From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 12:57:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from web4.allunix.com (cc598076-a.chmchl1.ca.home.com [24.11.229.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A637C37BB51; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:57:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@allunix.com) Received: from windoze (dhcp4.allunix.com [192.168.0.6]) by web4.allunix.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00267; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:09:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@allunix.com) Message-ID: <200008161257240540.004B7EAE@web4.allunix.com> X-Mailer: Calypso Version 3.10.03.02 (3) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:57:24 -0700 From: "David DeTinne" To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====_96645584441=_" Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --=====_96645584441=_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Is the sparc port really dead? I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users standpoint FreeBSD= is the best (my opinion) If a developer needs a machine I will donate my IPX to get it going. I will even throw in $50.00 in the box to help, I wish I could give more. David DeTinne --=====_96645584441=_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

Is the sparc port really dead?

I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users standpoint FreeBSD is the best

(my opinion)

If a developer needs a machine I will donate my IPX to get it going.

I will even throw in $50.00 in the box to help, I wish I could give more.

David DeTinne

--=====_96645584441=_-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 13: 8:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from post.mail.nl.demon.net (post-10.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 510F537BDC4; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:08:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wkb@freebie.demon.nl) Received: from [212.238.54.101] (helo=freebie.demon.nl) by post.mail.nl.demon.net with smtp (Exim 3.14 #2) id 13P9UP-0004sT-00; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 20:08:41 +0000 Received: (from wkb@localhost) by freebie.demon.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA01318; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:08:40 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wkb) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:08:40 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte To: David DeTinne Cc: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: your mail Message-ID: <20000816220840.H1056@freebie.demon.nl> References: <200008161257240540.004B7EAE@web4.allunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <200008161257240540.004B7EAE@web4.allunix.com>; from david@allunix.com on Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:57:24PM -0700 X-OS: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE X-PGP: finger wilko@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:57:24PM -0700, David DeTinne wrote: > Is the sparc port really dead? > > I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users standpoint FreeBSD is the best > (my opinion) > > If a developer needs a machine I will donate my IPX to get it going. AFAIK the project SPARC port of FreeBSD was destined for UltraSPARCs only. But that is about all I have ever heard/seen about it. -- Wilko Bulte wilko@freebsd.org Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 13:52:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39DB037B88D; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:52:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA75428; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:51:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: "David DeTinne" Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:57:24 PDT." <200008161257240540.004B7EAE@web4.allunix.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:51:44 -0700 Message-ID: <75425.966459104@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Is the sparc port really dead? I'm not sure I'd say it was dead so much as lying deeply asleep, waiting for a kiss from a prince of programming. :-) In short, there are lots of SPARCs out there and lots of programmers out there. What we need now is one or more of those programmers to actually start the ball rolling and convince more hacking talent to join in, just as it happened with the Alpha port. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 13:54:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083B637B577; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:54:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from beppo.feral.com (beppo [192.67.166.79]) by feral.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA02727; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:54:10 -0700 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:54:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: David DeTinne , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <75425.966459104@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Jordan- what's the status of the BSDi merge && a sparc port? I sort of thought that something that works would then "just arrive"? On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > Is the sparc port really dead? > > I'm not sure I'd say it was dead so much as lying deeply asleep, > waiting for a kiss from a prince of programming. :-) > > In short, there are lots of SPARCs out there and lots of programmers > out there. What we need now is one or more of those programmers to > actually start the ball rolling and convince more hacking talent to > join in, just as it happened with the Alpha port. > > - Jordan > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 13:58:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A95437B577; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:58:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA75502; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:58:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , David DeTinne , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:54:10 PDT." Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:58:08 -0700 Message-ID: <75499.966459488@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Jordan- what's the status of the BSDi merge && a sparc port? I sort of though t > that something that works would then "just arrive"? You mean the BSD/OS merge? Well, people have taken on the SMPng bits and that project appears to be progressing nicely. Nobody has taken on the SPARC bits, however, and I can only point out that lack of reference SPARC bits from another BSD implementation has never been the problem here. We've had both NetBSD and OpenBSD to serve that purpose for a long time but nobody who actually wanted to do the work step forward and do it. You've been around this biz long enough to know that bits never "just arrive", they have to be carried in on a stretcher and sent straight to triage. :) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 14:31:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB79E37BED7; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:31:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from beppo.feral.com (beppo [192.67.166.79]) by feral.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA02863; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:30:59 -0700 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:30:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: David DeTinne , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <75499.966459488@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Jordan- what's the status of the BSDi merge && a sparc port? I sort of though > t > > that something that works would then "just arrive"? > > You mean the BSD/OS merge? Well, people have taken on the SMPng bits > and that project appears to be progressing nicely. Nobody has taken > on the SPARC bits, however, and I can only point out that lack of > reference SPARC bits from another BSD implementation has never been > the problem here. We've had both NetBSD and OpenBSD to serve that > purpose for a long time but nobody who actually wanted to do the work > step forward and do it. You've been around this biz long enough to > know that bits never "just arrive", they have to be carried in on a > stretcher and sent straight to triage. :) Well, since the SMP stuff seemed to have been assigned/self-assigned, I assumed that somebody else, like maybe Chris, would become the stretcher bearer to come in and bless FreeBSD with. I wasn't saying "arrived" as in "out of the ether comes protons...". I was saying arrived as in the majordomo tinkling a bell and announcing, "The countess BSDi/SPARC, with retinue" -matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 15:32: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from mail2.aracnet.com (mail2.aracnet.com [216.99.193.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527DC37B593; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:31:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hamellr@aracnet.com) Received: from shell1.aracnet.com (shell1.aracnet.com [216.99.193.21]) by mail2.aracnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19370; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:31:44 -0700 Received: by shell1.aracnet.com (8.9.3) id PAA16308; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:31:41 -0700 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 15:31:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Rick Hamell To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: David DeTinne , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <75425.966459104@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > In short, there are lots of SPARCs out there and lots of programmers > out there. What we need now is one or more of those programmers to > actually start the ball rolling and convince more hacking talent to > join in, just as it happened with the Alpha port. And there are people like me who don't know enough to really program anything, but are willing to test what we can. When it gets here... :) Rick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 18: 6:29 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from mail.visi.com (baal.visi.com [209.98.98.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F74637B846 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 18:06:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mtempel@mail.visi.com) Received: from dirac (dirac.fofx.org [209.98.236.73]) by mail.visi.com (8.8.8/8.7.5) with SMTP id UAA23282 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 20:06:24 -0500 (CDT) Posted-Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 20:06:24 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <005c01c007e7$38cc3240$49ec62d1@dirac> From: "Mark Tempel" To: References: <200008161257240540.004B7EAE@web4.allunix.com> <20000816220840.H1056@freebie.demon.nl> Subject: Re: your mail Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 20:05:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4131.1600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4131.1600 Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:57:24PM -0700, David DeTinne wrote: > > Is the sparc port really dead? > > > > I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users standpoint FreeBSD is the best > > (my opinion) > > > > If a developer needs a machine I will donate my IPX to get it going. > > AFAIK the project SPARC port of FreeBSD was destined for UltraSPARCs only. > But that is about all I have ever heard/seen about it. I have never heard a definitive answer regarding which architecture FreeBSD Sparc will support. I would guess that it will run on Sparc 4 machines if the developers who port it have sparc 4 machines. If the developers get access to UltraSPARC machines, then it will run there... I can say that I only have a SS20 to try to port this OS with so what ever I can accomplish will run on Sparc 4m architecture machines... A few months ago I decided to try to port over the loader from FreeBSD 4.x to Sparc. However I also decided to get married... Both the loader and the wedding are alot harder and more time consuming than I had expected... As soon as I get done with my thank you notes *sigh* I will be working on porting the loader again... Mark Tempel To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 18:16:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from mail.theinternet.com.au (zeus.theinternet.com.au [203.34.176.