Subject: Re: Compiler timings on varous MVII NetBSDs etc.
To: NetBSD Bob <>
From: Brian Hechinger <>
List: port-vax
Date: 01/23/2001 11:00:34
ok, i've been meaning to say something here, but there is just too much to
cover! ;)

> It is OK to relegate them to the retirement pasture, ane let 1.4.x
> be their final hurrah.  But, if we are not careful, the same thing
> will happen shortly to the 3100 class machines.  I can feel the
> slowness on those, too.  IF we maintain that we are actively going
> to support the historic VAX machines, then, ``Houston,  we have a
> problem!''

and after the 3100, what next?  the 7000 machines being too slow to run NetBSD
5.0?  where will it end if we allow it to continue this way.

> I know it is heresy to say this, but I will, again..... IF it really
> is reaching that point in time where the 1.0VUP boxes are becoming
> priced out of the market, then we need to separate out a code tree
> for VAX 1.0 VUP machines and under, and then optimize it as a final
> hurrah for these machines, freeze it, and keep it as the Classical
> VAX NetBSD.  There is nothing wrong with that, and 1.5 is getting
> mostly useless on these machines.  It hurts, too, cuz I really do
> like the ol' MVII critters, and am actively looking for a 730 or
> 750 box to try.

i've _got_ a /750 that i've been planning on running NetBSD on for years.  i
will probably be going and picking it up in the next couple months, i'd really
like it to perform as well as to be expected.

if (and again, heresy) we would seperate the code out to form a seperate tree
i wouldn't want to see it ended at 1.4.x, i'd rather see a VaxBSD, as we thumb
our noses at NetBSD saying "we can keep the bloat out, why can't you?"  this,
of course, is assuming that progress can't be made to keep NetBSD in check.
it NetBSD is becoming bloated, then i personally care to have nothing to do
with it.  the whole reason i run NetBSD is that it is supposedly /not/ bloated.

> Is there a practical solution?  I dunno, but keep hoping there is.
> NetBSD-1.5 on the slow boxes is just not practical, anymore.

i just hope thie new list can help make some inroads to the performance
problem.  too much of the PC minset is being adopted (well, CPUs and RAM are
so fast/cheap, who cares) when on the other hand NetBSD is trying to maintain
this "runs on anyt platform" ideology, but the two DO NOT MIX.

>> Yeah - some of us don't have (read can't be bothered reconfiguring) any
>> ix86 boxen with NetBSD just to crosscompile, although I may do one day if
>> things carry on this way.

my last x86 box died (i don't count my laptop since it runs windows all of the
time) and i spent no time at all trying to revive it.  i dumped it in the
corner of my "non-working" pile, and it is there to stay.  i've messed around
with x86 a very few times in my life, and i hate it so much, i just don't even
care to look at it.  build a cross-compiler out of an x86 box, not a snowball's
chance in..................

> I have taken to compiling big things on my VS3100/M76 box at 7 VUPS as
> opposed to my MVII at 1 VUP.  That helps some.  I would really hate to
> have to stoop to a PeeCee to do that, although I have this 7000 class
> Alpha biggiemachine sitting out in the shed.....(:+}}...

a few of us are lucky enough to own this cool old iron.  to make it useless?
i'd rather run VMS.