> kim@pvv.ntnu.no wrote:
> 
> > All the versions of Linux I have worked with, including Sparc versions,
> > has been much stabler, and frendlier than NetBSD on ARM32.
> 
> Do you say that with any authority?

Yes. I work as a Unix consultant and system administrator.

> Do you know that an ARM Linux system
> freezes as soon as you run 3 xv's?

Do you know that xv wont run on my NetBSD ARM at all?

> Or you can't run two telnets, a find
> and an MPEG player at once without it bucketing over?

When I try that with ARM NetBSD, the line freezes, and sooner or
later, X-windows messes up keyboard and mouse inputs, which get
very jerky long before that.

The reason I run NetBSD 1.3 on my RiscPC, is that this is the most
stable version I have had through the years.

> Or some people
> who've tried to run the OS on commercial systems and have ended up
> banging their head against the wall _so_ many times?

I have never banged my head as little as when running Linux.

> While it might be
> faster (though these days, not very much) it's certainly not easier to
> install either (OK, NetBSD is hard, but Linux is even harder).

Most Linuxes these days come with very nice and user friendly
installations programs in several variants. I found it much easier
to install Linux on my 4MB PC/104 system than any version of
NetBSD I have installed.

> > The only reason that I still use NetBSD, is that I currently can't
> > afford a new machine. A lot of people has stopped using it on ARM32,
> > as far as I can see from the reduced amount of postings here.
> 
> Do you think that's anything to do with the platform dying?

Thats only a smaller factor. People with Acorn machines are very
steadfast, and has used their machines for a very long time, and will
continue to do that. Besides, free unixes such as NetBSD and linux
are typically run on old machines.

> > It has always been in a state of almost working.
> 
> For me, it works quite well. It's just for an OS that runs on several
> quite different architectures, as well as several commercial boards,
> there _aren't_ enough hours in the day.

You should have concentrated more on making it possible for other people
to help making it work. I once used up some hundreds of hours without getting
anywhere. I remember the author of the Cumana SCSI software trying too,
and other people. If competent programmers and Unix people can't get
ARM NetBSD going properly, it is ARM NetBSD that is faulty, not the people.

> > However, I actually has only one really serious critique of the RiscBSD
> > project, and that is the fact that user buildable sources has
> > never been sufficiently available, thus stopping lots of users
> > from contributing to this project.
> 
> Well, if it doesn't work and it really annoys you, *fix it*. 

Making an independent NetBSD tree for ARM is too big a task for me.

> I don't see
> why one person who feeds back some code from a hobby project should then
> exist to be a slave to the whims of hundreds (or thousands) of users on
> over 5 platforms.

Has that anything at all to do with my response?

Kim0