Subject: Re: MacLinux
To: None <, wisej@acf4.NYU.EDU>
From: Peter Brewer <>
List: macbsd-general
Date: 12/21/1994 23:33:11
>There is also the new-born Patmos camp.  On a scale from most to 
>least complete, they would be:

>        MacLinux 
>        Patmos 
>        MacMiNT 
>        MacBSD   
>        MachTen   
>        A/UX    

Hmmm.. I don't think so. Each has weaknesses and strengths. A/UX is the
most complete and trouble free setup while MacLinux is vaporware and
would be based on Minix. AND there is the original Minix for the Mac. :-)

A/UX has a complete Mac environment and has been tested with X11R6. It's
kernel accesses a sophisticated 'Mac emulator' to allow one to execute
Mac programs and even create Unix/Mac hybrids. It is probably System V
between R2 and R3 with Berkeley extensions down to the kernel level. As
Mssr. Borman found out when he tried to use Wollongong TCP/IP with his
Cray System V kernel it doesn't pay to do without Berkeley. So like 
of course Apple added the latest and greatest TCP/IP from Berkeley that
they had access to at the time. Extensions are all BSD 4.3.  A/UX may
seem slow to some and if it does I would not recommend moving up to
Copland or System 8 which seems to be a carbon copy of the current A/UX
architecture. E.G. the process containing the 'Mac emulator' is what
makes it all slow... shouldn't wonder. It is however a very complete
albeit somewhat dated UNIX.

MachTen is BSD4.3 again but this time with a twist. It instead creates a
Mac process within which is a 'UNIX emulator'. It supports X and comes
with Motif ... but only 1.1.4 not the current version 1.2. I'm not
sure whether X11R6 has been ported yet. It too is obviously going to
be even slower. This is a less complete UNIX given the lack of kernel
support mechanisms like memory protection and peremptive multitasking.
HOWEVER, it could become very close to A/UX by taking advantage of
System 8's A/UX kernel. Now Mach Ten could have preemptive multitasking
processes and memory protection without affecting Macintosh compatibility!
UNIX kernel features could be attached without compromising Mac features.
Performance should be alot better as well. One flaw is the BSD 4.3 instead
of 4.4. Brad has his work cut out.

MacBSD is based on BSD4.4, much better technology on the Unix side! However,
alot stuff still has to be done. There is no X based Mac emulator ala' MAS or
the more familiar MAE. Driver support in the kernel is not yet complete. 
The sign reads: Under Construction.

As to the others I say pick 'em.

So for Unix completeness:

                 1. A/UX
                 2. Mac BSD
                 3. MachTen
                 4. The rest

For Mac support:
                 1. Mach Ten
                 2. A/UX

For Windowing Systems support:

                1. A/UX
                2. Mach Ten

-- Peter