LinuxWorld.

[Rob]

On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 02:17:49PM -0800, Rick Moen wrote:
> begin  Nick Moffitt quotation:
> > begin  Deirdre Schmeirdre quotation:
> 
> >> Umm, it's an older fork. Your point?
> > 
> > With respect, BSD did not fork from NeXT.  Nor was the reverse true.
> > What exactly are you referring to?
> 
> I believe that should be parsed as "it's [NeXTStep is] an older fork
> [from AT&T UNIX than was NetBSD/FreeBSD from AT&T UNIX]".
> 

IIRC, BSDI and UCB had to rewrite/rename some functions, and
this coupled with the already enourmous changes/rewrites was
enough to satisfy AT&T's lawyers that BSD was _not_ UNIX (TM) 
anymore, although it began as a fork of AT&T's codebase.

Nevermind the fact that BSD code had been creeping into 
AT&T UNIX for some time ( which came out in the case ).

I am not up to speed on NeXTStep's heritage, but I understood
that it was licensed from whoever had UNIX at the time.

386BSD was quite a different codebase than UNIX IMHO.

Anyway, it seems like Apple has thrown out much 
( if not all ) of their older kernel/userland stuff from
NeXT, so it's probably a moot point. They've got a NetBSD
kernel and a FreeBSD userland. They couldn't distribute
Darwin under the terms they do if they had not done this.

What has made it from NeXT? Any *Step dev tools? I remember
seeing on their site a while back that they were discontinuing
support the "official" OpenStep dev stuff...