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