Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:1784 comp.unix.questions:23949 alt.folklore.computers:22272 alt.religion.computers:1467
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.questions,alt.folklore.computers,alt.religion.computers
Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!utoday!wagner
From: wagner@utoday.com (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Responses to survey on the death of BSD
Organization: Open Systems Today
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 14:14:24 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Jun29.141424.20672@utoday.com>
Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd
Lines: 1049
What's your reaction to the news that the University of California at
Berkeley will no longer be developing operating systems? Is this a
loss for computer users, or is there now so much good commercial Unix
available that Berkeley (BSD) Unix has outlived its usefulness?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This question is being posted to gather responses for an article
in OPEN SYSTEMS TODAY.
By sending an E-mail reply to the above question, you are
granting permission for us to publish your response. A compilation of the
responses to this post will be posted here.
Please include in your response your name, your employer or
university, your job title or class standing, and a telephone number where you
can be reached during the daytime (overseas readers note: that's daytime in
North America).
Please be brief; try to limit your responses to about 200 words,
not including headers and other administrivia. Unfortunately, we won't
be able to consider responses published after Monday morning, June
29.
(Just fyi, for anyone that cares about such matters, we are not
planning to include the replies in our net.views column---where you
may have seen posts like this one in the past---but rather in a
separate article.... )
Thanks!
--
Mitch Wagner, senior editor, Open Systems Today
2353 Massachusetts Ave. Suite 47, Cambridge, MA 02140
wagner@utoday.com CIS:70212,51 GEnie:MITCH.WAGNER
For subscription information, please call 516/562-5882
From: "M.Iqbal" <ugrad.ee.ufl.edu!iqbal@uunet.UUCP>
I think it will be great loss and the idea of free flow of information will be no longer valid. Can't these business people leave the college students alone?
I vehemently believe that students understand problem well and find free solutions; therefore, University of Berkeley should keep developing Unix.
iqbal
From: Lee `nomaD` Damon <watson.ibm.com!nomad@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Unfortunatly, with Sys V being prevelant, I fear that bad things can
happen. I like to hope that BSDI and the free BSD projects will be
able to counter some of the evil that Sun & USL have propigated.
I like to think that BSD will live on for a long time, in one form or
another. If everyone settles on Sys V or AIX, Un*x is doomed to
boredom.
Name: Lee Damon
Employeer: I'd prefer to leave them out of it, so I'll say
Castle P.A.U.S.
Job Title: Sr. Systems Administrator
day phone: 914-945-2167
--
work: nomad@watson.ibm.com - Lee "nomad" Damon - \
play: castle!nomad or nomad@castle.org \
Systems Admin, The Farm, IBM TJ Watson Research Center, Yorktown NY / \
"Today's Oxymoron: America the Free" / \
From: "R. Lee Hawkins" <annie.wellesley.edu!lhawkins@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: Wellesley College
In response to your net question concerning the demise of BSD, I
have the following comments:
While it is true that there is quite a bit of good commercial UNIX
out there now, it is sad to see that the BSD group is going away. While
commercial vendors may have much larger staffs and larger amounts of
capital to throw at problems, those of us in the academic community are
often freer to pursue more radical and innovative solutions to problems
than our commercial counterparts. Additionally, the BSD folks had the
"luxury" of looking at the big picture and being able to adapt features
and concepts from many different OS's into BSD releases. Without the
BSD folks in the lead, features that we all take for granted, such as
the 'fast filesystem' and virtual memory might have taken a lot longer
to come to System 5. I hope that Nemeth, et al, at Colorado, can pick
up where Berkeley leaves off.
________________________________________________________________________________
R. Lee Hawkins lhawkins@lucy.wellesley.edu
Department of Astronomy lhawkins@annie.wellesley.edu
Whitin Observatory
Wellesley College
Wellesley, MA 02181
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Katy T. Kislitzin" <nas.nasa.gov!ktk@uunet.UUCP>
I am very sorry to see CSRG dissolving. I just finished a 15 week intensive
course on 4.4 Internals taught by Kirk McKusick and Mike Karels, with guest
lectures by Keith Bostic and others,
and there is a lot of very nice work which is going
to come to a premature halt. The mature parts of the system, such as the
vnode interface, which is an Nth generation recoding, has the elegance of
modern theorems -- generality in the right places and not much extra fluff.
The difference between that "object oriented" interface and the newer MACH
vm system, which is also object oriented but written elsewhere, is a real
testament to the value of the BSD effort. The MACH vm system which is part
of 4.4 has a lot of excess complication for very little gain and is not yet
elegant. There are plans for a vm/vnode merge, but I am not
optimistic that such a major, substantial project can be accomplished in
the time available. The log based file system that Keith has been
developing is as important a development as the 4.4 fast filesystem, as
disk speeds are not increasing in step with processors.
