Subject: Re: Questions about features of NetBSD: remark
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Carsten Hammer <chammer@phyd2hammer.uni-bielefeld.de>
List: current-users
Date: 04/15/1995 11:14:42
>
>
> > This maybe a solution to the cdrom boot problem, not?
>
> I don't see how you expect to be able to boot off the same CD-ROM on
> multiple architectures, so I'm not sure there's any real reason to
> even be discussing cdfs. If all boot proms supported ISO-9660
> directly, we'd be in business, but I'm pretty sure that that's not the
> case.
you are right. But in the case we get the system booting
with the correct kernel we could easily start a script or whatever
is needed to give different platforms different hostnames
and from then on use a common binary tree (with cdf).
Of course fat bins are more elegant in this case..
>
> > > 4. improved sup with diff downloading for little changes
> > no opinions
>
> I think this is a good idea in principle, but there are a lot of
> improvements I'd make to sup before this one. Also, in order for sup
> to usefully generate diffs, it would have to learn to talk to CVS, and
> would have to keep revision control information on the sup client
> machine. So what you're describing could be more of a complete
> rewrite.
for me as someone who sups via ppp its an important point to
reduce overhead.
>
> > > 5. merging of xserver sources for all platforms, integration in
> > > netbsd source tree
> > no opinions
>
> I wouldn't say that. I think it's a bad idea for NetBSD to try to
> maintain a source tree and keep it in sync with MIT. I used to work
> at NCD, and we did exactly that. It was a hell of a lot of work, and
> we didn't really succeed (in some cases we didn't want to).
>
> The XFree86 Consortium is doing a pretty good job on this front, and
> I'm not sure why we'd want to change that.
This all sounds nice but in fact MIT only supports Xservers for certain
platforms. There most probably never will be a Amiga,Atari,...
support. But today the X-stuff is very important for an OS and
so the only way to hold netbsd "complete" is support the
X-stuff to be precise the Xserver. More and more X availability
gets a central question imho.
thanks,
ciao
Carsten