Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 17:22:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> To: pete@RockyMountain.rahul.net (Pete Delaney) Cc: freebsd-platforms@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD CD-ROM 2.0.5 - Any SPARC Porting Underway? Message-ID: <199508300022.RAA04815@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199508290838.AA11284@RockyMountain.rahul.net> from "Pete Delaney" at Aug 29, 95 01:38:56 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[One list only please!!!!] > > Forwarded: ... > > Re-Subject: Re: FreeBSD CD-ROM 2.0.5 - Any SPARC Porting Underway? > Re-Cc: freebsd-platforms, freebsd-hardware, port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG, > tech-ports@NetBSD.ORG, netbsd-ports@NetBSD.ORG > > > > For sparc, you want FreeBSD's first cousin NetBSD.. > > see www.netbsd.org.. > > I briefly checked it out. It feels dissapointing to see the Free/Net > BSD UNIX community splintered. Haveing been around these groups for 2 years (yes, go read the NetBSD 0.8 release notes, I was a part of that effort) I do not see them as ``splintered''. The fill different needs. NetBSD is much more of a research type of operation. They do not care a whole lot about providing finally polished releases of there code, though there is nothing serious wrong with there releases, they don't see a need to spend major efforts on installation tools, or end user niceness. Nor do they present anything as complete as the FreeBSD ports collection. FreeBSD on the other hand is interested in polished releases with maximal end user comfort. A lot of FreeBSD's technological advancements have come from the research vehicle of NetBSD where to code is developed and proven to be a workable solution. At many levels there is direct cooperation between NetBSD/FreeBSD developers and perhaps it is time for someone to start putting forth a clearer picture of just what has been going on if you take a close look at things. IMHO, the 2 groups are _good_ things to have around. And expect FreeBSD in the future to continue to graft things into its tree from the NetBSD tree as they come to bear fruit. > > > they have more platforms but we have a better install and cover PC > > hardware better.. > > Sounds like the old X11R6 vs XFree disintegration. I see no reason why > they should be different source trees. It is very hard to do ``research'' in a tree that is always been worked on for ``production release'' status. We have a heard enough time now trying to work in a branched cvs tree to for the purpose of allowing developement continue forward while the release team works on spit shinning the code for production release. > > you chose which you want.. > > I saw AT&T break up UNIX into a lot of individual releases and thought > it was stupid. Same for X on the PC and everything else. This doesn't > smell any different. Haveing had my noise buried in it for as long as I have it smells quite different. The future may bring to bear other fruit in the world of Unix source code trees as well, NetBSD/FreeBSD/Linux are not going to have this field for ever. One constant in this arena is that of change, it always happens :-). Yea, AT & T caused a lot of Bell Labs derived source trees to be created, by now they have sold it all off, and the trademark as well as real control over ``Unix'' has been handed to what looks to be a decent organizaion, and just maybe the 1178 spec will make things fly towards at least a unified standard to base your code against. We will, IMHO, never in our live times see a single unix source base. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199508300022.RAA04815>