On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 at 18:56, Michael Huff wrote: > I think I may have found 2.0 on the Internet Archive too. > https://archive.org/details/cdrom-freebsd-2.0-1 > > The dates on the iso are from late November 1994. > > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 2:14 PM Warner Losh wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023, 3:21 PM Michael Huff wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 5:46 AM Henry Bent >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Where did you get this distribution? The one I could easily find, >>>> https://archive.org/details/vax-svr2 , has serious filesystem problems >>>> that can easily be seen by running an fsck on boot. >>>> >>>> >>> Speaking of Unix History, following that link led me to a copy of what I >>> think was the first 4.4BSD-Lite based FreeBSD iso -it's from June 1995. No >>> big deal *except* that it includes a scan of the cover, something that >>> looks like an insert and it consists of two cds. I haven't had a chance to >>> look at the cds yet so I don't know what's on them. >>> >>> IMO the scans are the big deal and why I'm posting the link to it here. >>> Apologies in advance for any lapses in etiquette: >>> >>> https://archive.org/details/freebsd-205-b >>> >> >> FreeBSD 2.0.0 was the first Lite based release. This looks to be 2.0.5 >> which was a 7 months later. >> >> https://ftp-archive.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD-Archive/old-releases has all >> the old releases from 2.0.5 on... >> >> Hmmm I think I have the 2.0 cdrom in my basement... >> >> Warner >> > These are just the regular Walnut Creek ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walnut_Creek_CDROM ) packaged distributions of free software. Is there a reason that they are considered special or significant? -Henry