Subject: Re: ARM Linux
To: Markus Baeurle <emw4maba@gp.fht-esslingen.de>
From: Philip Blundell <pjb27@cam.ac.uk>
List: port-arm32
Date: 11/12/1996 13:07:43
On Tue, 12 Nov 1996, Markus Baeurle wrote:
> -What do you call "Linux-compatible"? If the software was written
Well, for the purposes of that, I was thinking of all the software that's
already packaged up and ready to compile by people like Red Hat. Creating
a distribution for the ARM should just be a case of saying "rpm --rebuild
*", sitting back and waiting. Yes, there will be _some_ porting work,
but not a lot.
> carefully, it should not be hard to compile it under BSD. You'll have to
> recompile the programs anyway so all the things which are not available
> as source are out of reach under ARM-Linux as well as RiscBSD anyway.
Yes.
> -What's the big difference between Linux and BSD from a user's and
> administrative point of view? I don't think that's really severe. I use,
It's not _desperately_ serious. I use Linux mostly, but I've had to
maintain FreeBSD systems at work (and I have one NetBSD at home), and it
was survivable.
> Anyway, it's good to have more people working on free Unix for Acorn
> machines and it's always good to have a choice. Competition is never bad too.
Indeed.
> A5000 because of the work involved to port it to the RiscPC. Not much
> seemed to be happening to ARM-Linux when you were looking at it as an
> outsider like me.
No, and that's a bit of a shame. I have told Russell repeatedly that
ARMLinux would do a lot better if he would only loosen his grip on it a
little. However, that's his choice...
phil