From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <694c62606510c6e7eb0583b36f62bb43@9netics.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] [OT] linux origins, why not?
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:20:57 -0800
From: Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com>
In-Reply-To: <442ABA98.1010302@comtv.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 24d91f36-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

>>I've been hearing this "terminal emulator" story quite a bit lately
>>(over the past couple of months), and, althought I do dislike talking
>>part in such arguments, the story that I've always heard (circa '94)
>>was that linux was the result of wanting to try out the protected mode
>>features of his spiffy new '386, which I assume that minix didn't
>>support.
>>
>>
> There is no offense for linux to start as a terminal emulator.
> And Linus confirms that. And this fact doesn't contradict with
> your point (" wanting to try out the protected mode features
> of his spiffy new '386, which I assume that minix didn't support").
> Why do you want to reject this terminal emulator origins?

what was the nature of this "terminal emulator"?  was it something
like a vt100 terminal emulator or something like mux (dmd, 630)?