===============================================================================
Katy Kislitzin, ktk@nas.nasa.gov, ...!{ames, uunet}!nas.nasa.gov!ktk ||
---
Systems Programmer, Networks Employed by Computer Sciences Corp for the |
Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Project, NASA/Ames \ |
----
The official poverty line of less than $4000/person/year, set in 1967, | |
is based on the costs of a minimally adequate diet in 1963. ^^^^^
===============================================================================
From: Paul Rubin <soda.berkeley.edu!phr@uunet.UUCP>
It's sad to see a historically important group break up,
but the Free Software Foundation draws closer and closer
to having a complete system to distribute...
From: "Michael C. Dickson" <csi.compuserve.com!m.dickson@uunet.UUCP>
Mitch,
Regarding the breakup of CSRG, I think it's both a shame and
understandable at the same time. I DON'T see it as the death of BSD Unix (
quite the contrary). The people at CSRG have pretty close to devlivered a
license free source Unix that will likely form the basis for lots of
creative work. There's already 386BSD, BSDI's BSD/386, and a Mach based BSD
Unix server all derived from the same base source tree. There's real
EXPLORATION going on that will likely continue to drive aspects of Unix in
the future.
To me an Open system provides the ability to not only select hardware and
software in ways that make sense for a corporation, but also to permit
intelectual exploration and tuning. One way for a company to develop a cost
and price performance edge with competition is to establish a computing
environment closely tuned to the problems they are trying to solve. The
CSRG group and BSD Unix have made this possible at a cost (minimal to free)
that most any company would find palatable.
Looking forward to your article...
Mike Dickson
Compuserve, Incorporated
m.dickson@csi.compuserve.com
From: AT-Dreamer <seq.uncwil.edu!brant@uunet.UUCP>
I believe there is some fair commercial unix on the market, but the
cost is very high, which in turn could prevent schools from using
unix based machines. BSD support is also good compared to
"most" other flavors of unix. As to the fact I use BSD, I don't
believe at has out lived it's usefulness, at least not for me.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Worlds may change, galaxies disintegrate/brant@seq. | Move your Butt Stimpy
but a woman always remains a woman. / uncwil.edu | it's a Higher Mammal!
- Kirk, "Conscience of the King," / "Chuck" | - Ren Hoek
From: Brian de Alwis <cognos.com!dealwisb@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: Cognos Incorporated, Ottawa CANADA
It is important to remember that many commercial Unix products
are either based on BSD, or pull many features from BSD. BSD inspired
many changes to Unix from conception, and is really what started the
whole openess and sharing of Unix software.
I think it is a loss for computer users (meaning all end-users,
system administrators, and operators) that the CSRG will be closing
down, as it really places 'us,' the users, under the tyranny of the
commercial vendors. Since BSD will no longer be 'officially' improved,
unless some consortium is started now, each site can, must, and will
make changes to their code to stay ahead, whether it be for bug-fixes,
or adding features. There will no longer be an encompassing compatibility.
Users will be forced to commercial Unix, if only to remain compatible
with the outside world.
It's sad, and I wish there was something else that could be done about it.
--
+++BdA Brian de Alwis. Brain on loan to Cognos Inc, Ottawa, Ontario.
dealwisb@cognos.com, or bsdealwis@napier.waterloo.edu
"Nine out of ten men who tried camels said they preferred women"
I do not necessarily represent those of Cognos, Inc. or UofWaterloo
From: markie <hookie.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu!tinguely@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: North Dakota State University
BSD has been the main test bed of Unix development. As any test bed, not
everything worked great (for example TCP trailers), but almost every commerical Unix
has taken major features from BSD releases (TCP/IP, fast file system, quotas
BSD version of groups, etc). BSD software also has been the source of education
in OS kernel and system utilities. BSD software also has been the source to
find working copies of utilities that vendors are too slow to fix or don't fix.
And BSD software has given the ability to customize utilities.
BSD software is the focal point of several minds from several locations.
If BSD software does not live beyond the disolvement of organizational
effort of the CSRG, then Unix will become object-only, proprietary, and
stale.
Mark Tinguely
tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu
Lecturer/System Administrator
Computer Science
North Dakota State University
Fargo, North Dakota 58015
Organization: Ziebmef home away from home
From: Chris Siebenmann <hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu!cks@uunet.UUCP>
This is a loss for computer users who like to see genuine innovation
and progress in Unix. The CSRG was practically the only non-commercial
organization working on an obtainable Unix release that actually had
a vision. Its death has doomed computer users to whatever overcrusted
hackwork vendors want to push off on people today, and insured that
we'll only see a series of proprietary 'enhancements' instead of more
innovations.
---
"However, since I'm one of a rare breed of individuals, characterized
by a marked tendency to do unwise things (like trying to make a living
developing Amiga software) [...]" - Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab
cks@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu ...!{utgpu,utzoo,watmath}!utgpu!cks
From: Chris Siebenmann <hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu!cks@uunet.UUCP>
Chris Siebenmann
Unix Herder (== sysadmin/system programmer/etc)
University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
From: Sean Goggin <watserv1.uwaterloo.ca!mks!u36!sean@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: U36 Research
The following personal statements are in the public domain and
you may do anything you like with them.
