Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!sdd.hp.com!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!cs.weber.edu!terry
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: 386BSD or LINUX?
Message-ID: <1992Nov5.024752.17974@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Sender: news@fcom.cc.utah.edu
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center
References: <1992Nov4.052106.29266@menudo.uh.edu> <1992Nov4.100317.25447@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 02:47:52 GMT
Lines: 61
In article <1992Nov4.100317.25447@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>, eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) writes:
|> W. Woody Jin (wjin@cs.uh.edu) wrote:
|> :
|> : Version numbers say it : Linux 0.98 <--> 386BSD 0.1 p58.
|>
|> I do not know about this. I'm using terry's collection of patches, which
|> is arranged in a very convenient way of applying patches.
|> You can reverse your patch. You can install selected patches. Linux
|> should take a look at this package but terry has not made the source codes
|> freely available.
Not true! It's under BSD-style copyright (free redistribution for *both*
commercial and non-commercial use)... This is one better than Linux, since
you can incorporate it in other products without passing out sources (oh,
all right -- shell scripts are always sources. 8-)).
The only thing I have restricted distribution on is the patch creation
software. This was done because ordering of patches and management of
patch layering required funneling the order of creation for the patches
through a "patch number assignment" mechanism. For instance, if 12 people
made a patch "59", it would be bad.
This software is available to management of other projects, assuming a
centralized funneling of *386BSD* patches in patchkit format through Nate
(he keeps the unofficial bug list) or myself. This is an onus we would
gladly hand off to Bill and Lynne. We *don't* want to give it out and have
patches basically created at random (the same situation we had before).
|> : Installing DOS and 386BSD in a single IDE drive is an extreme headache,
|> : which I don't want to suggest you to try unless you have lots of free time
|> I don't think it is true any more. It is just a matter of doing it the
|> right way. 386bsd has not got a partition editor for itself unlike minix
|> fdisk, so must use norton utilites.
|> The installation procedur had been posted. A new software also
|> written running on dos, called ide_conf which can tell the native geometry
|> of an IDE hard-disk so that the BIOS can be programmed with that geometry
|> readings.
I personally think this is still a headache, and am trying to do something
about it; for most situations, however, a procedure *does* exist.
|> : Not now, unless you are extremely intrigued (like me).
|> : I would not recommend current 386BSD to an average UNIX user who is busy
|> : doing his regular jobs.
This argument is wrong; I wouldn't recommend a free system to anyone for any
kind of "regular job" unless you buy support from a third party.
Terry Lambert
terry@icarus.weber.edu
terry_lambert@novell.com
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have an 8 user poetic license" - me
Get the 386bsd FAQ from agate.berkeley.edu:/pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/unofficial
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------