Tech Insider					   Technology and Trends


			   USENET Archives


Electronic mail:			      WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com		         http://tech-insider.org/

Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!clyde.concordia.ca!altitude!
Nyongwa.CAM.ORG!illusion!UUCP.Gateway
From: Elie.Lab...@f420.n514.z17.illusion.tpg.org (Elie Labeca)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <726191386.AA03683@illusion.tpg.org>
Date: 3 Jan 93 01:11:00 GMT
Sender: UUCP.Gate...@illusion.tpg.org
Lines: 9

Hello,

 I'm looking for the 386 BSD, I believe it is free. How can I get it?
I would also like to know how much place does it takes on a hard disk,
how many diskettes, where to get it. And more specifications about it.

Thank you very much, I really appreciate. ('ve got tell ya, I love Unix!)

- Elie

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!jvnc.net!newserver.jvnc.net!
newsserver.technet.sg!ntuix!ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg!othman
From: oth...@ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg (othman (EEE/Div 4))
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <1993Jan6.062816.26653@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
Sender: n...@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
References: <726191386.AA03683@illusion.tpg.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 06:28:16 GMT
Lines: 16

Elie Labeca (Elie.Lab...@f420.n514.z17.illusion.tpg.org) wrote:
: Hello,
: 
:  I'm looking for the 386 BSD, I believe it is free. How can I get it?
: I would also like to know how much place does it takes on a hard disk,
: how many diskettes, where to get it. And more specifications about it.
agate.berkeley.edu

It is a fully networking OS.
It has almost everything that Linux has except dos emulator and improved
387 emulator.

20Mbyte for (networking)binaries only
40Mbyte with X
50Mbyte with Xview
: 

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!randall
From: Jeff-Rand...@uiuc.edu (Jeff Randall)
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <C0F8L6.AB4@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
X-Aka: Upholder
Sender: rand...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jeff Randall)
Reply-To: Jeff-Rand...@uiuc.edu (Jeff Randall)
Organization: The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC)
References: <726191386.AA03683@illusion.tpg.org> <1993Jan6.062816.26653@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 07:24:28 GMT
Lines: 19

oth...@ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg (othman (EEE/Div 4)) writes:

>It is a fully networking OS.
>It has almost everything that Linux has except dos emulator and improved
>387 emulator.

>20Mbyte for (networking)binaries only
>40Mbyte with X
>50Mbyte with Xview


Not to start a flame war, but does 386BSD now have shared libs as well?
Those numbers seem to be more what a linux system ends up using.. and I've
been told by local 386BSD users that their systems are much larger than
a linux system (due to the lack of shared libs).
-- 
Jeff-Rand...@uiuc.edu (ASCII mail)           THIS IS _NOT_ CCSO'S OPINION!!!
jar42...@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu (NeXT mail)      If It were, It would've had a
wi.6...@n7kbt.rain.com (anon)                  more important name on it. =)

Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!uknet!mcsun!news.funet.fi!hydra!klaava!lukka
From: lu...@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tuomas J Lukka)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <1993Jan6.085905.25749@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Date: 6 Jan 93 08:59:05 GMT
References: <726191386.AA03683@illusion.tpg.org> 
<1993Jan6.062816.26653@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> <C0F8L6.AB4@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 51

In article <C0F8L6....@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> Jeff-Rand...@uiuc.edu (Jeff Randall) writes:
>oth...@ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg (othman (EEE/Div 4)) writes:
>
>>It is a fully networking OS.
>>It has almost everything that Linux has except dos emulator and improved
>>387 emulator.

EXCEPT for one feature I consider pretty good:
when you get the distribution, there's source for everything
right there. If you get Linux, you have to hunt all over the place
for the source if you want it. 

Also, 386BSD har ref.tfs.com, a central source tree, which I've talked
about here.

BUT there are bad sides to it, too: the distributions are much rarer,
we're waiting for the next one which  was hinted to arrive sometime
in march or so. In Linux, you get a new kernel with lots of bug
fixes every couple of weeks.

