"John S. Dyson" writes:
> NOTHING will get in the way of the FreeBSD port to the Alpha,

Well, I must admit that starting with NetBSD's kernel gives you more
of a shot to have something work than the technique you tried for your 
Sparc port. OTOH, it isn't even clear to me *why* anyone would want
FreeBSD on the Alpha, when there is already NetBSD.

> and just as the FreeBSD kernel works differently than NetBSD when
> running on the X86 (ask anyone who has tried both, and really tried
> to use them),

I've tried to use both. I haven't seen particularly much difference,
frankly. I have heard your claim that FreeBSD compiles code "three
times faster" and such, and frankly it isn't true. Claiming FreeBSD is 
five percent faster under some conditions on a normal machine is
within the realm of the believable, but I'm not even certain that that 
is true.

I have NetBSD based firewalls and web servers up that get hit as hard
as anything ever gets hit, and they run just fine, propaganda from
FreeBSD aside. When asked by anyone who's an ordinary user what they 
will see as a major difference if they switch from NetBSD/i386 to
FreeBSD or vice versa, I usually note "not much unless you're a kernel 
hacker". Most NetBSD people generally say the same.

> There is a significant performance difference between the two OSes,

No there isn't. They're virtually the same under most realistic
conditions. I'm sure you could contrive some conditions that aren't
realistic, as could I.

> and to discount FreeBSD/Alpha as being a NetBSD kernel is not accurate.

Well, right now, it is a NetBSD kernel so far as I know.

Perry