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83AF337BD37 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 18:16:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from akm@mail.theinternet.com.au) Received: (from akm@localhost) by mail.theinternet.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA48385; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 11:13:30 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from akm) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 11:13:30 +1000 From: Andrew Kenneth Milton To: Mark Tempel Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail Message-ID: <20000817111330.P14488@zeus.theinternet.com.au> References: <200008161257240540.004B7EAE@web4.allunix.com> <20000816220840.H1056@freebie.demon.nl> <005c01c007e7$38cc3240$49ec62d1@dirac> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <005c01c007e7$38cc3240$49ec62d1@dirac>; from Mark Tempel on Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:05:23PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org +-------[ Mark Tempel ]---------------------- | | As soon as I get done with my thank you notes *sigh* I will be working on | porting the loader again... You mean to say a Sparc-Port wasn't on the list of gifts at your registry? :-) -- Totally Holistic Enterprises Internet| P:+61 7 3870 0066 | Andrew Milton The Internet (Aust) Pty Ltd | F:+61 7 3870 4477 | ACN: 082 081 472 ABN: 83 082 081 472 | M:+61 416 022 411 | Carpe Daemon PO Box 837 Indooroopilly QLD 4068 |akm@theinternet.com.au| To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Aug 16 21: 7: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from band1.bandwidth.net (cheyenne4.sisna.com [208.135.42.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 842C937B754 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:07:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eno@pdxconnect.com) Received: from tty1A5.bandwidth.net by band1.bandwidth.net with SMTP (5.65/1.2-eef) id AA03843; Wed, 16 Aug 00 21:07:01 -0700 Message-Id: <399B64FC.E7D8A1F2@pdxconnect.com> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 21:07:24 -0700 From: Evan Oulashin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en Mime-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Subject: am I missing something? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Pardon my possible ignorance here, but isn't there some truth to the concept that since the BSDi merger, there will be lots of code floating here and there, merging here and there, such that the essence of a sparc version would just evolve out of all of that? It would seem that it might be to BSDi's advantage to perhaps act as some sort of guiding force/supplier of sorts to ensure that the various BSDs have whatever they need to pull together and produce more of the same great code that we've all come to know and love. To anyone who's been on the list more than a couple of months it should be quite clear that a> there's NO effort currently going into the sparc port, and b> there's NO one out there willing to pick up the banner and run with it. Maybe this is really saying, hey, if I want BSD on Sparc, I'll just run Open or Net. Or, maybe this says, hey, Solaris just does such a bang up job (right) that why would we spend the time... What might happen, for instance, if there were to evolve a base distribution which contained all of what's good in Free, Net, and Open, as well as BSD, and then at install time/compile time, whatever, the user then merely selected those attributes from whatever system that would work well for him? I realize this is some gross oversimplification of tons of code here, but I must admit, I've always sort of marveled at the fact that the 4 factions just sort of continue on their own paths rather than joining forces and perhaps producing the sum of all good... Just idle ramblings... hope this hasn't taken up anyone's time to any extent... Comments welcome though. eno To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Thu Aug 17 1:44:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from haldjas.folklore.ee (Haldjas.folklore.ee [193.40.6.121]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA66437B50B for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 01:44:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee) Received: from localhost (narvi@localhost) by haldjas.folklore.ee (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA27012; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:44:01 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:44:01 +0200 (EET) From: Narvi To: Evan Oulashin Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: am I missing something? In-Reply-To: <399B64FC.E7D8A1F2@pdxconnect.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Evan Oulashin wrote: [snip - code like manna falling down from heaven and getting itself self-integrated] > > To anyone who's been on the list more than a couple of months it should > be quite clear that a> there's NO effort currently going into the sparc > port, and b> there's NO one out there willing to pick up the banner and > run with it. Maybe this is really saying, hey, if I want BSD on Sparc, > I'll just run Open or Net. Or, maybe this says, hey, Solaris just does > such a bang up job (right) that why would we spend the time... > It just happens that the following things have not came together into one person yet: * time * desire to work on freebsd-sparc * ability to work on the level required to kickstart it * hardware > > What might happen, for instance, if there were to evolve a base > distribution which contained all of what's good in Free, Net, and Open, > as well as BSD, and then at install time/compile time, whatever, the > user then merely selected those attributes from whatever system that > would work well for him? I realize this is some gross > oversimplification of tons of code here, but I must admit, I've always > sort of marveled at the fact that the 4 factions just sort of continue > on their own paths rather than joining forces and perhaps producing the > sum of all good... > The great unified BSD. Not really worth spending time on, definately not on this list > > eno > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Thu Aug 17 7:35:49 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from alpha.netaccess.on.ca (alpha.netaccess.on.ca [199.243.225.