From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Dec 14 6: 2:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from entropy.tmok.com (entropy.tmok.com [204.17.163.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D855152B9 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 06:02:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wonko@entropy.tmok.com) Received: (from wonko@localhost) by entropy.tmok.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA98133; Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:03:22 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Hechinger Message-Id: <199912141403.JAA98133@entropy.tmok.com> Subject: Re: VM System In-Reply-To: <199912120307.TAA03062@implode.root.com> from David Greenman at "Dec 11, 1999 7: 7:16 pm" To: dg@root.com Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 09:03:22 -0500 (EST) Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: wonko@entropy.tmok.com X-Useless-Header: why? because i can. X-Organization: The Ministry of Knowledge X-Dreams: an OpenWin that is based on current MIT X11 releases X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG David Greenman drunkenly mumbled... > >looking through the NetBSD Web Site they were advertising some new-fangled > >VM SubSystem. calling it UVM. has anybody reviewed it for consideration in > >rolling it into FreeBSD or has that been done already? if not, what are the > >differences between the current VM system and this UVM (assuming of course > >that someone has looked at the code) > > > >just curious. > > FreeBSD developed a 'new' VM system as well, but it has stronger Mach ties. > We like our VM system, think it works better than anything else out there, and > don't intend to switch to anything else. when i asked this i was assuming the old VM system. but this is just as good. thanks for the help. -brian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message