*BSD News Article 36438


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.questions:13558 comp.os.386bsd.misc:3591
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!netcomsv!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jmonroy
From: jmonroy@netcom.com (Jesus Monroy Jr)
Subject: Re: How UTTERLY Amazing! (Was Re: FreeBSD vs NetBSD)
Message-ID: <jmonroyCx11pJ.5nv@netcom.com>
Followup-To: comp.os.386bsd.questions,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1]
References: <358o3g$p95@umd5.umd.edu> <jmonroyCwKFI2.6C0@netcom.com> <hart.780959657@apanix.apana.org.au> <36hof6$de4@quagga.ru.ac.za>
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 1994 03:58:31 GMT
Lines: 110

Geoff Rehmet (csgr@cs.ru.ac.za) wrote:
: In <hart.780959657@apanix.apana.org.au> hart@apanix.apana.org.au (Leigh Hart) writes:

: >jmonroy@netcom.com (Jesus Monroy Jr) writes:

: >>: FreeBSD 2.0 is just around the corner as well (perhaps not as close as
: >>: NetBSD), but I need things up and running in the next month or so.  Are
: >>: there any compelling reasons to wait to FreeBSD 2.0 instead of using NetBSD
: >>: 1.0 when its released?
: >>:
: >>	There are as many reasons to wait for 386bsd R1.0 as
: >>	any of the others.

: Flame-fests aside: both NetBSD and FreeBSD are now *very* far from the
: original 386BSD.  
:
	Boy, we want this on thick ...Today!

: FreeBSD 2.0, for instance, is no longer
: based on 386BSD, but is rather based on 4.4-Lite -- if you did a cvs
: checkout of the initial code in our tree you would (if you were lucky)
: get 4.4-Lite back.
:
	You haven't made a release to claim that on... even
	less you can't claim to have it operational.

	And let's say you  have a *current* version and it
	hobbles on a few select machines, there is no chance 
	in hell you can convince me that the *whole* 386bsd
	code tree has been eliminated... 

: Gauging by some email which I exchanged with Lynne Jolitz, the Jolitzes
: are more interested in the documentation than in a stable production
: operating system. 
:
	Oxymoron in action..... 
	Here is the premise.... if you write (or talk) about 
	your software, describe it to someone else,  then perhaps
	it was thought out well and works well.
	
	By your description, we are lead to assume that
	one has greater value than the other... your oxymoron.
 
:  Thus, I would say that anyone who is expecting any
: more stability than was available in 386BSD-0.1 may be in for a shock.
:
	Amazing sense of logic..... can I please have a
	chicken on the rocks.

: (Lynne did not answer my questions about stability.)  I think that it
: is fair enough to assume that 386BSD 1.0 should rather be taken as a
: set of reference bits and documentation of *how* certain parts of the
: system work.  It will probably require someone else to go and make it
: all stable.
:
	Yes, your sense of logic is clear here... 


: When I asked Lynne about whether 386BSD-1.0 would be based on 4.4-Lite,
: and if they had things like LFS, she brushed that question aside,
: commenting that they were not going include new code just because it
: was a new feature, and would rather stick to things that had good
: technical merit.  (My paraphrasing is not very good here - but Lynne
: can clarify this if she disagrees with my summary.)
:
	Well... "good technical merit" seems like a good 
	premise for logical code development. 
	Please explain how you think this is detiremental.

: We've already flamed this issue to death.
:
	No we haven't.

:  Those of us who are
: interested in stable systems for production use can happily go back to
: NetBSD or FreeBSD and keep using those.  
:
	Why do I constantly feel like this statement is like 
	"come-line" for an inusrance salesman?

: Any cute ideas that might come
: out of 386BSD-1.0 will surely find their way into the other *BSD.  When
: 386BSD-1.0 comes up on the ftp sites, I think it may still be useful to
: pull it down for reference purposes -- I don't think we should all
: ignore it.  However, it will probably be more of a reference than
: anything else.
:
	Amuzing concept.

: Leave the Jolitzes to do whatever they want.  If they come up with some
: useful ideas, we can use them.  386BSD might still be useful for
: teaching purposes in OS courses.  (Although, I suspect that XINU or
: MINIX are probably still better for situations where you want to teach
: students about OS's.)
:
	OK.. this is where Wiley Coyote falls off the edge 
	of the cliff.

: Geoff.

: Oh, I nearly forgot - Jesus, I won't see any follow-ups you make,
: because you're in my kill file.  (ie: don't waste your time.)
:
	Oh... that's terrible... I mail them to you when they post.

-- 
Jesus Monroy Jr                                          jmonroy@netcom.com
Zebra Research
/386BSD/device-drivers /fd /qic /clock /documentation
___________________________________________________________________________