On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 11:47:03AM -0500, Julian C. Dunn wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Don Yuniskis wrote:
> 
> > I think the big difference is that the FBSD camp has really
> > just focused on *one* port (i386) and "the rest be damned"
> > (though there is now an attempt to backfill to other
> > platforms... yeah, right.).  As a result, often hooks
> > exist and implementations rely on x86/PC specific things.
> 
> Just to be fair... it's true that there is a lot of x86 specific stuff in 
> FreeBSD, but significant efforts are being made to port to other 
> platforms. One of my co-workers is Jake Burkholder who's doing the sparc64 
> port, and they've gotten it to boot multiuser already. Of course, there's 
> still a lot of endian-ness problems to work out. But the "attempts to 
> backfill to other platforms" are happening and with some success.

I've heard rumours that the code is largely a port of NetBSD's sparc64
support. While that's fine, since the license says you can do what you
want with it - I do end up wondering why people are investing the time
in doing that, instead of just installing NetBSD.

Any idea what Jake's motivation is/was?

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net -->
Any sufficiently advanced Common Sense will seem like magic... 
					      - me