Kim G. S. yhus wrote:

> Then we agree on the usefulnes of unixfs. A pity it is not in "INSTALL".
> 
> I thought that those who bought CDs had so much trouble, that they
> more or less gave up, and that those who use NetBSD arm32 are diehard
> Unix fans who make it work by installing those patches not available on
> the CD, and listening for advice and discussion on this mailist.
> 
> Thats at least a proper description of myself. I have had plenty
> problems installing it, and at work, I singlehandedly manage all the
> Unix machines in Norways national cellular phone company, planning division.
> 
> Well, thats my view, and my honest wish for NetBSD 1.3 arm32, is
> that will be stable, work well, and be installable by people able
> to use it, and friendly enough that they will use it. So far, it
> has been too marginal. It is not there yet.

I'd say it was now very stable (well our 1.3 systems seem to be anyway;
most instabilities these days are due more to the Acorn hardware than
anything else). Most people have installed 1.3 with little trouble. SOme
people may have not gone all the way through, but most people have been
very happy, and we've received a number of nice e-mails saying how much
better the install has been than in the past.

> A more realistic wish, is that it becomes totally self-compilable,
> so that us Unix wizards can contribute to it.

It _is_ completely self compilable---well, everything is apart from the
linker anyway. Certainly a 1.3 kernel and userland compile fully under
1.3, the only slight problem being with the runtime linker for which you
need to get some patches from Mark. What's the specific problem?