*BSD News Article 20464


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:12558 comp.os.linux:54423 comp.os.386bsd.misc:881
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!think.com!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!mycroft
From: mycroft@trinity.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: Re: BSD UNIX
Date: 06 Sep 1993 05:28:40 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <MYCROFT.93Sep6012840@trinity.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
References: <newmanCCL33A.GBo@netcom.com> <GOWEN.93Aug30234233@apex.cs.tufts.edu>
	<1993Aug31.185019.22189@sophia.smith.edu>
	<MUTS.93Sep2205147@compi.hobby.nl>
	<michaelv.747084422@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: trinity.gnu.ai.mit.edu
In-reply-to: michaelv@iastate.edu's message of Fri, 3 Sep 1993 19:27:02 GMT


In article <michaelv.747084422@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu>
michaelv@iastate.edu (Michael L. VanLoon) writes:

   Actually, from what I can gather, the only one not coordinating is
   Bill Jolitz himself, [...]

This is exactly how I see it, too.

   a) The most stable, bugfree, production quality release possible in
   a free unix, [...]

I don't know whether that's possible, but we're trying to make it as
stable and reliable as we can, within our knowledge of the PC lossage,
er, architecture.

   b) As complete as possible compliance with 4.3BSD and Net/2, [...]

There are several compatibility issues we[*] are concerned with:

1) Compatibility with previous versions of NetBSD.  We do not want to
gratuitously screw over users.  The DB library changes in 0.9 were
because the old library was broken and out-of-date.  Had we stuck with
that version, we would have had to duplicate much of the work done by
the 4.4BSD people on it.  This would be a waste of effort.

2) Compatibility with 4.4BSD and other versions of Unix on the 386.
Ultimately, everyone benefits if they can run other people's
executables.  In particular, in the not-too-distant future we will be
able to run vendors' executables, and thereby inherit commercial
software support.  We currently run 386BSD(/FreeBSD/NetBSD 0.8) and
BSDI executables on the 386, modulo problems with differing DB
libraries.

3) Compatibility with other ports of NetBSD running on similar
hardware.  I will be working to make all of the 68k ports binary
compatible, and to make them all support the SunOS compatibility mode,
and the HP/UX compatibility mode where possible (when the former is
implemented and when I finish the latter).

4) Compatibility with POSIX, ANSI, and XPG3.  No comment.

[*] I'm sure there are people in the NetBSD group who disagree with
some or even all of these.

   Buildable on as many architectures as possible [...]

Perhaps not as many as possible, but at least as many as we care
about.  B-)  Ports from people outside the `core' NetBSD group are
also welcome; the Mac, Amiga, and DECstation ports are in this
category (though the first two borrow heavily from the hp300 port),
and most of the code in the hp300 and SPARC ports are from 4.4BSD
contributors.

   [Re: Linux]  Until recently, its networking was not at all
   complete.  They have recently adopted Net/2, but it is still
   somewhat buggy.

Apparently, Linux's `Net-2' is not `Berkeley Networking 2', but merely
the second release of Linux's own networking code.  It was the poor
networking, buggy file systems, and general instability that
encouraged me to change from Linux to 386BSD about 10 months ago.  It
has probably gotten better since then, but I have not had those
problems with 386BSD or now with NetBSD.