On Sat, 5 Aug 2006, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:

> See the "x86-32 PAE" thread at http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-i386/2005/07/.
> General drift I get of it is that PAE is a ugly hack.

That's a given.  Shoehorning >4G into a 32-bit address space is indeed ugly,
no matter how you slice it.  But sometimes that's a limitation you're forced
to endure for various reasons (like investing money in decent servers just
before EM64T was a standard feature on the I-brand chips).

> Or, we just run plain NetBSD/i386 or amd64 like one would Windows on a
> Vanderpool or Pacifica-enabled chip.

Well, that's a hell of a performance hit.  We have added quirk workarounds
for things as off the wall as Virtual PC before.

> > (As to the host in question, the proprietor has asked me not to mention its
> > name until the NetBSD configuration is actually working and they're ready to
> > advertise that fact.  Let me just say that this would be a *very* cost
> > effective way to get a dedicated-like NetBSD hosting plan, and well worth
> > whatever effort is needed to get it working.  ;)
>
> Hey, I know of at least two other places that are still running Xen 2,
> and advertise NetBSD as a choice.

Which of them are on large North American bandwidth pipes?  8-)

-- 
-- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>