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!usenet.coe.montana.edu!nate From: nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Subject: Re: So you say you want an interim release of 386bsd? (What to do?) Message-ID: <1993Apr23.214726.1036@coe.montana.edu> Sender: usenet@coe.montana.edu (USENET News System) Organization: CS References: <1993Apr23.174333.7879@coe.montana.edu> <1r9ivgINNoai@harpo.uccs.edu> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1993 21:47:26 GMT Lines: 86 In article <1r9ivgINNoai@harpo.uccs.edu> jmward@elbert.uccs.edu (Joel M. Ward) writes: > > > Okay, i had intended to put together a 0.1.23 release of 386bsd >(0.1 + .2.3 patchkit) so it would not be necessary for new users to have >to deal (or even know about) patches... that was right before Chris made >his netBSD annoucement. It looks to me like he's already done that, mostly. NetBSD is 0.1.23 release, plus a little less, and a lot more. > Now the choice I have is whether to work on 386bsd or netBSD. The >main difference between them at this point is whether or not you want to >be compatible with 386bsd 0.2. Technically, I think it will boil down to that in the long run. One or the other may have features the other one doesn't for awhile, but if they are good features, sooner or later they will both get them. > It seems like we're missing some data here. What exactly will >0.2 do?? what will be the advantages? we already know there will probably >some disadvantages like incompatibilities (i know people are trying to >avoid this, but it is inevitable), but without this sort of information >making a choice seems like flipping a coin. One of the BIG (BIG!) advantages of 0.2 is that Bill has completely re- written the VM system to avoid the stupid 'lockup when under heavy load' problem due to limited memory. Also, there is supposedly a unified VM and buffer cache (similar to Linux), so that your buffer cache can grow and shrink with the amount of available memory. I have also heard that the machine is much more 'configurable' on the fly. > NetBSD has a big advantage at this point in my mind with the >patches already installed (is 0.2.3 the latest? If so, Chris is only 1 >version behind) plus a better install program (i hear). It is far easier >to install NetBSD as a new system than 386bsd. Agreed, but the interim release group (an announcement will be made soon) also has access to this same install program. I looked at it, and it is very good to know what's going on with install finally, but as folks have been stating in other posts, there is still some work to be done. > I am leaning towards NetBSD right now, (i have some cool ideas for >the install program, & some other stuff). It seems like any work i do >on NetBSD will be quickly integrated if it is useful, while if i do any >work on 386bsd, it will be yet another patch scattered among the net that >people can use if they choose. If you want your patch to get integrated into BOTH versions, send it to our friendly neighberhood neutral patchkit co-ordinator, Rodney Grimes. Instructions on how to submit patches (which end up on both a interim machine and the host machine for NetBSD) are included in the newest patchkit. > NetBSD seems like it will approach a 'user friendly' state faster >than 386bsd. Like, if i want Linux, i can read up on it & install it. >If i want 386bsd, i have to get it, install it, get the source, get the >patchkit, patch it, rebuild it, and hope i don't get too confused along >the way. Hopefully, that will change. But as I've stated in the past, lots of people have said 'soon', and nothing has come out of it. > Plus, since Chris intends to pick & choose the best of 0.2, it >seems as though it will retain the 'lead' so to speak. > It's a matter of opinion. If 0.2 is such a large difference from 386BSD, it may take awhile for the NetBSD crew to integrate the stuff in, if it is even possible. >All i am trying to say is that if 0.2 doesn't come out soon, I think NetBSD >will soon outstrip 386bsd as a easier to install, more up to date OS. NetBSD is *right now* an easier to install, more up to date OS. Same as the MCC Interim Release is today more up to date, and easier to install than the current SLS release, but that may change tomorrow. (Besides, Peter gets $$ to do the SLS releases, which is a better motivator. :-) Nate -- osynw@terra.oscs.montana.edu | Still trying to find a good reason for nate@cs.montana.edu | these 'computer' things. Personally, work #: (406) 994-4836 | I don't think they'll catch on - home #: (406) 586-0579 | Don Hammerstrom