Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news.byu.edu!cwis.isu.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!cs.weber.edu!terry From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) Subject: Re: BSD/386 Commercial Product Message-ID: <1993Jul28.035328.2892@fcom.cc.utah.edu> Sender: news@fcom.cc.utah.edu Organization: Weber State University, Ogden, UT References: <1778.2C53F9EF@mechanic.fidonet.org> <23136o$aa6@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <1993Jul27.053721.6646@spcvxb.spc.edu> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 93 03:53:28 GMT Lines: 59 In article <1993Jul27.053721.6646@spcvxb.spc.edu> terry@spcvxb.spc.edu (Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr.) writes: >In article <23136o$aa6@pdq.coe.montana.edu>, osyjm@cs.montana.edu (Jaye Mathisen) writes: > > As far as "drop-in" drivers go, my impression (from running 386bsd 0.1 >a long time ago) is that BSDI is closer to current CSRG driver methodology, >while 386bsd is a unique beast (or several, these days). Not many CSRG drivers out there (or any BSD4.4 Lite, for that matter). Not to complain, but if you want to be where the drivers are, you need a kernel that can run Linux or 386BSD/NetBSD/FreeBSD drivers. >> Putting in new funky things like Terry's LKM stuff, bde's intr stuff, >> npx code, sio, etc, are futile exercises under BSDI. > > I'm unaware of the details of the packages you're discussing here. However, >back in BSDI's 0.9.4 release I added the latest bpf and some Sun "nit" stuff >and it went in easily. LKM is "Loadable Kernel Modules".. it allows you to load/unload device drivers, file systems, system calls, execution classes, streams modules, and misc modules (basically, anything you can wedge a hack into in the kernel address space) without taking the system down. And modules loaded take kernel memory, and are not affected by initial kernel size. For instance, say I bought a printer and wanted to get it running. I could install the interruptless printer driver without taking my machine down. An execution class is basically a program loader. For instance, using code I can't give out, I can run ISC 386 and SCO Xenix binaries on my machine (if I'd spent another week, the Xenix stuff would be distributable) as long as they are statically linked. > I wouldn't characterize BSDI as "trailing edge". Development and user >interest is less obvious because it isn't done in newsgroups. From what I've >read of BSDI's plans (ftp to BSDI.COM and read the literature there), they >are planning SCO compatibility and SPARC support for an upcoming release. I >would assume some sort of shared library support as well. They are also com- >mitted to tracking the 4.4BSD release (presumably, after the "Lite" kit is >released). I wouldn't either; but I wouldn't call it a research OS either, and that's the primary motivator for the *BSD efforts. BSD/386 is an applications platform. > I'd be quite surprised if any of these things make it out in an official >"free" release first. Suprise. Xenix Compatability and shared libs. Maybe not SPARC, but then again maybe (we'll see). In any case, Amiga and several ther ports exist in Beta (Macintosh?), and others are planned or starting coding. Don't underestimate free. Terry Lambert terry@icarus.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.