Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!usenet.coe.montana.edu!nate From: nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Subject: Re: 386BSD Release: Contributors Only Please... Message-ID: <1993May24.045456.27580@coe.montana.edu> Sender: usenet@coe.montana.edu (USENET News System) Organization: CS References: <1te9h8$8fn@agate.berkeley.edu> <CGD.93May22022324@gaia.CS.Berkeley.EDU> <C7FKJw.CMJ@moxie.hou.tx.us> <haley.738086416@husc.harvard.edu> Date: Mon, 24 May 1993 04:54:56 GMT Lines: 114 In article <haley.738086416@husc.harvard.edu> haley@scws5.harvard.edu (Elizabeth Haley) writes: >After that, there appears to be *3* groups: 386bsd-Jolitz (Headed by a >pair of Jolitzen :-)), 386bsd-interim (Headed by Nate?) and NetBSD >(Headed by cgd) [note the "Headed by" more means coordinated, >dictionary-flames > /dev/null] I can't speak as the 'head' of the interim group, but just as the one with the biggest mouth/keyboard. But I think I understand what's what. >Bill and Lynne apparently started this project with an eye towards >experimental work. I like this idea... > >However, I was under the impression that NetBSD was to have an eye >toward stability... > >As to 386bsd-interim, I think is was a "best-of-both-worlds" >approach... >Can I suggest something? Could the coordinator of any applicable group >send out a post to this group answering the following questions? > >1. What is your package's specific primary goal(s)? The main purpose of 386BSD interim was to make an interim/stable release that helped 'transition' folks to 0.2. With 0.2 looming in the next few months, we are still planning on doing a stable release in the event that 0.2 is not as stable as 0.1 + patchkit. There are some minor goals that the interim release is planning on doing, such as creating a new/ better way to patch the system, and in the process making an easier way to create patches to the systems for developers that are being worked on also, and other minor goals such as updating all the old sources (particularly GNU) that are in the srcdist to newer versions of said software. >2. Current projects that would lead to that goal: All of the current/former patchkit co-ordinators are involved in the interim group, and as such understand the need and requirements for stability and a better patchkit mechanism for both users and developers. We have a host site that is providing a machine for allowing us to have one main repository for us to do our owrk on. Until a recent posting that suggested otherwise, we were under the impression from conversations with the Jolitz that the interim work was 'blessed' by them. Any of the work that we consider completed has been given to the Jolitz for inclusion in 0.2. Many of the interim members speak with the Jolitz on the phone on a consistant basis. >3. What will determine your public interfaces? Our kernel interface is determined by 0.1, or by 0.2, whichever is stable. We do not plan on any large changes in the kernel, since kernel hacking is Bill's forte. >4. How often will you make a public release, and in what form? When it's done. :-) Whenever we feel that all of the utilities are integrated into the source tree and tested, and a new patchkit mechanism can be integrated easily into the current tree, we will release the interim version publically. >5. How will you deal with code offerings (patches and new drivers or >utilities) Since on of the goals of the interim release is to provide an easy way to integrate patches and new drivers, we are hoping that developers can provide to the public these fixes/changes in a way that most users can easily put into their tree. However, we will continue to collect patches that are posted and bugs that are reported and release 'blessed' patches that we consider to be stable and tested. Bottom line is that NetBSD and the interim group share any/all work with one another, and each group has access to one-anothers source tree, so most of the user level stuff is totally portable across both of them. Up to this poing, the Jolitz work is kept under wraps until it a major version is released, but this is supposed to change in the future. As far as the kernel stuff goes, most of the non-386 specific code is totally portable across 386BSD 0.1 and NetBSD, but they NetBSD have done some kernel changes that make it difficult to take the code from NetBSD and apply it to 386BSD 0.1. This is not to say that these changes are not good, but as stated above the interim group has no goal to do any large kernel changes. If I were someone walking in today and wanting to use a 386 based BSD system, I would choose NetBSD. It's easier to install. That may change in a week, a month, or a year. But, it's being worked on all the time, and that work is always available, which is a plus if you're looking for something that always evolving ala Linux style. 0.2 is going to be a lean/mean, but the stability of it is still to be determined. In retrospect, 0.1 was a big step up from 0.0, so who knows. Interim, it's just riding the fence. We hope to have to have the stability of the current NetBSD sources (the released version doesn't have much on 386BSD + patchkit 0.2.3, but the current NetBSD source tree does), plus an easier way of upgrading to new releases and an easier way to patching. Down-side is you have to wait until we're done. Nate -- osynw@terra.oscs.montana.edu | Still trying to find a good reason for nate@cs.montana.edu | these 'computer' things. Personally, work #: (406) 994-4836 | I don't think they'll catch on - home #: (406) 586-0579 | Don Hammerstrom