From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Sep 3 14:07:24 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA25330 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 14:07:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA25325 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 14:07:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA26936; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 15:07:07 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 15:07:07 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199609032107.PAA26936@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams To: Warner Losh Cc: Jake Hamby , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux 96 (my impressions) In-Reply-To: <199609032023.OAA27886@rover.village.org> References: <199609032023.OAA27886@rover.village.org> Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > : Advantage: Linux supports the Amiga filesystem. Pretty cool since I > : happened to have an Amiga-formatted Zip disk lying around! The > > NetBSD and OpenBSD have something called adosfs. I don't know if it > is endian clean or not. I don't know the effort of porting to > FreeBSD, but that might not be a bad place to start if someone was > wanting this bad enough... I *highly* suspect that the Net/OpenBSD code is at least as robust as the code in Linux. At last one of the Linux-Amiga hackers switched over to using NetBSD when it became more feasible, so the NetBSD code is going to be pretty good. (The Amiga hacker I know is *very* capable). Nate