Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!morgan.com!panix!dragons.tjls.com!rek.tjls.com!not-for-mail From: tls@rek.tjls.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: NetBSD camp reaction to OpenBSD? Date: 3 Dec 1995 12:44:48 -0500 Organization: Never! Lines: 22 Message-ID: <49snmg$kjk@fearsome.tjls.com> References: <30B6A790.41C67EA6@FreeBSD.org> <MICHAELV.95Nov26143135@MindBender.HeadCandy.com> <49cso4$4st@server.cs.vt.edu> <49lj23$kh3@park.uvsc.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: fearsome.tjls.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:1517 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:10131 In article <49lj23$kh3@park.uvsc.edu>, Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> wrote: >ceharris@mal.com (Carl Harris) wrote: >] >] Maybe if we ignore it (OpenBSD) it will slip quietly into insignificance. > >i386 OpenBSD supports bounce buffers. NetBSD should roll in >the code. I don't believe that's considered an acceptable solution; we have other ports that require bounce buffering, and I am told that the OpenBSD code is one of the patches we've seen before, none of which met the architecture-independence requirement. The last I checked the README on Theo's web site, it didn't list any differences between OpenBSD/i386 and NetBSD/i386, and the OpenBSD source was still not available. If either of these conditions have changed, I'm sure the source tree will be perused for anything of use to us. -- Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com Where is the day that melted into one rich noise? --Thomas Wolfe