*BSD News Article 14938


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!psgrain!m2xenix!agora!rgrimes
From: rgrimes@agora.rain.com (Rodney Grimes)
Subject: Re: So you say you want an interim release of 386bsd? (What to do?)
Message-ID: <C5vsp8.FK7@agora.rain.com>
Organization: Open Communications Forum
References: <1r067g$915@lobster.sid.mcet.edu> <C5sCvr.3G1@unx.sas.com> <1r146qINNmbn@hrd769.brooks.af.mil> <1993Apr20.160109.17689@gmd.de> <1993Apr20.191241.16618@coe.montana.edu>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 10:48:43 GMT
Lines: 114

nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes:

>In article <1993Apr20.160109.17689@gmd.de> veit@mururoa.gmd.de (Holger Veit) writes:
>>|> Another question is what do I do now?
>>
>>
>>I also asked the same question when I read the NetBSD announcement. Apparently
>>many people will grab the "new release of 386bsd" just because it is new.
>>What is missing is a procedure to upgrade from a src01dist+patchkit-0.2.2
>>to the new release for all persons who do not want to start from scratch.
>>Besides some reorgs of trees and splitting into separate packages the real
>>difference to src01+pk022 cannot be so extreme that an upgrade kit is impossible
>>(it just has to be done).

>One, the amount of changes from 386BSD + patchkit -> NetBSD are
>extremely large, especially in the area of configuration.

>The goals for the NetBSD group and the continuing 386BSD group are different.

Some areas of the goals are different but a lot of them are common, and
I think that the level of cooperation will help both teams produce some
very good work.  I am glad I do not have to make a choice on which to run,
I am running BOTH!

>There is currently work in progress (Yeah, right, we've heard that a
>million times now) to produce an interim release of 386BSD, with Bill's
>blessing.

And again and again..  so I wont say it... :-) <chuckle>

>The purpose of this release is to make the 0.1 -> 0.2 transition easier,
>and to introduce some new code into the tree (updated software, shared
>libraries :-), better installation tools, etc..)

And a lot of the fixes from NetBSD.  One of my primary goals as a 0.1.5
team member is to leverage as much of the NetBSD code that makes since
into the 0.1.5 release.  This is why I am now running both 386BSD and
NetBSD at current revision.

>>The situation becomes more interesting with the release of 386bsd-0.2
>>(even if it looks as if everyone will get a grey beard until it arrives;-)).

>If I am not mistaken, (Chris, contradict me if I'm wrong), the NetBSD
>crew have no intention on running 0.2.  However, this doesn't mean they
>will ignore 0.2, but instead take what they consider to be useful
>features from it (if possible), and place them into NetBSD.

And Chris stated this was so in another post.

>>In this case we have three releases people can offer patches for:
>>The 386bsd-0.1+pk0.2.*, NetBSD with its own patchkit possibly, and 386bsd-0.2.
>>In the latter case we again have the difficulty whether to drop NetBSD and
>>take the latest and best (?). Probably there will be a set of diffs to upgrade
>>NetBSD to the 0.2 level, or vice versa (?).

>Doubtful, if my statement on NetBSD is correct.
Humm yes very doubtful.

>>BTW: I just saw the announcement of pk-0.2.3, and wonder if this brings my system
>>to NetBSD. 

>No, NetBSD and 386BSD are still different.  Chris and his support crew have
>done a lot of VERY GOOD THINGS in NetBSD (and some things on which I disagree
>with, but that's to be expected. :-)

>Hopefully alot of these changes will be integrated into the interim release,
>but due to lack of hardware, and some miscommunication with the site hosting
>the interim release, things have not progressed as quickly as we would like.

Or at least from Nates view point that is true, from mine it is a little
different since I am in the process of culling certain work from NetBSD
and making it into patch kit patches.  

>>Maybe the patchkit people and the NetBSD people (who are mainly the same
>>group)
>>comment some more about the expected future.

>I can't speak for Rod, but as a former patchkit maintainer, if we can
>get these technical problems ironed out, we are planning on still doing
>an interim release. 

I can speak for Rod, or at least I think I can, and a binary release of
patch kit 0.2.3 is being worked on as I type this... it is simple a replace
ment for the bin01dist cpio files (it is actually going to be one huge
tar.z (gzip) file that I will split when I upload it from my box)

I am also working up a new set of install floppies based on some of NetBSD's
work to make installing 386BSD0.1.2.3 (that is what I am now doing with
patch kit version numbers to identify what you are running, just take the
patch kit revision, drop the leading 0 and take it on the end of the 386BSD
version) a lot easier.

>Now, right now today, Chris's release is the best thing on the market,
>and if you are a new users, I suggest using it.  But, if you're happy
>with 386BSD today, Rod is going to continue to work his tail off and
>produce patchkits against 386BSD.  (And there is some very nice stuff
>coming up in the next patchkit, but Rod needs to take about 2 years off
>after cranking this one out :-)

I don't know if I agree with the claim that Chris's release is the best
thing on the market, but I have no problem calling it a very good thing
on the market.

My work is gong to slow down starting tomarrow... I am going off to have
a life for a few days.. or at least I keep telling myself that..

2 years.. heck if I took that long off I would propably never come back!

>Anyway, that's the status from my end,
And some what form my end...
-- 
Rod Grimes						rgrimes@agora.rain.com
386BSD patchkit coordinator			      Wish it paid real money!
Accurate Automation Company          All opinions belong to me and my company!