Is this a loss for computer users...
Contrast SysV's slow progress with BSD's .
Commercial vendors are concerned with customers practical needs which
rarely involve inovative kernel work.
Without CSRG's push,
experimental progress in the Unix OS will slow or vanish.
Unix has lost it's experimental youth.
Sean Goggin
Mortice Kern Systems Inc.
Technical Support
sean@mks.com
--
Sean.Goggin....sean@u36.kwnet.on.ca..............................U36.Research...
From: Brian de Alwis <cognos.com!dealwisb@uunet.UUCP>
My name is Brian de Alwis, I'm currently employed by Cognos Inc. in
Ottawa, Ontario on my Co-op term. I'm entering my 2nd year in the
University of Waterloo's Math program (majoring in Computer Science).
Please note that my views are my own. (inserted for safety's sake :-)
From: Mike McDonnell <tec.army.mil!mike@uunet.UUCP>
This is a great loss for all computer users. A free, source-code Unix
is needed to keep prices down and quality of software up. As the X
Window System has showed us, there is no substitute for free source
code when it comes to desiring universal availability and global
support. BSD has been crippled by a last-minute attempt of some of
its developers to gain commercial advantage at the expense of all of
us having free software to develop.
Things may not be too bad, however. It will not take very much work to
provide a truly free Unix based on code developed at Berkeley, as Bill
Jolitz has showed us with his port to the 386 of those parts of BSD that
are free. So even though BSD may die just before its fruition as free
software, those of us who admire the software may have enough gumption
to put together some free ports of BSD. I hope so. I can't work well
without source code and even the government can't afford Unix source
code licenses from AT&T. The ball is now in the court of those of us
who admire this software and want it to be free. Of course, we can
all wait for the Free Software Foundation to present its operating
system to us, but I don't know when that may happen.
For developers, commercial binary code will never replace free source
code, and users get the advantage of the work done on this free code.
The last thing commercial sellers of operating systems want to see is
a free Unix; but it is the main thing that many of us want.
From: Mike Matthews <oberon.umd.edu!matthews@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: /etc/organization
Well, keep in mind this is coming from someone who hasn't had nearly as much
Unix exposure as he'd like, but...
I'm not sure it will have much of an effect at all. I mean, every vendor is
shipping their own version of Unix anyway, I don't know of any pure BSD
Unices out there now. I own a NeXT which is a BSD 4.3ism (Mach really), I've
worked on DECs running Ultrix which is a BSD 4.3ism, and I've worked on SunOS
machines which, well, have some of both universes (as you know).
It's a loss that there are that many fewer talented people working on
improving systems, but the loss probably won't be felt by too many people.
Name: Mike Matthews
Employer: Trident Data Systems (but I speak for myself here)
Job title: Systems Administrator, if you need a title (don't really have
one)
From: Steve McDowell <exloghou.exlog.com!mcdowell@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: Exploration Logging, Inc.
The death of BSD? I think the concepts and implementation details that the
CSRG pioneered in BSD 4.3 will be with the Unix community for a long time
to come and, for the most part, this is a good thing. I also think that
in the last 5 years or so, the CSRG hasn't really done anything to speak of.
Somewhere along the way the pioneering stopped.
We have to look at other schools and other systems for advanced systems
research. AT&T is trying to do it again with Plan9 at unnamed
schools. CMU is trying to do it with Mach. I think the bigger question
is, can the Unix phenomenon be repeated? I'm not sure I want to
speculate on that one.....
Steven McDowell
Exlog, Inc.
--
Steve McDowell . . . . o o o o o Opinions are
Exlog, Inc. _____ o mine, not my
mcdowell@exlog.com _____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. employers..
[_________]_|__|________)<
ooo ooo 'oo OOOOO oo\_
From: Mark Lottor <nw.com!mkl@uunet.UUCP>
BSD Unix has been dead for years. I haven't seen a 4.3BSD system
running in a long time. Vendors that sell 4.3BSD-based systems still
haven't fixed half the bugs it came with. The release of 4.4BSD will
have almost no impact on current Unix users, and most vendors will
ignore it. Unix vendors will continue to release trash, whether from
BSD or developed by themselves. They don't care about operating
systems anymore, just fast hardware, fancy windows and bloated
applications.
Mark Lottor
Principal Hacker
Network Wizards
PO Box 343
Menlo Park, CA 94026
From: Larry McVoy <slovax.eng.sun.com!lm@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Mt. View, Ca.
It is a loss to the community as a whole. The CSRG at UCB has been
instrumental in getting great technology to the masses. They brought
us a high performance file system, they brought us TCP/IP and continued
to show us all that networking can run at "wire speed". The AT&T free
release will probably live on for some time, maybe outlasting supported
commercial offerings.
