*BSD News Article 35846


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:13187 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3509
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!gmi!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!MathWorks.Com!news.cic.net!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!epiwrl.entropic.com!usenet
From: kenh@entropic.com (Ken Hornstein)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs NetBSD
Date: 15 Sep 1994 18:00:45 -0400
Organization: Entropic Research Lab, Washington, DC.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <35ag6d$sqp@sparc2.entropic.com>
References: <358o3g$p95@umd5.umd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sparc2.entropic.com

In article <358o3g$p95@umd5.umd.edu>,
Alok K. Dhir <adhir@bigdipper.umd.edu> wrote:
>I have found compiling things for FreeBSD is sometimes a bit of a chore 
>(as compared to Linux and NeXTStep, which I also run), especially
>since there is usually not a default config for it (for example, with
>gcc, pine, and misc others).  Is netbsd in the same boat?

I often hear people say that porting to *BSD is difficult, but I have never
seen that myself; I've found it the easiest of all the Unixes I've worked with.

For example: Under NetBSD 1.0_BETA, I was able to compile Motif 1.2.3 without
a single change to any of the sources.  I've never tried to port Linux-specific
stuff, so I can't say if that would be hard or not.

I am pretty sure there's a gcc configuration for freebsd, and probably one for
netbsd as well.  If there isn't a configuration, I generally start with the
SunOS configuration and work from there.

--Ken