Subject: Re: goals for NetBSD binary packages
To: Georg Schwarz <email@example.com>
From: John Klos <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/25/2005 12:19:03
> I wonder why both the amiga and the mac68k port web page give the impression
> of NetBSD 2.0 running just fine.
Got me. Maybe people think that running for several days at a time is
adequate to consider it "running", but eventually the kernel eats all of
the system's memory, and it crashes. I have a colocated Amiga running
1.6.2 which has had uptimes of more than six months, so onviously I don't
want to move to a few-days-at-a-time OS. This is especially true of a
system that's used to build bulk packages.
> Compiling on a 50 MHz (or 100, depending on which marketing philosophy you
> follow :-)) R4000 I for your know what you mean...
Yeah. Even the 400 MHz PowerPC 604ev on a 50 MHz memory bus seems
blisteringly fast when compared with the Quadras and the VAXen...
How's 2.0 doing on the R4400? Is it stable and usable yet?