Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!sgiblab!wetware!spunky.RedBrick.COM!psinntp!tcgw.tandy.com!abacus.tis.tandy.com!criney1 From: criney1@tisdec.TIS.Tandy.COM (Chris Riney) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: 4.4-lite? Date: 15 Jul 1994 17:16:16 GMT Organization: Tandy Information Services Lines: 76 Message-ID: <306g90$lsp@abacus.tis.tandy.com> References: <2vgvc7$3tg@spruce.cic.net> <301rrc$cmv@masala.cc.uh.edu> <301url$mtp@solaris.cc.vt.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: sasoom.tis.tandy.com X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Allen Briggs (briggs@puma.bevd.blacksburg.va.us) wrote: : In article <301rrc$cmv@masala.cc.uh.edu> : wjin@moocow.cs.uh.edu (Woody Jin) writes: : >I was always curious why they want to run BSD on a McIntosh, or Amiga. : It's really not that difficult to figure out. I've had a mac for : several years. I have, in that time, invested in more disk space, : more software, and more knowledge that relates to that machine. I : am also a Unix bigot. I like to use, run, develop, and develop under : Unix. I also don't want to have two well-configured machines sitting : on/under/around my desk. I also don't want the headaches of configuring : a DOS system. : >If I can have a graphic environment (X11) with BSD on Mac or Amiga, : >it may be OK. : But you can. X11R6 has been run on a NetBSD/Mac machine. The Amiga : folks are running it all the time. : >[unix on] top of Mac OS, run X11 window, communicate between Mac and Unix : >system using graphic environment. Then this would be great. Just a ludicrus as suggesting that unix run on top of MS-DOG. : Unix on top of MacOS? Where a buggy application could crash the system? : And you're at the mercy of the Macintosh scheduler? And drivers? And a : change in the next release of the OS could make any performance : enhancements that you've managed to include, obsolete? : >I just can't think of the situation like : running BSD on McIntosh in : >tty mode and saying "This is great !!!". : >(This could have been really great ten years ago) : Heh... Ever driven through a maze, blindfolded? Or tried to write an : OS for a machine for which precious little hardware documentation : exists? It's a challenge. It's also progress, IMO. BTW, it would : have been impossible 10 years ago on the 68000--at least to have an : OS as advanced as NetBSD (or Linux or FreeBSD) is. And what do you you think the TRS-16B's where using for their CPU? I know for a FACT that they had 68000's and where running some of the first XENIX code around. IMHO the Motarola series are a better CPU than the Intel. When Xenix for the Intel came out, there was a drop from 512K(or 1024K on some TRS-16B models) to 128K or less DUE to hardware design limitations that DOS didn't reach. Intel is only on top because IBM took them! : >Even though it is better to run on more platforms, I would hate if : >FreeBSD core team creates the above kind of comedy, wasting their time : Do you call the Sparc port, or the PMAX port comedy? Or the i386? : There is no reason on this planet why the FreeBSD core team should : start developing for other platforms than the i386 unless they : a) want to, or : b) are paid to, and want to ;-) : I don't see any reason for them to actively avoid it, though, which : seems to be what you're suggesting. We happened to hook up with : NetBSD last summer--it could've been FreeBSD--or Linux ;-) : -allen : -- : Allen Briggs - end killing - allen.briggs@vt.edu ** MacBSD == NetBSD/Mac ** : = Over the years you swam the ocean following feelings of your own [...] = : == It's a shame to have to die to put the shadow on our eyes. We don't == : === want to care. Under the bridge. Over the phone. Wind on the Water. === -- Chris Riney E-mail: chris@sasoom.tis.tandy.com Unix Technical Services chris.riney@tandy.com Tandy Information Services