The greatest shame is the loss of a research group that was focussed on
writing the smallest, cleanest OS possible. Contrast this with the
various OSF vs USL vs Windows/NT nonsense and you start to see why that
is such a great loss. There is value in having an organization who's
sole charter is to "do the right thing". Who will step into that
role?
From: Brian Berliner <central.sun.com!Brian.Berliner@uunet.UUCP>
The folks at Berkeley's CSRG are largely responsible for many of the nice
features of today's UNIX systems. Losing this group will hurt UNIX and,
perhaps, those small start-ups that needed a good UNIX to port to their
whiz-bang box.
However, thanks to CSRG's work to produce "free" versions of much of the
BSD system, companies like Berkeley Software Design, Inc (BSDI) is taking
the place of CSRG and offering extremely cheap ($1000 including source) and
high quality BSD-based solutions. It's my guess that BSDI will be
successful at filling CSRG's capable shoes, providing the UNIX for the rest
of us.
Brian Berliner
SunSoft, Inc.
Member of Technical Staff
From: Noah Friedman <gnu.ai.mit.edu!friedman@uunet.UUCP>
I, for one, am sorry to hear that they are quitting. They deserve a
hand for all the work they've done over the years. I like the "feel" of
BSD more than any other unix or unix-like operating system that has been
released to date.
I think macrokernels are reaching the limit of their usefulness and
since other organizations exist which are writing free software, I think
the main downside to CSRG breaking up at this point is that there will be
no official maintainer (i.e. no "clearinghouse" for bug fixes and patches)
for the free system, so over time the net3 release may acculate a lot of
random hacks that will be hard to track of. There won't be any clear
definition of what "official BSD 4.4" is, and programs ported to such a
system may become gradually more crufty to conditionally support random
change other people may have made. Even if someone else takes over
maintenance of the entire system, I don't know if they'll do as good a job
as CSRG has done, and keep the same design goals in mind. On the other
hand, it may be that few changes and little further development will occur,
and the free versions of BSD might just quietly die over time because of
the lack of support (note that proprietary derivations of BSD may appear,
but these are of little use to people wanting a system free of licensing,
such as myself).
Noah Friedman
Free Software Foundation (GNU Project)
System Administrator
From: cl.cam.ac.uk!John.Beaven@uunet.UUCP
Since Berkeley has released its sources, I think announcements
of the death of BSD are a bit premature.
It's likely to become a very popular free OS (BSD386 for 386-based
closnes is out, still in alpha release but quickly improving)
From: "Peter L. Wargo" <sun.soe.clarkson.edu!wargopl@uunet.UUCP>
Mitch-
I have mixed feelings about the announcement. Having been weaned on BSD
(Under SunOS), I tend to prefer it over straight System V. On the other
hand, the general industry trend has moved away from the differing camps
with the release of SVR4. Although I lament the loss of some of the
familiar "Berzerk" stuff in Solaris 2.0, I will eventually move to it,
mostly to add my small support for an emerging standard.
BSD was a good thing in its time, promoting a better and more flexible
UNIX environment. Like all things, however, UNIX must grow up and
become a consistant OS, which will never happen as long as there are two
camps of thought. (I remember the first time I used SCO UNIX - I spent
darn near half an hour trying to find the "lpq" command...)
I guess I don't see it as the *death* of BSD, since the spirit lives on
in SVR4. Hopefully, once we have a standard, the market will come alive
as people clone *one* OS, instead of its many varients. I'm looking
forward to the SVR4 version of LINUX someday.
-Pete Wargo
Documentation/System Admin.
Enable Software, Inc.
313 Ushers Road
Ballston Lake, NY 12019
ps - Met Linus hisself last night. I feel old.
-Pete
--
----------
Peter L. Wargo | wargopl@sun.soe.clarkson.edu | "In other words...
Documentation | | R.T.F.M..."
Enable Software, Inc. | GEnie mail: PSYCLOPS |
From: Vijay Gurbani <fnsg01.fnal.gov!vijay@uunet.UUCP>
It's a shame that BSD Unix is closing down, and a definite loss to the
Unix community. It would be understandable if funding for BSD was cut
due to performance reasons, but considering how instrumentive BSD has
been in the Unix world (with networking/sockets, signals, Berkeley Fast
File system, etc) it's a downright shame that BSD is gone.
There might be good commercial Unix available now, but the presence of
BSD prodded the commercial Unix vendors to constantly have their versions
measure up to BSD standards. And above all, BSD Unix was free (at least
to the Universities).
People like me who came out of colleges weaned on BSD will miss it. It's
a closing of an era. Kind of reminds me of Johnny Carson leaving all
over again :-)
- vijay
--
(____) Chicago Bulls 33 54 Vijay K. Gurbani
'(o o)` 1990-91 NBA World Champions 24 Fermi National Accelerator Lab.
