Upgrading to FreeBSD 3.2 etc

[Mark Ovens]

On Tue, Aug 31, 1999 at 09:49:47PM +0100, Ben Smithurst wrote:
> Mark Ovens wrote:
> 
> > I guess it's what you're used to. I got introduced to UNIX on a
> > Sun386i (yes, an INTEL 386 in a Sun box - it showed just what a
> > pig's ear M$ made of exploiting the power of Intel's first 32-bit
> > chip) about 10 years ago. Of course csh is the default shell on
> > Suns, and I've used it that long I know my way around it, ``!!''
> > history and all.
> 
> I suppose so. I started using FreeBSD (which was the first time I'd set
> eyes on unix[0]) about 15 months ago (I think, I'm not too sure), so I
> haven't been using it as long as a lot of people here. I only found it
> by chance, as well, while roaming around Sunsite waiting for something
> else to download. (*shudder* If I hadn't found it, I might still be
> using Windows.) I seem to recall I switched the root shell from /bin/csh
> to /bin/sh fairly early on though.  Then I used bash for my login shell,
> and only switched to zsh recently.
> 
> One thing which hasn't changed (another religious subject coming up,
> run for cover) is my choice of editor; I've always used nvi. I've heard
> a lot of good things about vim, but never really switched (I looked at
> briefly, but wasn't impressed).
> 

Well, I use vi but I keep thinking about having a go with emacs as
it seems to have so many useful features but I've never got round
to it.

> I hope I don't start another religious war over this. As far as I'm
> concerned, people can use csh and do other such perverted things in the
> privacy of their own {home,office}, just don't do it near me, and I
> won't force my perverted habits such as using zsh onto you. :-)
> 
> [0] well, except a bit of work on a Solaris machine as part of work
> experience about three years ago. But I had *very* little work to do on
> this, so I didn't learn much. Dunno what version of Solaris, but it was
> 2.6 back in February when I last saw it. (although why does the login
> prompt say "SunOS 5.6"? Can't Sun just give their OS one fscking name,
> for $DEITY's sake? And why the fsck did Solaris version numbering jump
> from 2.6 to 7? Not as bad as 3.11 to 95, I suppose. Excuse my ignorance
> on Solaris related things here, please)
> 

Sun always seemed to make the point that the OS and the GUI are 2
separate things. SunOS 5.6 is the OS proper and Solaris 2.6 is the
whole working environment, including the windowing system
(OpenWindows/CDE). I think the jump to 7 is because they merged
the 2, I don't *think* that Solaris 7 has a base SunOS version.

> -- 
> Ben Smithurst            | PGP: 0x99392F7D
> ben at scientia.demon.co.uk |   key available from keyservers and
>                          |   ben+pgp at scientia.demon.co.uk
> 

-- 
STATE-OF-THE-ART: Any computer you can't afford.
OBSOLETE: Any computer you own.
________________________________________________________________
      FreeBSD - The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org
      My Webpage http://ukug.uk.freebsd.org/~mark/
mailto:mark at ukug.uk.freebsd.org              http://www.radan.com