*BSD News Article 35500


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sunic!mimuw.edu.pl!news
From: <wgalazka@chem.uw.edu.pl>
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Does FreeBSD 1.1.5.1 support the following - summary
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 14:05:23 +0100
Organization: Department of Maths and Computer Science, Warsaw University
Lines: 109
Message-ID: <62842.wgalazka@chem.uw.edu.pl>
Reply-To: <wgalazka@chem.uw.edu.pl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: caesar.chem.uw.edu.pl
X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_16
X-POPMail-Charset: English

This is a summary of the posting I got for the question above

Does FreeBSD 1.1.5.1 support the following ?
1 shared libraries
   Yes.

2 runtime linkable device drivers
   No, but yes in FreeBSD  2.0, NetBSD does though.

   If you mean "plonk driver.o in kernel directory and reboot to start
   driver" then no.

   Full source is provided for the kernel (and everything else for that
   matter) so configuring drivers in and out of the kernel is as simple
   as editing one file (eg: FOO) and typing

   'config FOO; cd /sys/compile/FOO;make clean depend all' and copying
   the freshly compiled kernel to / (after making a backup of course!)

3 memory mapped files (i.e. a file can be manipulated
  with the same functions as memory
   Yes.

4 filesystem mapped processes
   Not until 2.0 - "portal" filesystem.
   If you mean processes are mapped into /proc, then yes.
   Less complete than Linux's one but will evolve in time.

5 file sharing
   You mean with flock()?  Yes.  FreeBSD has numerous file locking/sharing
   mechanisms/ If you mean with NFS, then still yes.

  >>> FreeBSD 2.0 will be coming soon.

 Many thanks to

 Jordan K. Hubbard <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com>
 Leigh Hart        <hart@apanix.apana.org.au>
 Ollivier Robert   <roberto@keltia.frmug.fr.net>


 Also of great interest might be the posting below.

 From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
 Subject: Re: Usefulness of BSD/Linux Source Knowledg
 Date: 28 Jul 1994 04:03:52 GMT

 [stuff about AIX deleted]

 You have lumped a bunch of issues together here; let me try to sort them
 out and respond to them:

 1)      Dynamically loadable kernel modules

         I wrote this code and released it at the start of 1993 prior to
         the Novell acquisition of USL.  It's in NetBSD right now (with
         fixes by Chris), and is easily installable into FreeBSD.

         Unlike your AIX version, you don't have to reboot to install
         or deinstall file systems, drivers, pseudo-devices, system call
         extensions, or "misc" modules (modification of kernel structures
         and function pointers).

 2)      Autoconfiguration of "dev" devices.

         There are two approaches to this; the first is a postinstall
         script for the module loader; this works now.

         The second approach is a device file system; this has been
         discussed, experimentally implemented, and suggested on the
         mailing lists that it will be included in FreeBSD 2.0.  I am
         positive the NetBSD crew have aspirations in this direction
         as well.

 3)      Virtual volume management.

         This has been discussed, but not formally pursued, by many
         people (like Phil Neiswanger and me).  To deal with this
         first requires dealing with DOS partition management, since
         any such virtual management will have to take place in DOS
         partitions anyway if BSD is to coexist.  This is further
         complicated by the fact that existing file systems (like the
         Linux, DOS, and HPFS) from those other systems will not undergo
         the same management, yet must still be accessable.  This means
         a stage raw driver, and (if SCSI LUNs are to be supported) an
         increase in the minor device name space (from 16 to 32 bits).

 4)      File system expansion.

         This is not necessarily desirable; the allocation of 4M units
         at a time without respect to their position on the disk
         relative to the partition being added to destroys the locality
         of reference assumtions in UFS, as well as requiring tables
         that are *not* currently dynamic become dynamic (specifically,
         it horribly impacts bad sector replacement and requires per 4M
         hunk virtualization of the superblock structures.  Yes, it is
         a sexy feature, but volume striping and block replication are
         more useful, and the AIX approach only provides crude striping.
         The Journaling capabilities are more interesting, but are
         available elsewhere.
 [...]
      Regards,      Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu>


                     >> Wojciech Galazka <<
| Wojciech Galazka <wgalazka@chem.uw.edu.pl>    
| Computer Center, Chemistry Department,  University of Warsaw 
| Pasteura 1, 02-093 Warsaw, Poland           
                 ->> A happy FreeBSD user <<-