\ / 1991-92 NBA World Champions 05 23 vijay@{cdsun,fnsg01}.fnal.gov
== OO =====#include <all_neccessary_evils>====All opinions are mine, of course==
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <shearson.com!pmetzger@uunet.UUCP>
The end of CSRG's efforts is a major loss for the Unix community.
Although most of the major past innovations from Berkeley have long
been absorbed by the bulk of the community, there is still a great
need for a source code available research platforms. Standardized
systems, almost by definition, do not contain innovations but are
instead built upon compromises. The survival of Unix depends on the
incorporation of new ideas -- if Unix ceases to evolve it will die.
Much of Unix's success is attributable to the way that the operating
system has flexibly incorporated new features from new developments in
computer science, such as networking, windowing, and improved file
systems, that were not in existance when Unix was first created. The
growing success of NeXT with a nonstandard operating system running
nonstandard software demonstrates that there is a continuing need for
innovation that slavish standardization stifles. Many of us forget
that Unix is twenty years old and has achieved its vitality through a
capacity for experimentation and extension, often by the user
community. The end of CSRG represents the end of an era in which this
sort of innovative experimentation is possible.
Perry Metzger
Systems Administrator
Lehman Brothers
From: Aaron Sherman <fmrco.com!asherman@uunet.UUCP>
My info:
Aaron Sherman
Systems Engineer
I-Kinetics Inc.
asherman@fmrco.com
Secondaries:
asherman@i-kinetics.com
asherman@gnu.ai.mit.edu
asherman@dino.cpe.ulowell.edu
I am a systems administrator, as well as a systems-level and GUI
programmer.
I'm not sure that the correct question has been asked. After all, BSD
may be going away, but that hardly means that the only alternative is
commercial UN*X. The "free" or "non-commercial" UN*X's that I have seen
recently are:
Mach - Not really UN*X, but has a very good emulator.
Used as the heart of OSF/1, NeXT's and a few others.
Linux - Available for 80x86 machines (I think you have to
have at least a 386...)
Free BSD- There is a port to the 80x86
In the works:
GNU - GNU's Not Unix. A BSD-like system built on the Mach
micro-kernel and supporting many UN*X-related
standards from IEEE and ANSI.
As you can see, commercial software is NOT all that's left.
All things considered, it's too bad that BSD is going away as an
on-going project, but I feel confident that quality "non-commercial"
software will continue.
-AJS
From: James Risner <ms.uky.edu!risner@uunet.UUCP>
BSD Unix development will move to the masses. Individuals will take
over the tasks of making BSD Unix stable on the various architectures
supported, but unless some other organized group planning and developing
operating systems (Mach; Hurd) takes over, new advances in operating systems
may not be introduced and incorporated into BSD. Most of the unique features
of BSD are no longer unique. Most every unix like operating systems developed
today uses concepts that originated in BSD. Also many colleges may begin
(if they do not already) teaching classes on the concepts of operating system
designing using freely distributed versions of unix clones. Maybe some of
these students will contribute to the future of BSD Unix and other advance
operating systems.
James Risner
Student (Senior)
University of Kentucky
University Archive Manager for 386bsd
From: dircon.co.uk!uad1077@uunet.UUCP
Ian Kemmish, software designer, 5D Solutions Ltd., London
(used to write window managers fo workstations
running BSD; now develop PostScript clones).
Mixed feelings: as far as I can see, BSD is still the nicest
UNIX environment around (well, at least I can *find* things:->).
On the other hand, given that the world and his dog use windowing
systems these days, a different approach than UNIX might be preferable
anyway. I would prefer it if they'd announced they were going to
bring Plan 9 up to the same commercial state as BSD brought UNIX to.
From: Adam Justin Thornton <rice.edu!adam@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: Milo's Meadow
It would be a huge loss except that such packages as the GNU
Hurd, and (on a much smaller scale) Linux and 386BSD promise
to continue to provide free Unices for The Rest Of Us.
BSD-flavored Unix is tastier than SysV, but as long as some
good free Unix is around, not a big problem. BSD hasn't outlived
its usefulness, but UCB may have in relation to it.
--
"Adam Thornton plays the homosexual Horatio without succumbing to _too_ many
cliched stereotypes. His Horatio, Hamlet's bosom companion...has a penchant
for cream dresses and thigh-high black leather boots." | adam@owlnet.rice.edu
Rice and I don't share opinions, thankfully. | Retry Student A | 64,928 | ;-)
(queueing-rmail) id 033137.16254; Thu, 25 Jun 1992 03:31:37 EDT
From: "Eric S. Raymond" <cbmvax!snark.thyrsus.com!eric@uunet.UUCP>
Between Sun, BSDI, Mach, and Bill Jolitz I think we can be pretty sure the BSD
tradition isn't going to die. For that matter, so much of BSD has been
absorbed into SVr4 that one can reasonably claim we're all BSD users now.
