Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!sgiblab!sgigate.sgi.com!fido.asd.sgi.com!slovax!lm From: lm@slovax.engr.sgi.com (Larry McVoy) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: ffs & sunos? Date: 19 Nov 1994 22:53:38 GMT Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA Lines: 66 Message-ID: <3alvli$ssg@fido.asd.sgi.com> References: <3ahflh$og3@spruce.cic.net> <scottr-1811941644050001@sarmac.acs.nmu.edu> Reply-To: lm@slovax.engr.sgi.com NNTP-Posting-Host: slovax.engr.sgi.com X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Scott Reynolds (scottr@acs.nmu.edu) wrote: : 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). Before I left Sun I spent about 4 months in a very active campaign to get them to do this. I was meeting with the top folks pretty regularly, trying to get them to realize that they were throwing away the good stuff. You can read all about it, I wrote a paper or two on the subject, send mail to archives@slovax.engr.sgi.com with the word "freeos.ps" in the body - it will send you back the postscript. Check out the list of people that blessed the idea, it is a veritable who's who of the Unix world. Sun didn't go for it and I left. They did do one thing that I suggested, which was to buy out rights to Unix. If they wanted to, they could still solidify the market and make the source available. On to the specific details of your suggestions: : 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). DNS/NIS is pretty good in SunOS, better than most peoples. What do you want fixed? How should it work? 4.4 BSD style shared libraries *are* SunOS shared libs; Sun donated the code. 4.4 BSD FFS is a much older and buggier version of Sun's UFS. Sun's UFS is better quality and has a far better vnode interface. There are some very subtle problems with BSD's vnode layer (along with the obvious problems of VOP_STRATEGY and no VOP_GETPAGE or VOP_PUTPAGE). Sun's is better. : 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. Agreed. : 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). Exactly what I told them to do. -- --- Larry McVoy (415) 390-1804 lm@sgi.com