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC60E37B647; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:35:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from schizo.controlq.com (dial164.nas.net [207.176.144.164]) by alpha.netaccess.on.ca (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA24472; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:35:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:35:33 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert S. Sciuk" Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: <20000816220840.H1056@freebie.demon.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Wilko Bulte wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:57:24PM -0700, David DeTinne wrote: > > Is the sparc port really dead? > > > > I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users standpoint FreeBSD is the best > > (my opinion) > > To play devil's advocate, briefly ... Perhaps we should examine just why FreeBSD is `best'. As I understand it, the limited architectures supported has maximized talent and effort into making the intel platform work REALLY well, added stability, content, performance and functionality. If FreeBSD migrates to additional architectures, how much of its `goodness' will translate directly to other platforms?? Moreover, how much future effort and talent will be diverted into porting efforts rather than single platform perfection?? One must always trade off optimal platform performance for the sake of portability! I'd love FreeBSD on Sparc, and PA-RISC for that matter -- just not at the expense of the single best Intel based OS I've yet to encounter!!! I am happy with OpenBSD and NetBSD (thought neither one is on PA-RISC yet). I look at the scalability efforts going on in the FreeBSD kernel as a case in point, removing the GBL and threading and wonder just how much of that will translate directly to other architectures?? Would this effort have started at all if the talented individuals working on it were busy porting to platform X?? No doubt at the end of this project, FreeBSD on Intel should beat the living pants off of NT and Linux on the scability side of the equation. Just food for thought. Cheers, Rob. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Thu Aug 17 10:27:33 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D55D737B6AC; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA78296; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:26:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , David DeTinne , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:30:59 PDT." Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:26:40 -0700 Message-ID: <78293.966533200@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Well, since the SMP stuff seemed to have been assigned/self-assigned, I > assumed that somebody else, like maybe Chris, would become the stretcher > bearer to come in and bless FreeBSD with. Ah. Well, there's sadly a limit to the number of such projects BSDi can be convinced into funding and for the time being, at least, SMPng is the limit. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Thu Aug 17 10:55:59 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from mail.ptd.net (mail2.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D23C537B6D8 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:55:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 6436 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2000 17:55:45 -0000 Received: from du151.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) (204.186.33.151) by mail.ptd.net with SMTP; 17 Aug 2000 17:55:45 -0000 Message-ID: <399C270A.DCADA0DF@mail.ptd.net> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:55:22 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 4.0-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Robert S. Sciuk" Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Robert S. Sciuk" wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:57:24PM -0700, David DeTinne wrote: > > > Is the sparc port really dead? > > > > > > I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users standpoint FreeBSD is the best > > > (my opinion) > > > > > To play devil's advocate, briefly ... > > Perhaps we should examine just why FreeBSD is `best'. As I understand it, > the limited architectures supported has maximized talent and effort into > making the intel platform work REALLY well, added stability, content, > performance and functionality. > > If FreeBSD migrates to additional architectures, how much of its > `goodness' will translate directly to other platforms?? Moreover, how > much future effort and talent will be diverted into porting efforts rather > than single platform perfection?? One must always trade off optimal > platform performance for the sake of portability! > > I'd love FreeBSD on Sparc, and PA-RISC for that matter -- just not at the > expense of the single best Intel based OS I've yet to encounter!!! I am > happy with OpenBSD and NetBSD (thought neither one is on PA-RISC yet). > > I look at the scalability efforts going on in the FreeBSD kernel as a case > in point, removing the GBL and threading and wonder just how much of that > will translate directly to other architectures?? Would this effort have > started at all if the talented individuals working on it were busy porting > to platform X?? No doubt at the end of this project, FreeBSD on Intel > should beat the living pants off of NT and Linux on the scability side of > the equation. > > Just food for thought. On the other hand, Unix has survived as long as it has because it has been portable across platforms. Platforms come and go, and an operating system tied to a single platform will go when that platform goes. IA-32 will not last forever. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Thu Aug 17 18:53:44 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.129.