Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!crcnis1.unl.edu!wupost!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!zip.eecs.umich.edu!quip.eecs.umich.edu!dmuntz From: dmuntz@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Dan Muntz) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: WILL ???BSD DIE? Date: 3 Nov 1993 01:46:41 GMT Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI Lines: 58 Message-ID: <2b72i1$dbl@zip.eecs.umich.edu> References: <jmonroyCFv39C.Iv1@netcom.com> <2b64ce$l4o@zip.eecs.umich.edu> <1993Nov2.234106.5280@cm.cf.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: quip.eecs.umich.edu In article <1993Nov2.234106.5280@cm.cf.ac.uk>, Paul <paul@myrddin.isl.cf.ac.uk> wrote: >In article <2b64ce$l4o@zip.eecs.umich.edu> dmuntz@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Dan Muntz) writes: >>386 w/o patches, but when it comes right down to it, my 386bsd systems have >>stayed up for weeks (probably months) with only one (XS3 related) crash. One >>machine acts as a slip gateway, and both are used signifcantly every day for >>various tasks (xtroff, simulations, remote login, games, etc.). BUT... > >This is just totally misleading. Saying that 386BSD 0.1 is more stable >than Net or Free just because it stays up for you is bogus. You're just >not triggering the numerous bugs that have been fixed in the latter two. Ah, but I *am* triggering bugs in FreeBSD and NetBSD. 386bsd is more stable for me (nothing misleading about that). I suppose it just _accidentally_ works on my machine and is unstable for everyone else? BTW: my machines are hardly identical: isa+et4000+esdi vs. eisa+s3+scsi. >386BSD 0.1 is NOT more stable than the later releases. I mean 386BSD 0.1 >with the patchkit when I refer to 0.1, as I suspect most others do as >well. Some obviously didn't mean 0.1+pk, possibly because the patchkit is apparently no longer available. On a brighter note, my machine running NetBSD has been behaving fairly well: %uptime 8:20pm up 17:17, 7 users, load average: 0.01, 0.04, 0.01 >My only comment here is that I'm interested in hearing about the problems you >had with FreeBSD so we can correct it for the future. I've been exchanging mail with a couple of FreeBSDers. >This is premature in the extreme. If we were to set up net of free >newsgroups then there would be 6 virtually emptu newsgroups left behind. >You may think it's rather presumptious of me to suggest that but let's >have some realism here. There's virutally no-one doing any development >work with 0.1, and most users are migratin to one of the two newer >releases. 386bsd is dead. 0.1 is no longer supported, and 0.2 is nowhere in sight. Why confuse the issue by continuing to post to the 386bsd newsgroups? If you think volume will be too low, create one group, comp.os.freebsd, and split it later if needed. rmgroup the 386bsd groups when the traffic drops off. However, there seems to be opposition in the FreeBSD group to using newsgroups _at all_. >I can't comment on NetBSD because I don't have a machine running it but >as far as FreeBSD is concerned I have no stability problems. The only >serious shortcoming at the present is it's wd driver but that is a high >priority with us and we'll get it fixed. It is far more stable than >386bsd 0.1 with patchkit ever was. I described what I meant by stability. How about you? Does the wd problem <or some other problem> cause you to crash once a day, once a week, ... -Dan