One good thing about 386BSD: it's newsgroup has a LOT less FAQ's asked.

Maybe we should make a file that makes an UNBIASED comparation between
the two as a FAQ... anyone ready to work with me?

>>20Mbyte for (networking)binaries only
>>40Mbyte with X
>>50Mbyte with Xview
>
>Not to start a flame war, but does 386BSD now have shared libs as well?
>Those numbers seem to be more what a linux system ends up using.. and I've
>been told by local 386BSD users that their systems are much larger than
>a linux system (due to the lack of shared libs).

No, not yet. They're in the works, by a mailing list on ref.tfs.com,
386bsd-sharedlibs. The implementation is going to be rather high-tech
(non-kludged). The current linux shared libraries do their job but
are very difficult to generate, have to have fixed addresses in the
address space etc. 

NOTE:
 I'm not trying to start a flame war, however, I think that an
 unbiased mutual FAQ would serve everyone well. The current
 comments about 386BSD in the Linux FAQ are rather dated
 (saying for example, that only vanilla vga is supported by
  it's X etc. Linux and 386BSD both use XFree!)
 Myself, I used 386BSD until christmas, and at christmas
 changed to Linux. But when 386BSD 0.2 comes out,
 I might swap again, who knows. No fanatic feelings.

	TJL

Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!
menudo.uh.edu!wjin
From: w...@cs.uh.edu (W. Woody Jin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Date: 6 Jan 1993 16:57:53 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <1if32hINNghk@menudo.uh.edu>
References: <1993Jan6.062816.26653@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> <C0F8L6.AB4@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> 
<1993Jan6.085905.25749@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodin.cs.uh.edu

In article <1993Jan6.085905.25...@klaava.Helsinki.FI> lu...@klaava.Helsinki.FI 
(Tuomas J Lukka) writes:
>In article <C0F8L6....@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> Jeff-Rand...@uiuc.edu (Jeff Randall) writes:
>>oth...@ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg (othman (EEE/Div 4)) writes:
>>
>>>It is a fully networking OS.
>>>It has almost everything that Linux has except dos emulator and improved
>>>387 emulator.
>
>EXCEPT for one feature I consider pretty good:
>when you get the distribution, there's source for everything
>right there. If you get Linux, you have to hunt all over the place
>for the source if you want it. 

Maybe opposite way.
I always find source codes first, and since I don't want to spend time in
downloading big souces and compiling them,  I have to haunt around the
binaries. If I fail to find them, then I had to get the sources and
compile.

Also, 20M for 386BSD is a bogus.
You must have at least over 40M disk space to install 386BSD.
Xserver for 386BSD is nonsense (to me).  The size was around 10M !


-- 
____   ____  ____ ____________________________________ (___) _________________
|  |   |  |  |  |  W. Woody Jin (w...@cs.uh.edu)       (o o)      Moo.... 
|  |   |  |__|  |  PhD Student. Research Asst.  o=======\ /  I'm  a Cow Lover.
|  |   |        |  Dept. of Computer Science   / |     ||O   My wife  was born
\  |---|  |--|  |  University of Houston      `  ||'---||    in Cow year. Mooo
 \____/|__|  |__| _______________________________^^    ^^_____________________

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!news.funet.fi!hydra!klaava!lukka
From: lu...@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tuomas J Lukka)
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <1993Jan7.191406.25765@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Organization: University of Helsinki
References: <C0F8L6.AB4@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1993Jan6.085905.25749@klaava.Helsinki.FI> 
<1if32hINNghk@menudo.uh.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:14:06 GMT
Lines: 35

>>EXCEPT for one feature I consider pretty good:
>>when you get the distribution, there's source for everything
>>right there. If you get Linux, you have to hunt all over the place

>I always find source codes first, and since I don't want to spend time in
>downloading big souces and compiling them,  I have to haunt around the
>binaries. If I fail to find them, then I had to get the sources and
>compile.