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D063B37BC9E; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:51:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5B06E3ED5; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA07842; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:29:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr06.primenet.com(206.165.6.206) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAaFaOgp; Thu Aug 17 13:29:00 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA19336; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:30:41 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200008172030.NAA19336@usr06.primenet.com> Subject: Re: your mail To: rob@controlq.com (Robert S. Sciuk) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:30:41 +0000 (GMT) Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Robert S. Sciuk" at Aug 17, 2000 10:35:33 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:57:24PM -0700, David DeTinne wrote: > > > Is the sparc port really dead? > > > > > > I have tried the other BSD's and from an average users > > > standpoint FreeBSD is the best (my opinion) > > To play devil's advocate, briefly ... > > Perhaps we should examine just why FreeBSD is `best'. As I understand it, > the limited architectures supported has maximized talent and effort into > making the intel platform work REALLY well, added stability, content, > performance and functionality. > > If FreeBSD migrates to additional architectures, how much of its > `goodness' will translate directly to other platforms?? Moreover, how > much future effort and talent will be diverted into porting efforts rather > than single platform perfection?? One must always trade off optimal > platform performance for the sake of portability! Doing a port to another architecture is pretty trivial. I had a Motorolla PowerStack system running a PPC port of FreeBSD up to single user mode back in 1997. It took less than two months, and the biggest obstacle was waiting for Motorolla to ship the PPCBug SDK and documentation to me (I had to pay for it twice, since they screwed up the first shipment). The biggest obstacle, historically, has been isolating the architecture dependent bits in the FreeBSD source tree. This has become much less of a problem, since the Alpha port has become mainstreamed, though there are still some pieces that depend on "alpha" vs. "!alpha", instad of on "ARCH", and there are not C versions of everything that could be C instead of assembly code. Going from another BSD to FreeBSD self-hosted on SPARC has got to be a damn sight easier than going from AIX to FreeBSD self-hosted on a PPC platform with PReP but not CHiRP support and a non-standard ias opposed to OpenBoot boot monitor. > I'd love FreeBSD on Sparc, and PA-RISC for that matter -- just not at the > expense of the single best Intel based OS I've yet to encounter!!! I am > happy with OpenBSD and NetBSD (thought neither one is on PA-RISC yet). PA-RISC is terribly dead, but since the MACH port and the OSKit work at the University of Utah, if you happened to have one of these things lying around, you could do the work, probably in a pretty short time frame, if you started with OSKit or another UNIX-like system as the base. The biggest barrier to PA-RISC is hardware documentation. > I look at the scalability efforts going on in the FreeBSD kernel as a case > in point, removing the GBL and threading and wonder just how much of that > will translate directly to other architectures?? A lot of it. > Would this effort have started at all if the talented individuals > working on it were busy porting to platform X?? Probably not; but you are incorrectly assuming that if work was expended on one, that it would not be expended on the other, since you appear to be assuming that it's the same people who would be doing the work. I rather seriously doubt that the set of SPARC-knowledgable people and the set of Intel MPSpec and APIC knowledgable people has a very large intersection. I could probably count the people who were _ever_ involved with FreeBSD that had this combination on both hands, with fingers left over. > No doubt at the end of this project, FreeBSD on Intel should beat > the living pants off of NT and Linux on the scability side of the > equation. Beating Linux performance is rather trivial. I have rather grave concerns about some of the technical approaches being pursued in this attempt, particularly as concerns use of kernel threads to dumb-down state machines to the point that linear thinkers can understand them. The SMP scaling strategy currently looks to be limited in value over 4 processors, which is supposedly an Intel limitation, but which others (e.g. Sequent) have demonstrated is really a limitation of the approach used to solve the problem. I actually rather doubt that it will beat NT performance, since free software projects appear to have a Roche limit over a certain level of complexity that prevents them from doing some things. It has been a tendancy of many commercial companies, fearing open source, to drive increasing complexity into IETF standards (IMO, without technical necessity) in order to protect their shrinking domain without having to actually confront the other commercial companies eating into their market. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Thu Aug 17 20:21:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from berserker.bsdi.com (berserker.twistedbit.com [199.79.183.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7024637B43E; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:21:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from berserker.bsdi.com (cp@LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by berserker.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA19373; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:21:09 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200008180321.VAA19373@berserker.bsdi.