Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:14105 comp.os.mach:3923 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!vixie!vixie From: vixie@vix.com (Paul A Vixie) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.mach Subject: Re: Anyone using MachTen on a Mac? Date: 5 Jun 94 14:50:32 Organization: Vixie Enterprises Lines: 18 Message-ID: <VIXIE.94Jun5145032@office.home.vix.com> References: <1994Jun3.210215.20699@midway.uchicago.edu> <2sp809$hnq@xochi.tezcat.com> <1994Jun4.091322.13685@midway.uchicago.edu> <2sruh6$hnh@news.u.washington.edu> <2ss0lm$54s@xochi.tezcat.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: office.home.vix.com In-reply-to: ilixi@tezcat.com's message of 5 Jun 1994 02:59:50 -0500 > I can never keep track of this stuff, but I know that one of the "free" >BSD Unices at least is based heavily on the Mach sources. Or was. > > Actually, could someone fill me in on its relation to modern BSD ports? "Based heavily" might be too strong a wording. BNR2 included the Mach 2.5 "pmap" code, with lots of local modifications to get it to fit into the BSD kernel "style" and also increase performance (which wasn't really a concern for the Mach folks). The mmap() stuff was also borrowed somewhat from Mach, but modified even more radically. FreeBSD then whomped on the pmap stuff even more, to get it to run better in low-memory, low-CPU-speed environments. Pmap is an ugly hairy nasty mess. -- Paul Vixie Redwood City, CA decwrl!vixie!paul <paul@vix.com>