Yes, but how is this relevant?
(And I mean not just source, but also the binaries ARE in the
 distribution)...

>Also, 20M for 386BSD is a bogus.

So? When was that mentioned? 

>You must have at least over 40M disk space to install 386BSD.

If you strip the system down, it can fit in quite narrow spaces...
Anyway, not to dispute about that, BSD is a system with more
disk space requirements. 

BUT...

>Xserver for 386BSD is nonsense (to me).  The size was around 10M !

It's nonsense because it was compiled with symbolic info!
strip X386 
and the size is little over a meg.

Just trying to correct some of the WORST misunderstandings
about the free OS wars...

	TJL

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Path: sparky!uunet!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!
batcomputer!cornell!uw-beaver!uw-coco!nwnexus!danubius
From: danub...@halcyon.com (Joseph R. Pannon)
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <1993Jan7.205455.974@nwnexus.WA.COM>
Sender: s...@nwnexus.WA.COM (System Security Officer)
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
References: <1993Jan6.085905.25749@klaava.Helsinki.FI> <1if32hINNghk@menudo.uh.edu> 
<1993Jan7.191406.25765@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:54:55 GMT
Lines: 13

In article <1993Jan7.191406.25...@klaava.Helsinki.FI> lu...@klaava.Helsinki.FI 
(Tuomas J Lukka) writes:

One of the reasons that originally steered me toward Linux instead of
386BSD was the latter's low version number (0.1) compared to Linux (0.97
at the time).  From what I hear from you guys, that big difference may not be
justified by the features offered by both.  What may be behind Jolitz's
thinking by assigning such an early version number to it?  What does he
think he should have in addition to existing features to qualify for 
version 1.0?

Any ideas?

Joe Pannon

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!ra!tantalus.nrl.navy.mil!eric
From: e...@tantalus.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Youngdale)
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Message-ID: <C0I80x.5uM@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
Sender: use...@ra.nrl.navy.mil
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory
References: <1if32hINNghk@menudo.uh.edu> <1993Jan7.191406.25765@klaava.Helsinki.FI> 
<1993Jan7.205455.974@nwnexus.WA.COM>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 22:05:20 GMT
Lines: 21

In article <1993Jan7.205455....@nwnexus.WA.COM> danub...@halcyon.com 
(Joseph R. Pannon) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.191406.25...@klaava.Helsinki.FI> lu...@klaava.Helsinki.FI 
>(Tuomas J Lukka) writes:
>
>One of the reasons that originally steered me toward Linux instead of
>386BSD was the latter's low version number (0.1) compared to Linux (0.97
>at the time).  From what I hear from you guys, that big difference may not be
>justified by the features offered by both.  What may be behind Jolitz's
>thinking by assigning such an early version number to it?  What does he
>think he should have in addition to existing features to qualify for 
>version 1.0?

	You should ask Bill this question if you want a real answer.  I know
that 1 year ago, linux was at version 0.12 or so, and that the next release
after 0.12 was 0.95 because Linus felt that we were getting closer to a stable
system.   Still, this does not prove anything when comparing linux to 386bsd.

-Eric


-- 
Eric Youngdale

Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!agate!
soda.berkeley.edu!wjolitz
From: wjol...@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 386 BSD
Date: 7 Jan 1993 22:56:21 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
Lines: 98
Message-ID: <1iicelINNa01@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <1if32hINNghk@menudo.uh.edu> <1993Jan7.191406.25765@klaava.Helsinki.FI> 
<1993Jan7.205455.974@nwnexus.WA.COM>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu



In article <1993Jan7.205455....@nwnexus.WA.COM> danub...@halcyon.com (Joseph R. Pannon) 
writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.191406.25...@klaava.Helsinki.FI> lu...@klaava.Helsinki.FI 
>(Tuomas J Lukka) writes:
>
>One of the reasons that originally steered me toward Linux instead of
>386BSD was the latter's low version number (0.1) compared to Linux (0.97
>at the time).  From what I hear from you guys, that big difference may not be
>justified by the features offered by both.  What may be behind Jolitz's
>thinking by assigning such an early version number to it?  What does he
>think he should have in addition to existing features to qualify for 
>version 1.0?
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Joe Pannon

There appears to be some confusion as to how to view 386BSD and
the work associated with it. While BSD goals and procedures are 
well-known among the educational/research sites which have formed
the core support for BSD releases over the last 12 years, they
may not be familiar (rightly) to the broader audiences now reached 
by 386BSD and Linux.

