Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!msuinfo!news.mtu.edu!lisa.acs.nmu.edu!sarmac.acs.nmu.edu!user From: scottr@acs.nmu.edu (Scott Reynolds) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: ffs & sunos? Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 16:44:05 -0500 Organization: Northern Michigan University Lines: 48 Message-ID: <scottr-1811941644050001@sarmac.acs.nmu.edu> References: <3ahflh$og3@spruce.cic.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: sarmac.acs.nmu.edu In article <3ahflh$og3@spruce.cic.net>, pauls@locust.cic.net (Paul Southworth) wrote: > Has anyone tried playing around with implementing the 4.4BSD ffs under > SunOS 4.x? Any problems inherent in trying it apart from needing > kernel sources, perhaps? (ie, is this a ridiculous idea?) > > Although I know and love NetBSD, I am still interested in playing with > performance-enhancing additions to SunOS... Hear, hear. I have a suggestion for Sun (though I doubt they will seriously consider this). 1) Fix the known deficiencies in SunOS 4/Solaris 1. These include, but are not limited to, resolving (no pun) the DNS/NIS brain damage, implementing BSD 4.4-style shared libraries, and adding a BSD 4.4 filesystem. In fact, they could eliminate dependencies on the AT&T/USL code entirely, while they're at it, to cut any royalty costs (which I would assume they are paying USL). They've already gone partway in the right direction by making it run on multiprocessor systems. Implementing an NIS+ server under this OS would address the security issues corporate customers would undoubtably bring up (perhaps they've already done this, too?). 2) Throw Solaris 2.x in the dumpster. Stability problems (I gave up after patching 2.2 rather heavily earlier this year), compatibility problems, and gratuitous changes of user interfaces go with it. Yes, I realize that 2.4 is available, but come on... this is starting to look like Linux, FreeBSD- and NetBSD-current with the "OS upgrade of the month". For the free systems that's expected, but for a commercial product? I ended up reinstalling SunOS 4 here, and three new SS5s were ordered in August with the explicit understanding that Sun would ship SunOS 4 with them. 3) Call the new, improved SunOS from (1) "Solaris 3" and market the fact that it's simpler to maintain and easier to get new software for (after all, most existing SunOS 4.x software would compile with no more than minor changes). (* end soapbox mode *) -- Scott Reynolds scottr@acs.nmu.edu Northern Michigan University