Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!decwrl!decwrl!usenet.coe.montana.edu!bsd.coe.montana.edu!nate From: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: What's "FreeBSD"? Date: 25 Jul 1993 23:14:10 GMT Organization: Montana State University Lines: 124 Message-ID: <22v442$57h@pdq.coe.montana.edu> References: <22up8o$pvb@introl.introl.com> <22ut4j$53o@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <explorer.743637064@tbird.cc.iastate.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: bsd.coe.montana.edu In article <explorer.743637064@tbird.cc.iastate.edu> explorer@iastate.edu (Michael Graff) writes: > >In <22ut4j$53o@pdq.coe.montana.edu> osyjm@cs.montana.edu (Jaye Mathisen) writes: > >[ Much biased text deleted ] Biased? What do you know of what happened? Really? I have been there from the beginning, and Jaye was sitting in the other room when alot of this was going on. What are your credentials? >>FreeBSD is essentially: > > >What?!? Another damn choice? Jesus folk, why not put these attitudes in the >bottom drawer and leave them there! FreeBSD == the baseline for the new patchkit releases. >If I were to choose a side, I'd choose NetBSD. In fact, I have. I'm running >three NetBSD machines right now. I have had some conflicts with various >sides, the Jolitz's are nice folk, but tend to be busy. And tend to ignore any attempts to release any code. ***FLAME MODE ON*** FACT: Since 0.1 was release, there have been 3 patches from Bill that the world has seen. a) The BIG memory fix/hack, Waaaay back when 0.1 was first released. b) the select fix, gotten via Julian for ref. c) his recent fixes that make NULL references core when accessed a) and b) were given to folks who graciously passed them on, and c) was posted in order to show that a new a.out format was not required. (But the posted patch used up 4K extra space for every binary as well) Since that time, I have submitted more patches to 386BSD, and I don't claim to know that much about this system, nor have I ever asked for money, nor claimed that what I did was better than anyone else. FACT: The 0.2 release has been promised so many times to individuals and the public that for anyone to believe any date now is either more trusting than I or has their hands on the actual code. (Dozens of times it has been promised. I have lists of times at home) FACT: Bill Jolitz at one time 'blessed' the interim group as a release to help 'ease the transition' from 0.1 -> 0.2, since the patchkit was becoming way too unweildy. However, when the time came to server those ties, it was nice an easy to say things like. "Don't get anything but the official 0.2 release. We don't support any patch-kit releases, or any other release" FACT: Many members of the FreeBSD (interim then) crowd have spent their own money calling the Jolitz on the phone, asking if they could do anything to help out the 0.2 release. Response. "Tell us what's wrong with 0.1, and send us any fixes you have to us, to guarantee that 0.2 will be a stable release" Us: "How can we help out the release?" Response: "You can't, we must do it by ourselves. Besides, you wouldn't understand much of what we have done anyway" FACT: A big stumbling block in making 0.1 usable was the lack of swap size that the install script created. (Some of this was due to problems in the VM system, other reasons are lack of understanding the need for a SWAP PARTITION at least as large as system memory for core dumps) It would have been nice to have the source to the install program supplied in the original install disk. I and many other's asked Bill to release the source code to install, with a stone-wall every time. Finally, in April of this year, when Bill asked me what I felt was wrong with 0.1, one of the issues was 'There is no source to install, so that custom installations are very difficult, would you please supply the source code to install" Response: (This is a direct quote) "The users wouldn't understand it" FACT: In private email to individuals, the Jolitz have said that they attempted to contact us and ask our help with the 0.2 release, but they were turned down because we wanted to 'do our own thing'. [ This was the straw that broke the camel's back, and at this point we gave up trying to ease the transition to a product that didn't exist, by an author that chose to alienate his most vocal supporters ] --- ***FLAME MODE OFF *** I could go on and on, but if folks are truly interested you can call me on the phone, and I can dig out my phone/notes on the whole affair. Heck, to be fair, call up Bill and get his side as well. To summarize, if you want a stable unix that is easy to install, take a look at FreeBSD. Nate -- nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu | In the middle of it ........ again. nate@cs.montana.edu | Running/supporting one of many freely available work #: (406) 994-4836 | Operating Systems for [34]86 machines. home #: (406) 586-0579 | (based on Net/2, name changes all the time :-)