Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:14110 comp.os.mach:3927 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!EU.net!uunet!tezcat.com!tezcat.com!not-for-mail From: ilixi@tezcat.com (Charles Ewen MacMillan) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.mach Subject: Re: Anyone using MachTen on a Mac? Date: 6 Jun 1994 05:31:44 -0500 Organization: TEZCAT - Wicker Park's Own Internet Services 312-850-0181 Lines: 30 Message-ID: <2sutug$q78@xochi.tezcat.com> References: <1994Jun3.210215.20699@midway.uchicago.edu> <2sruh6$hnh@news.u.washington.edu> <2ss0lm$54s@xochi.tezcat.com> <VIXIE.94Jun5145032@office.home.vix.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: xochi.tezcat.com In article <VIXIE.94Jun5145032@office.home.vix.com>, Paul A Vixie <vixie@vix.com> wrote: >> 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. >-- Thank you Paul. I guess when I said "based heavily" I should have said, that the kernel was so based, which is more or less what I meant. Then it would be the case as well, that all of the "free" Unices aside from Linux would have parts of Mach in them? -- Charles Ewen MacMillan | Tezcat.COM - The Good Guys <ilixi@tezcat.com> | Offering Internet Access Modem: 312-850-0112/0117| Via Interactive UNIX to Voice: 312-850-0181 | the Chicago Area.