It's a good time for UC Berkeley to bow out gracefully, leaving its legend
intact, rather than bucking the market trend to SVr4 and its successors.
(If you quote this, your readers might be interested to know that I edited
_The_New_Hacker's_Dictionary_, which OST should have reviewed already. Want
me to nudge MIT Press about sending you a copy?)
--
Eric S. Raymond = eric@snark.thyrsus.com (mad mastermind of TMN-Netnews)
From: Peter da Silva <ficc.ferranti.com!peter@uunet.UUCP>
I consider this a major loss to the computing world. BSD is not that great
a production system, but as a research platform it's been the origin of so
much basic software that's trickled down to the commercial world. It's a
big hole that's going to be hard to fill.
--
Peter da Silva `-_-'
$ EDIT/TECO LOVE 'U`
%TECO-W-OLDJOKE Not war? Have you hugged your wolf today?
Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp. Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012
From: Michel Dagenais <vlsi.polymtl.ca!dagenais@uunet.UUCP>
Right now BSD has the potential of providing a "free" operating
system with source code included. It also has the virtue of being
technically driven as opposed to "committee" driven. Otherwise,
there are plenty of almost POSIX compliant OS on the market.
On the longer term i have more hope in GNU (MACH + Hurd). It has
a more advanced technical foundation and the GNU people have a
better record at providing completely free source code than BSD does.
From: Na Choon Piaw <pure.com!piaw@uunet.UUCP>
I'm sad that BSD is dying. Not for any particular technical reasons,
just simply because none of the other UNIces have quite the same
features, and a lot of my programs wind up breaking on them... It was
also a lot easier to manage BSD.... (I'm afraid SUN's Solaris 2.0 is
a step backwards...)
From: Ted Lemon <lupine!mellon@uunet.UUCP>
BSD hasn't gone away - it's gone public. Free 4.4 BSD isn't quite
there, but it's close enough that it *will* happen. As a user, I am
looking forward to the day when I will be able to run BSD instead of a
commercial implementation.
_MelloN_
From: Adam Justin Thornton <rice.edu!adam@uunet.UUCP>
Undergrad (Junior, Ancient Mediterranean Civilization major (*)), whose
current job is Big Iron Wrangler (systems programming on our ES/9000).
Rice is in Houston. Yee-haw.
*Nope, there is absolutely no connection between my major and all the
technogeek stuff I like doing. At least not that I've yet found.
--
"Adam Thornton plays the homosexual Horatio without succumbing to _too_ many
cliched stereotypes. His Horatio, Hamlet's bosom companion...has a penchant
for cream dresses and thigh-high black leather boots." | adam@owlnet.rice.edu
Rice and I don't share opinions, thankfully. | Retry Student A | 64,928 | ;-)
From: Rick Emerson <ssg.com!bsd4me@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: System Support Group
In this cynical era, I must begin by saying, "I'm not surprised." Altruism
is not a paying job, by definition. The heady days of free anything have
passed and don't seem to be on the horizon again.
Having contributed a few small projects to the computer world (not BSD
software, BTW) with the conscious decision that the journey was the reward
(gosh, wouldn't that work well at Apple <g>), I'm sorry to see others unable
to help keep the flame of free-ware alive.
At the same time, my work was supported by other, paying, projects. My
projects were only briefly demanding of my entire work effort. To spend
years on nearly non-paying projects is beyond my ability.
As one willing to accept free software, I'm saddened, if for selfish
reasons. I'd rather pay $200 for a Unix than $2,000.
On a practical level, there will still people people willing to invest time
in keeping the project going. But the aphorism about too many cooks is
based on experience and this is a prime invitation for too many cooks. The
result is something which could be worth its cost - nothing.
Commercial products are certainly not good things by virtue of being
commercial products. Support and updating problems with commercial Unix
systems have filled the newsgroups.
What's needed is an inexpensive Unix supported by moral people. What we
will see is an honest effort with varying degrees of reliability for a free
system or a major payout for something that may not be much better.
Richard B. Emerson
President,
System Support Group
Lansdale, PA
(c) Copyright 1992, Richard B. Emerson - All rights reserved world wide
permission for publication in part or whole granted to Open Systems Today
From: Nathan Banks <neptune.iex.com!banks@uunet.UUCP>
Yes, I read the article and I am little dissappointed with this
announcement. I only hope that DARPA/"powers that be" will consider
providing *some* funding for "consultative" opportunities such that
Berkeley might continue to have some inputs/recommendations on the
evolution of *nix in whatever name, shape or form it takes.
Hats off to the guys and gals of Berkeley - your contributions to the
community are greatly appreciated!
Thanks Mitch for the opportunity and for presenting an excellent publication.
