# Why change the name?



## Niatross (Sep 24, 2012)

Why does NetBSD and OpenBSD call it building userland and FreeBSD chose to call it building world?

Why did FreeBSD deviate from the other BSD dirivatives?


----------



## Majorix (Sep 24, 2012)

Where does it say FreeBSD has to stay in compliance with other *BSDs? As long as you understand what it means I see no problems.


----------



## Niatross (Sep 24, 2012)

Majorix said:
			
		

> Where does it say FreeBSD has to stay in compliance with other *BSDs? As long as you understand what it means I see no problems.



I was just trying to learn why FreeBSD did it. I'm not trying to fight with someone over it.

Just thought there was a reason for calling it "world".


----------



## Majorix (Sep 24, 2012)

I am not trying to fight with you over it either  Just stating my opinion that the BSDs don't have to approach everything the same way. Small differences will occur.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Sep 25, 2012)

Niatross said:
			
		

> Why did FreeBSD deviate from the other BSD dirivatives?


Since FreeBSD was around before the other two, you should be asking why they deviated from FreeBSD.


----------



## Niatross (Sep 25, 2012)

drhowarddrfine said:
			
		

> Since FreeBSD was around before the other two, you should be asking why they deviated from FreeBSD.



Your right.


----------



## Niatross (Sep 25, 2012)

drhowarddrfine said:
			
		

> Since FreeBSD was around before the other two, you should be asking why they deviated from FreeBSD.



Most Unix-like operating systems use the term "userland", more than "world" though.....right?

This is why I thought naming it "world" was kind of odd.


----------



## SirDice (Sep 25, 2012)

*make world* used to build the entire OS, kernel and userland. I think it's still a valid make(1) build target. Although the process has changed significantly over the years, it's still called "world".


----------