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: rob@controlq.com (Robert S. Sciuk), freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: your mail From: Chuck Paterson Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:21:09 -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At the macro architectural level the approach being taken is not that unlike Solaris which has been shown to run acceptability with something greater than 4 processors. It is also true that until we get it up and stable and can work on those areas, such as the single scheduling lock, it is not going to scale above a smallish number of processors. It simply is not practical to do everything at once, debugging the simplified scheme is tough enough. Chuck } }I have rather grave concerns about some of the technical }approaches being pursued in this attempt, particularly as }concerns use of kernel threads to dumb-down state machines }to the point that linear thinkers can understand them. The }SMP scaling strategy currently looks to be limited in value }over 4 processors, which is supposedly an Intel limitation, }but which others (e.g. Sequent) have demonstrated is really }a limitation of the approach used to solve the problem. } }I actually rather doubt that it will beat NT performance, since }free software projects appear to have a Roche limit over a certain }level of complexity that prevents them from doing some things. It }has been a tendancy of many commercial companies, fearing open }source, to drive increasing complexity into IETF standards (IMO, }without technical necessity) in order to protect their shrinking }domain without having to actually confront the other commercial }companies eating into their market. } } } Terry Lambert } terry@lambert.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Fri Aug 18 14: 5:44 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from hotmail.com (f124.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.149.124]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD8437B422; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:05:41 -0700 Received: from 146.186.228.165 by lw4fd.law4.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 GMT X-Originating-IP: [146.186.228.165] From: "Harris Kauffman" To: arch@freebsd.org, sparc@freebsd.org Subject: O/S porting docs? Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 21:05:41 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Aug 2000 21:05:41.0825 (UTC) FILETIME=[114AA310:01C00958] Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The recent thread on the [somewhat-dead]sparc port has got me thinking. I would like to contribute, on a code level, to such a port. However I don't have the technical background. I am a computer science student, and my programming talents currently run more along the lines of application programming. So what I would like are pointers to * mailing lists * articles * books * websites or whatever other information you think would help me along the road to being able to contribute. I realize this is a rather long term learning process.. but I have plenty of free time. I also realize by the time I learn anything useful the port to sparc might be done.. but better late then never. Besides, there will always be more ports to work on... TIA, Harris ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Sat Aug 19 12:15:34 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7BFD37B422; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 12:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id VAA55942; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 21:15:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA43208; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 21:15:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 21:15:26 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: "Robert S. Sciuk" Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > If FreeBSD migrates to additional architectures, how much of its > `goodness' will translate directly to other platforms?? Moreover, how > much future effort and talent will be diverted into porting efforts rather > than single platform perfection?? One must always trade off optimal > platform performance for the sake of portability! The issue here is also how many platforms, and what kind, you port to. Porting to the UltraSPARC is different from trying to backport to a 6502 with a ram extender. > I'd love FreeBSD on Sparc, and PA-RISC for that matter -- just not at the > expense of the single best Intel based OS I've yet to encounter!!! I am > happy with OpenBSD and NetBSD (thought neither one is on PA-RISC yet). Actually, I'd not mind regression on the Intel, if we gain more "high-end" platforms from it; such as UltraSPARC and Cray. > I look at the scalability efforts going on in the FreeBSD kernel as a case > in point, removing the GBL and threading and wonder just how much of that > will translate directly to other architectures?? Would this effort have SMPng work will, if I understand it correctly, benefit all architectures when committed to the tree. > started at all if the talented individuals working on it were busy porting > to platform X?? No doubt at the end of this project, FreeBSD on Intel Different individuals have different areas of competence. > should beat the living pants off of NT and Linux on the scability side of > the equation. And Linux would've won on portability. The Intel platform would seem to be dying, and we'd do well to port to better platforms. Our alpha code is ages cleaner than the x86 code, at least. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Sat Aug 19 12:39:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.osd.bsdi.com (zippy.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EDFF37B43F; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 12:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.osd.bsdi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA87666; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 12:38:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com) To: Marius Bendiksen Cc: "Robert S. Sciuk" , freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 19 Aug 2000 21:15:26 +0200." Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 12:38:27 -0700 Message-ID: <87663.966713907@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > The Intel platform would seem to be dying, and we'd do well to port to > better platforms. Our alpha code is ages cleaner than the x86 code, at > least. Heh. I'm not sure I'd share your conclusion that "The Intel platform is dying" given the extreme growth and increased competition I've been seeing in that marketplace; there are even x86 compatible chips which are beginning to compete with the StrongARM in terms of price and power consumption, and let's not forget our friends at Transmeta driving the next generation of flat panel "Internet computing slates". Nonetheless, there's been a lot of discussion about porting FreeBSD to other architectures lately and everyone seems to come around to the same question: "What can I do?" Porting to a new architecture is a pretty straight-forward process which involves getting gcc and the toolchain to support the new architecture (David O'Brien has imported partial support for a number of non-x86 architectures already so talk to him if you want to coordinate your efforts) so you can actually compile things. Then one should go after locore.s and friends and start researching some of the first necessary device drivers, those usually including the system console and serial port drivers, so that you can get to the all-important single user shell prompt milestone. At that point, other people will tend to see your efforts as being "real" enough to get seriously involved in rounding out the device driver support and work on the next milestone, which is multi-user mode. :) If you're truly serious about seeing FreeBSD on a new architecture, that's what needs to happen. Volunteering to be a tester or rock polisher is kinda gratuitous until one or more people are already engaged in the process of tackling the toolchain and kernel bootstrap code. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Sat Aug 19 15: 6:12 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from post.mail.nl.demon.net (post-10.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E66B37B42C; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 15:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [212.238.54.101] (helo=freebie.demon.nl) by post.mail.nl.demon.net with smtp (Exim 3.14 #2) id 13QGkc-0000F4-00; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:06:03 +0000 Received: (from wkb@localhost) by freebie.demon.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA00621; Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:06:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wkb) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 00:06:04 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Marius Bendiksen , "Robert S. Sciuk" , freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: your mail Message-ID: <20000820000603.A551@freebie.demon.nl> References: <87663.966713907@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <87663.966713907@localhost>; from jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com on Sat, Aug 19, 2000 at 12:38:27PM -0700 X-OS: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE X-PGP: finger wilko@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Aug 19, 2000 at 12:38:27PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > The Intel platform would seem to be dying, and we'd do well to port to > > better platforms. Our alpha code is ages cleaner than the x86 code, at > > least. But not nearly as optimised IMO. Or well tested. Getting a truly good compiler for alpha is just one of these things (Linux has the edge here with the CPQ compiler bits). > Heh. I'm not sure I'd share your conclusion that "The Intel platform > is dying" given the extreme growth and increased competition I've been > seeing in that marketplace; there are even x86 compatible chips which > are beginning to compete with the StrongARM in terms of price and > power consumption, and let's not forget our friends at Transmeta > driving the next generation of flat panel "Internet computing slates". -- Wilko Bulte wilko@freebsd.org Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-sparc Sat Aug 19 20: 3:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from darren2.lnk.telstra.net (darren2.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.53.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60E0C37B42C; Sat, 19 Aug 2000 20:03:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by darren2.lnk.telstra.net (8.9.1/8.8.7) id DAA28108; Sun, 20 Aug 2000 03:03:45 GMT From: Darren Reed Message-Id: <200008200303.NAA06295@avalon.reed.wattle.id.au> Subject: Integration of Net/OpenBSD code (was Re: your mail) To: jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 13:03:12 +1000 (EST) Cc: mjacob@feral.com, freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL37 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Jordan- what's the status of the BSDi merge && a sparc port? I sort of > > thought that something that works would then "just arrive"? > > You mean the BSD/OS merge? Well, people have taken on the SMPng bits > and that project appears to be progressing nicely. Nobody has taken > on the SPARC bits, however, and I can only point out that lack of > reference SPARC bits from another BSD implementation has never been > the problem here. We've had both NetBSD and OpenBSD to serve that > purpose for a long time but nobody who actually wanted to do the work > step forward and do it. You've been around this biz long enough to > know that bits never "just arrive", they have to be carried in on a > stretcher and sent straight to triage. :) Jordan, I think the problem (now) is that the different in-kernel architectural changes by the BSD groups have created, essentially, code that is hard to just "copy". The time it is taking for cardbus to arrive in FreeBSD, when it is already available in NetBSD, is a good example of this. (This is/was Warner Losh's baby, or am I confused ?) I'm *really* disappointed that FreeBSD doesn't (yet ?) support cardbus in 4.x (-current?) :-( There is also the problem of increasing the already cumbersome animosity when one imports code from the other with little or no credit, etc, which I think sometimes leads to the above problem not being seen as a "problem" as it makes that step somewhat harder. (I'm not pointing fingers here, just merely calling it as I see it.) In short, what was able to be done with alpha for FreeBSD may not be as easy for sparc64, if at all possible. Given noises made earlier, I'm surprised there has not been any effort to merge, at least, the BSD/OS work... Darren --- NetBSD/sparc64 - self-hosting for the new millennium! Port Home page: - http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/sparc64/ Complete 64bit snapshots: - ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/arch/sparc64/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message