Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!caen!hookup!news.kei.com!eff!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!hudson.lm.com!news.galt.com!phred.ws.cc.cmu.edu!alex From: alex@pc.cc.cmu.edu (alex wetmore) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Subject: Re: Easiest to port: Free, Net, or 386 (bsd)? Date: 28 Nov 1994 01:36:00 GMT Organization: Phred Networking Lines: 19 Distribution: world Message-ID: <3bbc60$4lj@dagny.galt.com> References: <3b2k9q$11q@hustle.rahul.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: phred.ws.cc.cmu.edu X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] > Seeing as how there's a *lot* of software running on sunos4 > that I'd like to run on one of the 3b's (oops) Free B's, > my question is... Which of freebsd, netbsd or 386bsd has > the least pain of porting involved for big stuff such > as Kerberos, etc? I have a port of Kerberos V4 sort of > running on bsdi and it was not just a matter of typing "make." I think you'll find that all of them are rather easy to port to (and similarily so). I haven't found anything that required much more than running configure and make, especially if they had already been ported to another BSD-derived system such as SunOS or straight BSD. All of the BSDs (including BSDI) have similar roots, so most stuff that works on one works on all 3 (and in fact both FreeBSD and NetBSD can run (and probably link) BSDI binaries). 386bsd is pretty much unsupported at this point, except for the widely rumored (but as far as i know) never seen 386bsd 1.0. alex