. Also, using the mac os would slow things down. I
want to try something hot and fast, and the mac osslows the machine down,
especially system 7.

BTW, is there a downloadable 486BSD?

-Jim


------------------------------------------------------------------------------