Re: netbsd on vax 11/730; booting in sim

[Johnny Billquist <bqt%softjar.se@localhost>]

Hi.

Andrew Sporner wrote:
> Hi Mouse,
>
> For some reason my posts are not appearing on the list (they were!)
> so if you reply, I would apprecate that the list is on it.  -- Thanks
>
> I have been away from the list for about 10 years so I see a lot has
> happened.  A few questions come to mind.
>
> 1.  When they have their "brainstorming sessions" is not a representative
> from each port asked, or is it assumed that "wintel" is the core platform
> and everything is ported from there?

I cant't speak for how NetBSD core works, but it sure feels like that 
from here. :-)

> 2.  How many active people are still doing vax stuff?  By unhappy fate
> with contracts  I will have extra time on my hands so I intend to work
> on the frame buffer for the VaxStation 4000/60 and whatever else is
> interesting (needed).

Core system hacking is much more needed than fram buffer stuff right 
now, but I guess any contributions are always welcome.
I guess I'm still semi-interested, considering that I'm still here, and 
still post.

> >  The real question is why the VAX people are even still here, not why
> >  they're not contributing more.  Perhaps Johnny is right and it's time
> >  for another fork.  NetBSD seems to be no longer interested in
> >  supporting the legacy systems that were once one of its big strengths;
> >  maybe it's time for a BSD that is.
>
> I have been working in the embedded systems for the last 8 or so
> years designing routers.  The first one was at first NetBSD based, then
> switched to FreeBSD because of PCI performance was better
> (http://www.nitro-switch.de) and now I am working in Vxworks.
> I would much prefer to use somebody BSD like but alas without MMU
> it doesn't go.  Linux on the other hand does.

Funny. I used to work for a company doing embedded systems as well, and 
used NetBSD initially, but moved away from it. They are now using Linux, 
but I'm not there anymore.

> I would think enough momentum could be generated by the inherrent
> portablility of NetBSD to work also as an Embedded system and also
> be usefull for Legacy systems as well..

I think that that used to be true, but isn't any more.

> The trick and most difficult thing is getting people to communicate with
> each other--which has never been easy in ANY BSD port :-)

:-)

        Johnny