Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!bsd.coe.montana.edu!nate From: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: 4.4-lite? Date: 19 Jul 1994 19:29:57 GMT Organization: Montana State University, Bozeman Montana Lines: 70 Message-ID: <30h9jl$fg4@pdq.coe.montana.edu> References: <2vgvc7$3tg@spruce.cic.net> <30em65$g17@autodesk.autodesk.com> <30finf$98e@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <Ct75oE.75p@newsserver.aggregate.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.90.192.29 In article <Ct75oE.75p@newsserver.aggregate.com>, Rob Healey <rhealey@sirius.aggregate.com> wrote: >In article <30finf$98e@pdq.coe.montana.edu>, >Nate Williams <nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu> wrote: >>John *is* a member of the core team, and his comments are valid. >>Basically, even though FreeBSD does not *currently* have any non-x86 >>specific directories doesn't mean it can't with sufficient time spent >>have them. >> >>I'm not going to do it, but this doesn't mean it can't be done, or >>that it's any more difficult to do on FreeBSD 2.X than in NetBSD. >> > > But that still doesn't answer why someone like myself, with 8 > months invested in to NetBSD 1.0 would want to spend time > trying to get things to fly under FreeBSD when that same time > could be spent building on the work I and others have already > done on, in my case, the m68k/Amiga port? By all means, if you are going to work on a 68K box of ANY kind NetBSD is the way to do. And anyone looking for help in that area will be immediately sent your direction. (As well as VAX, MIPS, and a couple others) But what about someone doing a PPC or a Alpha port? NetBSD has little to offer over FreeBSD, since machine independence is close, and FreeBSD has some enhancements that NetBSD doesn't and vice-versa. It's not so cut & dried at that point. > NetBSD has SunOS(sparc and m68k), Ultrix, HP-UX and even x86 SVR4 > emulation modes First I heard of x86 SVR4 emulation modes short of Christos announcing he had binaries working. I find it hard to believe (but please show me wrong) that NetBSD will run a significant number of SVR4 binaries. > How would switching to FreeBSD speed it up any? *Significant* VM enhancements. > As far as the implication that somehow NetBSD 1.0 is tainted, and I > doubt this implication is an accident due to it's recurrance in > FreeBSD postings, I would like to see proof backing up this claim. If you are sued, you'll have to prove that it isn't. Starting from scratch makes it *much* easier to prove. According to CSRG, they started removed all tainted sources from their tree, but see where it got them. Given USL's past legal history, I wouldn't want to be in NetBSD shoes. Someone sometime in the future *is* going to take Free/NetBSD and sell it commercially, and at that point the legal entities are going a closer look at the code to see if money can be made by suiing. > Just because NetBSD started from a Net/2 base and replaced whole > parts with 4.4-lite code when it became legally available is not > reason to indirectly accuse it of possibly being tainted. Tell USL that. Just because they started with tainted 32V code and them removed all tainted code doesn't mean they aren't going to get sued. I don't need a ton of bricks to fall on my head twice. Nate -- nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu | FreeBSD core member and all around tech. nate@cs.montana.edu | weenie. work #: (406) 994-4836 | home #: (406) 586-0579 | Available for contract/otherwise work.