Subject: Re: Prob with 2.0 build
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.org>
From: Matthias Scheler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/19/2004 08:44:39
In article <40FB90CD.email@example.com>,
> I think I had similar problems last time I tried to cross-compile for
It worked fine for with yesterday's NetBSD-current sources.
> While we're on sparc64 subject, does anyone know why NetBSD
> doesn't support UltraSparc III and UltraSparc IV systems? Is it because
> those systems are too expensive for mortal users ...
Yes, that's why the NetBSD Foundation asked for a donation recently.
> ... so nobody bothers to support them or ...
... so nobody can afford one.
> If I win the lottery which 64 bit system would I be better off with
> Alpha or UltarSparc? Well there is AMD's x86_64 but I guess it sucks
> compared to Alphas or UltraSparcs, ...
Does it? You'll need hell of an Alpha or UltraSPARC system to beat
a quad Opteron. And at least the UltraSPARC II systems which could
do that are not supported by NetBSD at the moment.
> ... I mean it's cursed x86 with 64 bit registers :-) can't be too
> much of an improvement can it?
The biggest problem of the x86 architecture were the small number
of registers. And AMD fixed that in the AMD64 instruction set.
Matthias Scheler http://scheler.de/~matthias/