It might be reasonable to just work on both, and see what happens. I expect that any work done on one would probably be at least somewhat helpful to the other.
Nathan Myers writes:
We haven't yet come up with wording for the announcement of the goals of the Debian GNU/BSD Project, including the provision that the Project has no plans to relicense BSD sources.
Somebody volunteered to be project coordinator, who was it?
As well as I understand it, the following goals are more or less settled:
Kernel is NetBSD.
Native file system is UFS; others later "if somebody does the work".
Boot loader is BSD's, initially; maybe Grub later "if ...".
Libc is NetBSD's unless/until somebody ports GNU libc; then maybe both.
Kernel-related utilities (ifconfig mount etc.) are from NetBSD.
File system layout is Debian/FHS.
Installer is custom.
Remaining packages are from the Debian source archives, patched as needed.
Comments?
Nathan Myers
ncm at cantrip dot org
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
