*BSD News Article 71313


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!theos.com!zeus!niklas
From: niklas@zeus.theos.com (Niklas Hallqvist)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: How do NetBSD and FreeBSD differ?
Date: 18 Jun 1996 10:27:30 GMT
Organization: 
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <4q60ai$g8q@zeus.theos.com>
References: <4pvg1u$3aj@news.umbc.edu> <SOUVA.96Jun16153706@aibn58.astro.uni-bonn.de> <4q2kma$qru@voodoo.pdx.oneworld.com> <4q3jmk$24t@turbocat.snafu.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.theos.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

David Wetzel (dave@turbocat.snafu.de) wrote:

: Last time I checked, I noticed that OpenBSD/amiga ==  NetBSD.

I don't usually get into religious wars in puclic forums but as this
statement concerns my personal work in a way I think I have to comment
on, I'll bite.

I don't know how you judge two OSes to be equal, or even how a certain port
of one OS is equal to the same port in another.  Perhaps you find the two
OSes similar enough to think they are equal, but that does not mean that
they are to another person.  The amiga port of OpenBSD started out with no
*port-specific* changes for a couple of months, but in the machine-
independent parts there were differences right from the start.  For a couple
of months I have worked on that port off and on, so even the machine-
dependent part has changes.  The main change is the support of ISA devices
in Amiga's with ISA busses.  This will hopefully end up in NetBSD at some
time too, but for the moment it is to be found in OpenBSD only.

It concerns me a bit that you state a fact on "news" that hasn't been
true for a long time, without giving some kind of time-estimate of when
you checked, and certainly: it would have been cool to know *how* you did
it too.

: Why did they start another project? Why don't they work on ONE BSD?

A) Why start?

   The story is a bit boring, so I won't tell it here.  It's also a story
   that has several versions, depending on who you talk to.  Suffice to
   say: Failure of communication made the two groups inevitable.

B) Why not ONE?

   That was my initial reaction too.  But as I got involved I noticed
   there were some differences in priorities and ideologies.  Most notably:

   NetBSD				OpenBSD

   Conservative code inclusion policy,	Pragmatic inclusion policy.  If the
   meaning code that isn't of a very	code is useful and does not harm other
   high quality doesn't go into the	parts of the system, it deserves a
   tree.  The idea is that the high	place in the tree.  The idea is that
   standards will require the authors	sharing is best done via the tree,
   to do stuff the right thing earl	and that sharing is the key to
   on.					developpment.

   Developper status you get by		Pretty much, "if you have cool ideas
   "earning" it, i.e. you have done	and want to implement them, you can
   substantial work and/or devoted	have an account".
   much time to the project.

   These are the main reasons for having several projects I think.  In an
   ideal world everyone might be satisfied with just NetBSD.  However I think
   this world is not ideal, and that NetBSD actually shapes up due to the
   competition.  My guess is things like ATAPI, bounce buffers for ISA,
   PCMCIA actually will appear sooner in NetBSD, than if OpenBSD not had
   been.  Competition is good in this respect.  The bad side is that it
   often creates pissing contests too.  Well, I've decided to try to
   disregard of personal differences and flaming, and be cooperative with
   whoever that wants to cooperate with me.  I must admit having full CVS
   access is sufficiently better than mail & send-pr that I focus on OpenBSD.

Niklas Hallqvist
niklas@appli.se