*BSD News Article 27333


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:8746 comp.os.386bsd.misc:1941
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU!werple.apana.org.au!zikzak.apana.org.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!cs.utk.edu!martha.utcc.utk.edu!martha.utcc.utk.edu!frank
From: frank@martha.utcc.utk.edu (frank segner)
Subject: Re: [q] Why (Free & Net)BSD use different binaries?
Message-ID: <1994Feb15.071540.8607@martha.utcc.utk.edu>
Sender: usenet@martha.utcc.utk.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: ifan (inst. for appl. nonsense)
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
References: <2jotfv$irj@homer.cs.mcgill.ca>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 1994 07:15:40 GMT
Lines: 150

once you asked me about the differences ???

here they go...


storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes:
: In article <CL7tvx.A74@news.cis.umn.edu>,
: Pitt Cheang <cheangk@marlin.micro.umn.edu> wrote:
: >I have been using Linux for a while and very happy with it, browsing through
: >386bsd newsgroups and having some opinion compare between the two different
: >multiprocessing OS, makes me want to try how 386bsd taste. I believe people
: >from here would suggest either FreeBSD or NetBSD, however I have a question
: >thought. Why would there exist two versions of XFree86 for FreeBSD and
: >NetBSD ? Motif ? If both are diversed from 386bsd, I couldn't think of
: >any ideas what is the difference would make seperate binaries, are they
: >different in binary code or just filesystem structure? Are the different
: >in kernel code ? or are they just different in distribution method?
: >Right now have just downloaded FreeBSD, (it takes me two days to get
: >them all), should I try NetBSD also? 
: 
: 	sigh.
: 
: 	in the beginning, there was 386bsd.  Bill Jolitz, a weird guy
: 	to say the least, ported the BSD 4.3 Net/2 code to intel i386
: 	chip.  the port kinda worked and kinda did most unix things
: 	that people want it to do, except it was extremely unstable, 
: 	buggy, and to some people, poorly written.  however, it was
: 	free, and there was an excellent series of articles in dr.dobbs
: 	journal startin in jan 91 i believe that described the porting
: 	process.
: 
: 	a bunch of people who were working on 386bsd started up what
: 	became the 'patchkit' for 386bsd.  every once in a while,
: 	a whole collection of patches and bug fixes would be submitted
: 	that people could add to their source tree to make it run 
: 	better.
: 
: 	all the while, bill jolitz was promising the imminent release
: 	of 386bsd version 0.2 [up until then, there had been 0.0 and
: 	0.1 only].  this version of 386bsd was promised to:
: 
: 	1. fix everything broken in 0.1
: 	2. contain a real sysv streams implementation
: 	3. solve world hunger.
: 	4. contain vast tracts of Jesus Monroy Jr's [ye groupe foole]
: 	code. [hahahhahahhaha]
: 
: 
: 
: 	now, some people who did a lot of work on 386bsd came along,
: 	and decided that 
: 
: 	1. 0.2 was never going to come out
: 	2. 386bsd kinda sucked.
: 	3. too much of bsd's platform independance had been
: 	removed.
: 
: 	thus, they started NetBSD 0.8, with the intent of removing
: 	the 386 from 386bsd.  ports to the amiga, mac, and sparc
: 	quickly followed, all the while work on the 386 continued.
: 
: 	the code tree was massively reorg'd, and work to make it easier to
: 	port followed.  0.9 soon after came out [i386].
: 
: 	now, there wer e a bunch of people who were still holding out on 0.2,
: 	but slowly  started to realize that it had about as great a chance
: 	as showing up sometime soon as bob dole did of convincing the world
: 	that he really does believe in gay rights.
: 
: 	these people were tempted to join up with the netbsd camp, and 
: 	start the mother of all free operating systems. [most being
: 	largely of the opinion that linux was pooopoo for what they
: 	wanted].
: 
: 	however, oweing to -phenomenal- tact, diplomacy, and general
: 	conversation skills above and beyond that of a dandelion [barely],
: 	what ended up ensuing was a series of donnybrooks that would do Orca 
: 	[oops Oprah] proud.
: 
: 	thus, the netbsd people decided to do what they were doing, and the
: 	old 386bsd people decide to continue working on the 386bsd
: 	code base, but instead rename it to freebsd, since 386bsd was all but
: 	dead.
: 
: 	freebsd 1.0 [after about 50 beta, alpha, gnu, pie, epsilon, and
: 	gamma releases], finally came out, and proved to be a stable upgrade to
: 	386bsd 0.1.  the goal of freebsd was not concentrate on getting the
: 	multi-platform stuff working as much as getting the i386 stuff
: 	working[well].
: 
: 	NetBSD 0.9 came up with a dfferent executable format that was 
: 	more similar to BSDI's QMAGIC, than 386bsd's OMAGIC [god, i hope
: 	i got the letters right ;-)], while FreeBSD continued to use
: 	the same format as 386bsd, since it worked just fine.
: 
: 	thus, 386bsd and freebsd 1.0 binaries would run under netbsd 0.9,
: 	as would many [all?] bsdi  bsd/386 1.0 binaries.  however,
: 	netbsd and bsdi binaries would not run under freebsd 1.0.  i believe
: 	that freebsd can now run the qmagic binaries from bsdi and netbsd, 
: 	although i will not accept to being quoted on that one.
: 
: 	both netbsd 0.9 and freebsd 1.0 are pretty old in that the code base
: 	both os's were based on has changed much since, in compeltely
: 	different directions [ie, they were once pretty similar, but
: 	this similarity grows less on a regular basis].  to get the 
: 	most up to date code trees, you want to look at the netbsd-current
: 	and freebsd-current trees.  these both have shared libraires,
: 	fixes this and that, etc.....  freebsd has a newer serial
: 	and western digital disk driver, while netbsd continues to be plagued
: 	by a broken serial driver and a buggy wd driver.  the netbsd/amiga
: 	sparc, and  mac trees continue to evolve at a pleasant rate.
: 
: 	both now require different xfree86/motif/moo trees, since
: 	they differ a lot oat the system level.  most freebsd ported
: 	apps compile sans trouble under netbsd, and vice versa [ie,
: 	in user land, the differences aren't quite as severe...]
: 
: 
: 
: 	thus, to sum it up:
: 
: 	386bsd is the common ancestor.  netbsd and freebsd are diverging
: 	code trees that both do pretty much the same thing. [run
: 	unix :-)].  both will likely upgrade to BSD 4.4-lite at the easrliest
: 	opportunity.
: 
: 
: 	which one should you use for you intel computer?
: 
: 	Not 386bsd 0.1.  anything else is pure religion.
: 
: 
: 	if you've downloaded one, you might as well stick with it.
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 						toodlepip!
: 						marc 'em.
: 
: -- 
: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Marc Wandschneider					    Seattle, WA
: Barney the Dinosaur sings! You faint... Barney sings!  Barney sings! --More--
: You Die... --More--

--
--
frank@martha.utk.edu                  | The only Word is Silence.
frank@ifan.knox.tn.us                 | (aleister crowley, the book of lies, 5)