Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!psgrain!m2xenix!agora!rgrimes From: rgrimes@agora.rain.com (Rodney Grimes) Subject: Re: So you say you want an interim release of 386bsd? (What to do?) Message-ID: <C5vsp8.FK7@agora.rain.com> Organization: Open Communications Forum References: <1r067g$915@lobster.sid.mcet.edu> <C5sCvr.3G1@unx.sas.com> <1r146qINNmbn@hrd769.brooks.af.mil> <1993Apr20.160109.17689@gmd.de> <1993Apr20.191241.16618@coe.montana.edu> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 10:48:43 GMT Lines: 114 nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: >In article <1993Apr20.160109.17689@gmd.de> veit@mururoa.gmd.de (Holger Veit) writes: >>|> Another question is what do I do now? >> >> >>I also asked the same question when I read the NetBSD announcement. Apparently >>many people will grab the "new release of 386bsd" just because it is new. >>What is missing is a procedure to upgrade from a src01dist+patchkit-0.2.2 >>to the new release for all persons who do not want to start from scratch. >>Besides some reorgs of trees and splitting into separate packages the real >>difference to src01+pk022 cannot be so extreme that an upgrade kit is impossible >>(it just has to be done). >One, the amount of changes from 386BSD + patchkit -> NetBSD are >extremely large, especially in the area of configuration. >The goals for the NetBSD group and the continuing 386BSD group are different. Some areas of the goals are different but a lot of them are common, and I think that the level of cooperation will help both teams produce some very good work. I am glad I do not have to make a choice on which to run, I am running BOTH! >There is currently work in progress (Yeah, right, we've heard that a >million times now) to produce an interim release of 386BSD, with Bill's >blessing. And again and again.. so I wont say it... :-) <chuckle> >The purpose of this release is to make the 0.1 -> 0.2 transition easier, >and to introduce some new code into the tree (updated software, shared >libraries :-), better installation tools, etc..) And a lot of the fixes from NetBSD. One of my primary goals as a 0.1.5 team member is to leverage as much of the NetBSD code that makes since into the 0.1.5 release. This is why I am now running both 386BSD and NetBSD at current revision. >>The situation becomes more interesting with the release of 386bsd-0.2 >>(even if it looks as if everyone will get a grey beard until it arrives;-)). >If I am not mistaken, (Chris, contradict me if I'm wrong), the NetBSD >crew have no intention on running 0.2. However, this doesn't mean they >will ignore 0.2, but instead take what they consider to be useful >features from it (if possible), and place them into NetBSD. And Chris stated this was so in another post. >>In this case we have three releases people can offer patches for: >>The 386bsd-0.1+pk0.2.*, NetBSD with its own patchkit possibly, and 386bsd-0.2. >>In the latter case we again have the difficulty whether to drop NetBSD and >>take the latest and best (?). Probably there will be a set of diffs to upgrade >>NetBSD to the 0.2 level, or vice versa (?). >Doubtful, if my statement on NetBSD is correct. Humm yes very doubtful. >>BTW: I just saw the announcement of pk-0.2.3, and wonder if this brings my system >>to NetBSD. >No, NetBSD and 386BSD are still different. Chris and his support crew have >done a lot of VERY GOOD THINGS in NetBSD (and some things on which I disagree >with, but that's to be expected. :-) >Hopefully alot of these changes will be integrated into the interim release, >but due to lack of hardware, and some miscommunication with the site hosting >the interim release, things have not progressed as quickly as we would like. Or at least from Nates view point that is true, from mine it is a little different since I am in the process of culling certain work from NetBSD and making it into patch kit patches. >>Maybe the patchkit people and the NetBSD people (who are mainly the same >>group) >>comment some more about the expected future. >I can't speak for Rod, but as a former patchkit maintainer, if we can >get these technical problems ironed out, we are planning on still doing >an interim release. I can speak for Rod, or at least I think I can, and a binary release of patch kit 0.2.3 is being worked on as I type this... it is simple a replace ment for the bin01dist cpio files (it is actually going to be one huge tar.z (gzip) file that I will split when I upload it from my box) I am also working up a new set of install floppies based on some of NetBSD's work to make installing 386BSD0.1.2.3 (that is what I am now doing with patch kit version numbers to identify what you are running, just take the patch kit revision, drop the leading 0 and take it on the end of the 386BSD version) a lot easier. >Now, right now today, Chris's release is the best thing on the market, >and if you are a new users, I suggest using it. But, if you're happy >with 386BSD today, Rod is going to continue to work his tail off and >produce patchkits against 386BSD. (And there is some very nice stuff >coming up in the next patchkit, but Rod needs to take about 2 years off >after cranking this one out :-) I don't know if I agree with the claim that Chris's release is the best thing on the market, but I have no problem calling it a very good thing on the market. My work is gong to slow down starting tomarrow... I am going off to have a life for a few days.. or at least I keep telling myself that.. 2 years.. heck if I took that long off I would propably never come back! >Anyway, that's the status from my end, And some what form my end... -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@agora.rain.com 386BSD patchkit coordinator Wish it paid real money! Accurate Automation Company All opinions belong to me and my company!