Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!news.alpha.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!galen.med.Virginia.EDU!jwa2n
From: jwa2n@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (James W. Adams)
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.0, 4.4BSD-Lite, and 4.4BSD
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: galen.med.virginia.edu
Message-ID: <D5G1wo.EMs@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: University of Virginia
References: <95068.131339SHIH@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> <CHRISB.95Mar13123724@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 18:55:36 GMT
Lines: 65
In article <CHRISB.95Mar13123724@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>,
Chris Bitmead <chrisb@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au> wrote:
>In article <95068.131339SHIH@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
><SHIH@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> writes:
>>
>>FreeBSD 2.0 is based on 4.4BSD-Lite. Does FreeBSD 2.0 source code
>>distribution contain ALL the source code?
>>
>>Is 4.4BSD-Lite a complete unix operating system, or just a part
>>of 4.4BSD?
>>is a complete unix operating system (we know that), but 4.4BSD-Lite
>>is not a complete unix operating system (I thought it was).
>
>Neither 4.4BSD nor 4.4BSD-Lite is a complete OS. Perhaps it might be
>complete on whatever platform was used to develop it, but certainly not
>for the 386. The Lite version has certain files removed which USL was
>claiming copyright to. This is not very important since they have been
>rewritten by the FreeBSD and NetBSD teams.
To more closely answer the original questions:
1) 4.4BSD was released in two versions:
a) 4.4BSD-Encumbered. This is the "traditional" BSD release which,
like 4.3BSD, requires a source agreement from AT&T or USL. 4.4BSD
was developed primarily on the MC68040 HP-300/400 workstations and
supports a number of 68040-based WS out-of-the-box. VAX and Tahoe
are *NOT* supported. There is a Sun4c SPARCstation port. I don't
recall the status of i386/486 support. 4.4BSD-Encumbered ships
with source and binaries for all supported architectures. It is
a fully bootable and runnable stand-alone operating system for
any supported architecture.
b) 4.4BSD-Lite. This is an *INCOMPLETE* subset of 4.4BSD-Encumbered
which omits all code over which USL claims ownership and charges
royalties for redistribution. Since this prevents building a
bootable kernel for any architecture, only sources are shipped.
4.4BSD-Lite is not a full release of 4.4BSD and cannot be used
as an operating system without additional user-supplied code.
Unfortunately, people have tended to use "4.4BSD" to describe what is
actually 4.4BSD-Lite, and most have never even heard of
4.4BSD-Encumbered, so there is a lot of confusion.
2) I am unsure about FreeBSD in particular, but all of BSDI, FreeBSD
and NetBSD ship source for everything they can. In the case of
BSDI, there are certain drivers for which NDAs were required to
get the vendor interface data, and these are distributed binary-
only. This is a philosophical issue, whether to insist on full
sources or to support a wider variety of hardware. All three
variants ship all of the relevant "UNIX" sources, so far as I am
aware, so you do effectively get full OS sources with any of them.
There may be some drivers for graphics cards or other peripherals
which are binary-only in some versions. If you don't like that,
select peripherals for which the manufacturers provide freely
redistributable interface specifications rather than condemning
the OS developers for trying to support as wide a variety of hardware
as possible.
--
James W. Adams Medical Center Computing
Box 512, HSC jwa2n@virginia.edu
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22908 /* ! comment */