First of all, 386BSD is intended for research and educational purposes.
There are a number of email Special Interest Groups (SIGs) which are
chartered to do not only short-term work (such as enhancements to
drivers, kernel fixes, new drivers and the like) but also examine
some longer-term items, such as unicode implemention, new approaches
to driver design, very high-speed networking, multithreading, and
so forth. These items are slow and tedious to do correctly, but very
rewarding in the long-term. Some of these items which are in-progress
even now will not appear until 1.0 and later, but they must be designed
now, if they are ever to be a part of the future.

For immediate work and test, the /unofficial directory was established
as a base of operation for new work to be tested/used as needed. Hence,
new work to be included in future releases is thoroughly tested before
release engineering by the 386BSD user community first.  In addition,
it is hoped that the call for votes (announced yesterday in news.groups)
will be favorable for the establishment of the 386bsd newsgroups, thus 
channeling people to appropriate people for problems, solutions, new work,
announcements, and so forth, and eliminating the confusion which 
currently and understandably exists.

For example, with respect to shared libraries, just as with Linux, 
there already exist several shared library implementations
which work with 386BSD and are available for test/use. These versions
were announced a month ago in comp.unix.bsd, and are among the many
new items done by the 386BSD user community and made available to any
interested party. 

There is also a research group which is attempting to complete
a more extensive and difficult shared library implementation which
will have serious ramifications on other areas of the system.

Should anyone wish shared libraries now, one can get a version which
works and is quite suitable for most purposes. However, that is
not the end of the matter for 386BSD.

Many of the people who work on 386BSD do so in order to continue the 
tradition of innovation which is the hallmark of BSD over the decade. 
BSD has been the basis for much exciting new work which has been incorporated 
into research and commercial projects, and we hope to encourage 
challanging new ideas to create a future, and not just accommodate the present.

Regarding 386BSD version numbering. All versions of 386BSD follow 
BSD release numbering guidelines. Release 0.0 was the base 386BSD
release. Generally, even numbered releases (i.e. 2.8BSD, 4.0BSD, 4.2BSD
and 386BSD 0.2) incorporate new research or work. As a consequence, 
the release may not be as robust as desired, since establishment of 
new paradigms can often perturb other areas of the system. Odd numbered 
releases (2.9BSD, 4.1BSD, 4.3BSD in it's various incarnations,
and 386BSD 0.1) on the other hand are generally more comprehensive
and fixed versions of the previous releases. However, as more "things"
are added to these releases, the paradigms and implementations tend
to sag under the weight the additional items, thus requiring redesign
or new design of the system.

Each release of 386BSD has a planned area of technology to be addressed.
This will take some time. But we hope that overall the correct 
design decisions will be the basis for the next generation of 
technology as well, and not just another "unix" system. This is
a very ambitious goal, but then again, BSD has always been a
very ambitious (and audacious) program from the beginning.

I hope this clarifies matters. I urge you to vote to establish the
386bsd newsgroups, so we can better meet people's needs and interest.

We are always open to feedback from all users of both 386BSD and Linux,
in the hopes that both groups can encourage creativity and exploration
of new ideas. 

Thank you for your time.

Lynne Greer Jolitz
386BSD Development
ljol...@cardio.ucsf.edu

			   USENET Archives


Notice
******

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or 
research.


Electronic mail:			      WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com		         http://tech-insider.org/