Nathan Banks
Member of Technical Staff
--
/| |\ Nathan Banks
/ | | \ IEX Corporation
\ | | / 1400 Preston Road, Suite 350
\| |/ Plano, Texas 75093 Email: {uunet,convex,att}!iex!banks
for
From: Ti Kan <altos.altos.com!bazooka!ti@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: AMB Research Labs, Sunnyvale, CA.
Berkeley has done the UNIX community great service in the past by
introducing useful technologies absent in the AT&T versions. As
a result, BSD has been the favored platform for scientific/engineering/
academic environments. Much of that technology, however, has been
incorporated into UNIX SVR4 today. Moreover, many new technologies
are being added to SVR4 that will not be available in vanilla BSD.
This makes BSD a less attractive alternative than it once was.
Also, there needs to be less variants of UNIX in order for UNIX to
gain more market share. As much as I hate to see BSD go, the demise
of BSD and an unification toward SVR4 may prove to benefit the
UNIX business as a whole. But please understand that I say this
without any intention to slight the contributions that Berkeley has
made to the UNIX circles.
This is my personal opinion only, and does not necessarily represent
those of Stratus or other Stratus employees.
Ti Kan
Stratus Computer, Inc.
Senior UNIX Software Engineer
-Ti
--
/// Ti Kan vorsprung durch technik
/// Internet: ti@bazooka.altos.com
///// UUCP: ...!{uunet,sun,sco,apple,mips}!altos!bazooka!ti
/// AMB Research Laboratories, Sunnyvale, CA.
From: AT-Dreamer <seq.uncwil.edu!brant@uunet.UUCP>
Chuck Brant (laptop man) "AT Dreaming" brant@seq.uncwil.edu
Chuck Brant, UNC-Wilmington, Lead ACS Consultant, Senior, Comp sci
major.
--
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|The mountains are calling me, and I must go. | brant@seq.uncwil.edu |
| -John Muir | Chuck Brant |
|----------------------------------------------+-------------------------------|
| A bug is just an undocumented feature ! | Joy, Joy, Joy -R&S |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: Mike Trimberger <ics.uci.edu!fmt%mbf.uucp@uunet.UUCP>
I feel a little sad that UCB will give up the OS business. I
started my UNIX career by cutting my teeth on BSD releases. In
a way, the improvment of the USL UNIX has contributed to the
demise of CSRG.
However, this does not mean that there isn't a big need for the
BSD 'concept'. The success of the 'free BSD' source that Bill
Jolitz is developing shows this. But this is what the BSD
concept always was - a Unix system for myself. The complete
source for a large OS is an excellent teaching tool. And it
is a great hacking tool too - but what is hacking but self-teaching.
BSD gave just about everyone a chance to touch an OS to try to
make it better and to try to make a mark on the world. And
that so many did is a tribute to the success of BSD.
I predict that BSD will not actually die with the demise of
CSRG at UCB. It will actually come back somewhere else, maybe
called something different. But the need and the desire is
there so it will live on.
From: Claus Gittinger <langesw!clam!claus@uunet.UUCP>
Having worked on many different Unixes, BSD systems have
always been the most usable, stable and innovative.
I dont like the idea of BSD going out of OS-business,
since many new ideas originated at Berkeley - the stuff
coming from AT&T has always been less usable and much
much buggier.
Also many of the BSD ideas where taken over by AT&T and
others - we'd work with 5.2-like systems if there wasn't
BSD ! Things like virtual memory, fast-file-system, long
filenames, networking, vi :-) etc. all came from BSD.
If money is a problem, UCB should be sponsored by the
major computing companies to stay in business - just
imagin the horror of a SUN/NEXT/VAX etc. running 5.x :-)
Name:
Claus Gittinger
Empl.
Indep. Consultant
Major work area:
Unix internals, porting, drivers,
graphics, smalltalk
From: Heiko Blume <uropax.contrib.de!src@uunet.UUCP>
As the co-owner of a company that exists mainly because there is
so much software available in source form, i'm worried.
there is much effort being invested in creating whole systems,
like in the GNU project, MIT's athena, Linux and, in this case,
4.4BSD. on the other hand there are throwbacks and dangers like
software patents, interface copyrights and discontinuation of
projects due to the lack of the necessary money.
in the long run i consider software patents and weird copyrights
the most dangerous, while i consider those projects to be the
main weapon against those dangers. [i also tried to convince RMS
that free software can be most valuable for the goals of the LPF]
but until now all these projects haven't reached the masses.
what needs to be achieved is making a free operating system
with any imaginable kind of applications that *normal* people need
in a easily installable distribution.
once millions of users depend on this, it would be impossible
for the software patenters and interface copyrighters to take
them their daily tools away.
therefore it is crucial that these projects do go on. we will
support them in any way we can.
with hopes,
Heiko Blume, President
Contributed Software
src@contrib.de
Graefestr. 76
1000 Berlin 61
--
email: src@scuzzy.in-berlin.de
Contributed Software, Graefestr 76, D-1000 Berlin 61
source archive: nuucp/nuucp for uucp, 'archiv' for interaction, get /src/README
From: Jeffrey Kegler <algor2!jeffrey@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: Algorists, Inc.
