Subject: Re: current port-vax status
To: Kevin Ogden <email@example.com>
From: Johnny Billquist <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/26/2006 13:55:12
Kevin Ogden wrote:
> Amen. I still prefer NetBSD over the others (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc) but
> it's certainly not as light as it used to be. It's a little piggish
> lately for daily use on my VS3100 m30 so I've reverted to Ultrix as
> 4.3BSD won't run on these machines. I wish I had some Y2K patches for
> Ultrix 4.4 though, support for larger disk partitions would be nice as
You need Ultrix 4.5 (or was the last version 4.6?) then. That will give
you the Y2K fixes. Larger disks is not there, however.
But I agree with what you say. NetBSD is still the preferred version,
but it don't feel as good as it once did. However, I still prefer NetBSD
over Ultrix (brrr)...
> NetBSD 1.4L was fairly zippy on this machine though and I might go back
> to running it but NetBSD 2.1 was a dog and dig an awful lot of disk
> thrashing, haven't tried 3 yet though.
It's about the same.
> I kinda miss the days of NetBSD 1.2 on my Mac II CI. 1.2 was really
> lightweight, didn't support the VS3100 though.
Well, the differences between 1.2 and 1.4 aren't that big, so if you
like 1.2 I really can't see what you would mind about 1.4.
> I'm not B!tc*ing, I'm sure NetBSD 3 runs quite well on the faster,
> beefier vax machines with more than 32MB of RAM.
No it don't. I have run it on a VAX 8650, which literally drags it
knuckles. Amazing considering that when I worked at DEC in 1986, we had
one 8600, on which we usually had about 100 users (running VMS though).
I have one 4000-90 at home, and it still takes eons to compile the
world, but the usual (and current) state is that it don't even compile.
(Yes, I'm soon about to post a number of PRs, so that people can stop
objecting on the basis that no PRs are filed.)
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: email@example.com || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol