Taking your wise lead, I pulled down the syssrc for 1.3.2 and 1.4.2 (both
having available vax install sets to match) and then 1.5_BETA on my system:

Doing a ruthless editing job of the 1.3.2 GENERIC kernel I come down to
(likely I need to keep some COMPAT stuff but I chopped that too):

  include         "arch/vax/conf/std.vax"
  options         "VAX630"
  maxusers        8
  options         INET
  file-system     FFS
  config          netbsd root on ? type ?
  backplane0      at root
  cpu0            at backplane0
  uba0            at backplane0
  uda0            at uba? csr 0172150
  mscpbus*        at uda?
  mtc0            at uba? csr 0174500
  mscpbus*        at mtc?
  ra*             at mscpbus? drive?
  mt*             at mscpbus? drive?
  qe0             at uba? csr 0174440
  dhu0            at uba? csr 0160440
  pseudo-device   loop    1
  pseudo-device   pty     48

Comparing 1.3.2 with a 1.4.2 hand edited GENERIC:

  diff -w 1.3.2 1.4.2
  7,9c7,9
  < backplane0    at root
  < cpu0          at backplane0
  < uba0          at backplane0
  ---
  > mainbus0      at root
  > cpu0          at mainbus0
  > uba0          at mainbus0
  14a15
  > rx*           at mscpbus? drive?

So we switched from "backplane" to "mainbus" and a
floppy drive has been added.

And then comparing 1.4.2 with a 1.5_BETA hand-edited GENERIC:

  diff -w 1.4.2 1.5.0
  8,9c8,9
  < cpu0          at mainbus0
  < uba0          at mainbus0
  ---
  > ibus0         at mainbus0
  > uba0          at ibus0
  20c20
  < pseudo-device   pty   48
  ---
  > pseudo-device   pty   64

So a new layer? has appeared called ibus and the pty count was upped.

One can drop the rx support as unrelated to the comparision as can any
change in the number of pty's.

Cheers,

-- Ken

David Brownlee wrote:
> 
> 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
> > changed,
> > 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
>               than options
>             - 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.
> 
>                 David/absolute
>                                -- www.netbsd.org: A pmap for every occasion --