The center of UNIX development will now move to the GNU project, and
to LINUX and the Jolitzs'.
Commerical UNIX can be quite good, but its achievements cannot be
built on by others, the way BSD's were. Many a nifty hack has been
added to a commercial UNIX. But the code remained proprietary, and so
the hack remained unavailable to the wider UNIX community. Even those
improvements which are features evident without the code can be tried
out only by those buying their UNIX from that vendor, which usually
prevents these features from getting enough of an audience to be
appreciated properly.
BSD is dead. Long live 386BSD! Long live GNU!
A second prediction: With the breakup of BSD, volunteer efforts will
become crucial to the development of UNIX. This means cheap hardware
will become the preferred medium of expression, and this of course
means 80x86 ISA or EISA bus based hardware -- DOS boxes to put it
crudely. There will continue to be a BSD UNIX, in 386BSD. And its
competition will be LINUX and GNU's forthcoming HURD. The winner in
this competition will be the industry, and the user.
Jeffrey Kegler, Independent UNIX Consultant, Algorists, Inc.
jeffrey@algor2.ALGORISTS.COM or uunet!algor2!jeffrey
137 E Fremont AVE #122, Sunnyvale CA 94087
"The problem with hi-tech is that the marketers who invented the
term think they know what it means."
From: Alexander Weidt <cs.tu-berlin.de!alcaman@uunet.UUCP>
Hello,
in a previous message I wrote:
I realise that I forgot to include that my opinions in no way reflect
those of Daimler-Benz or the Technical University of Berlin. I would be
grateful if you could acknowledge the receipt of this mail.
Happy hacking, Alex.
--
Use the Force, read the source.
From: Alexander Weidt <cs.tu-berlin.de!alcaman@uunet.UUCP>
Hiho..
in comp.unix.questions you wrote:
My reaction is one of grief and sorrow. BSD UNIX (*) has consistenly been
years ahead of AT&T's developments. However there are signs that public
funding could put development of new releases of BSD back on the rails.
I would be much obliged if could you forward me a copy of the article when
it is completed.
(*) - UNIX is a bell of AT&T trademark laboratories.
Happy hacking, Alex.
--
Use the Force, read the source.
From: Greg Black <bullit.void.oz.au!gjb@uunet.UUCP>
This is a sad loss to the Unix and general computer community,
even if it was inevitable in the present climate. BSD has in no
way outlived its usefulness and will continue to evolve and be
used in ever wider circles. The recent free 386BSD and the
commercial (but low-cost) release from BSDI (BSD/386) both run on
commodity hardware and (in the case of BSDI) provide or (in the
case of 386BSD) will provide high quality operating systems that
are not controlled entirely by vendors who only fix what suits
them. It is my considered view, having failed on many occasions
to get (often very old) bugs fixed by vendors, that there are no
good commercial Unix versions currently available. While that is
even partly true, BSD will have an important place. And while
there is a world-wide community with the source and the energy to
develop it, it will live on.
Name: Greg Black
Employer: Greg Black & Associates - Unix Software Consultants
Job Title: Director
--
Greg Black, 681 Park Street, Brunswick, Vic 3056, Australia
gjb@bullit.void.oz.au
id <14204-0@swan.cl.cam.ac.uk>; Fri, 26 Jun 1992 14:58:50 +0100
From: Allon Herman <batata.huji.ac.il!allon@uunet.UUCP>
Organization: The Fritz Haber Research Center, HUJI
Well,
honestly I'm rather sad about the departure of BSD to the eternal east.
I think that BSD has done great deal of good for the unix community by both the
addition of features that where revolutionary at the time (networking, fast
file system, etc.). Anyway on the other hand, the development of BSD turned
what used to be a small but yet a powerfull system into a gigantic system...
and obviously further evolution of the system has to take this into
consideration. I am also aware that supporting system on an order of magnitude
such as BSD's requires employees that their job is dedicated for this purpose.
So, to summerize my opinion in brief:
As many other people have already said on this list, some sort of
Consortium should be created (of volunteers *NOT* of people with comertial
interests) and this consortium should set the goals for future development of
the system and the major work should be done inside research institues that
are willing to support this effort by both means of man power and means of
equipment. The rest of the support should be done by the community by means
of users contributing ideas and fixes to the consortium and the consortium
merging fixes and promoting these ideas in further releases.
Furthermore BSD will live iff it can be used on a wide variety of
platforms and on the other hand it will keep promoting new ideas, otherwise
it will eventually become 'just another flavor of unix' and thus lose its
right to live.
Allon.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allon Herman
System Manager, The Fritz Haber Research Center for Molecular Dynamics.
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Israel, 91904
Disclaimer: Any opinion stated above is my own and has nothing to do with my
organization's opinions or my boss's opinons