Subject: Re: 1.5_Beta on 3100/M76 and MVII (hare and tortoise syndrome)
To: Ken Wellsch <email@example.com>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/26/2000 20:29:42
On Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Ken Wellsch wrote:
> > > What if he took a GENERIC from 1.2 or 1.3, custom stripped it down, then
> > > carried it forward? I don't think a whole lot has changed, but I may be
> > > out to lunch.
> > A whole bunch - the syntax for specifying filesystems, probably
> > some device names, options added/removed...
> Sure in a full blown GENERIC kernel. But I'm talking about a kernel config
> that just matches his hardware, no more. If related device names have
> I'll grant you that.
OK. Taking a few minutes to look through the file:
Changes after 1.2
- filesystems are now introduced with 'file-system' rather
- ra devices attach to mscpbus rather than directly to uda
- tapes now attach to mscpbus on mtc, not tms on tmscp
- the 'config' line is completely different.
Changes after 1.3
- backplane0 has been replaced by mainbus0, which affects every
bus attach line
- microvaxes now have an 'ibus', to which uba0 is attached
I may have missed some.
> Is not the point to use a common denominator by which to judge size changes
> and performance? Leaving in differing options is not likely to be very
> effective comparison I think.
I agree we should benchmark a GENERIC kernel and one specifically
customised for the hardware and with the same set of filesystems/
devices/network options as in the previous release.
-- www.netbsd.org: A pmap for every occasion --