Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NetBSD Now Supports Dual Power PC Processors

Posted by timothy on from the shiny-boxes dept.

djcdplaya writes: "DaemonNews is reporting that the good guys over at NetBSD have gotten dual PowerPC processors working on dual-G4 Apples. The NetBSD mailing can be found here."

7 of 85 comments (clear)

  1. To all the ppl saying BSD is dead by t0qer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see like 12 or so totally offtopic comments saying BSD is dead. Here is what I have to say about it.

    In the last month, as a hobbyist i've set up 3 BSD systems.

    I like BSD, the install isn't bloated, the system boots up REALLY fast, and it really is a better place to start than Linux if you want to learn UNIX standards.

    This message is coming to you through a transparent squid proxy :)

    Now for some on topic stuff.

    SMP on PPC? Cool beans!

    --toq

    1. Re:To all the ppl saying BSD is dead by BitGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful


      How can BSD be dead when Apple ships more BSD systems every year than Linux has in its entire history??

      Really, though, these comparitive unix arguments are just silly.

      Above the kernel, everyone has vi, emacs, gcc, curl, et al. Inside the kernel everyone has access to the open source kernels and so anything competitively advantageous will eventually make it to the other kernels.

      Sure, there's a difference in the kernels, some being better than others at some tasks-- but really, to users, its unix, unix, unix, unix.

      *UNIX* in all its flavors, is taking over the world... one Mac, one PC, one Workstation, one Server at a time.

      When microsoft is the alternative, why squabble over kernel flavors?

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    2. Re:To all the ppl saying BSD is dead by CoolVibe · · Score: 3, Interesting
      When microsoft is the alternative, why squabble over kernel flavors?

      Just ignore the trolls, this is exactly what they want.

      I am running Linux- and Windowsless too, I like BSD, there's nothing wrong with it. It's just a UNIX flavour indeed. Just like Solaris (and SunOS, which was BSD based too)

      And for the poor people that actually believe the "BSD is dead" trolls, well, I hope they happen on a BSD system one day and see the beauty of it.

      Everything I have runs on BSD, and it hasn't let me down once (well, not counting my FreeBSD CURRENT box, but hey, that's bleeding edge for ya).

      Oh, and even the allmighty Redmondian Giant uses BSD. Check out hotmail mail headers, you might see a Qmail MTA in there somewhere. Microsoft still uses FreeBSD at HotMail for the backend. Apparently the Win2k machines can't keep up :)

  2. Re:What for? by hubertf · · Score: 4, Informative

    Um, maybe not all PPC hardware is made by Apple?
    Look at the list of NetBSD ports that use a PPC:

    amigappc bebox macppc mvmeppc ofppc pmppc prep sandpoint walnut

    Of these, only 1 runs OSX.
    All of them run NetBSD though.

    - Hubert

  3. NetBSD in OS X by foniksonik · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought the point of this was so that the NetBSD portion of OS X's Darwin would finally be capable of utilizing dual CPUs. Am I missing something?

    If previously NetBSD in OS X, et al was only cinlge CPU aware then OS X Server has been sub-optimal from it's inception as a server and now should see very nice performance improvements to such things as the TCP/IP stack and many other networking technologies.

    I'm definitely curious to see what impact this will have for OS X Server. I assume that it was Apple's engineers that privided the 'last mile' details to get this working... nicde work people.

    Maybe we'll be seeing TiVos with Dual G4 PPCs running NetBSD in the future or something too..

    BTW, does anyone know if PPC Linux distros are MP aware?

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    1. Re:NetBSD in OS X by LizardKing · · Score: 3, Informative

      I thought the point of this was so that the NetBSD portion of OS X's Darwin would finally be capable of utilizing dual CPUs

      Mac OS X uses portions of FreeBSD (user land bits mostly), but is built on top of the Mach microkernel. Mach began life as the BSD Unix kernel, but was extensively rewritten as an academic attempt at a working microkernel. While on his extended hiatus from Apple, Steve Jobs founded Next, who used this microkernel version of BSD in the NextStep operating system.

      Mac OS X is arguably NextStep given a bit of a makeover, hence the continued interest in GNUstep as a free version of OpenStep (and now the newer Apple API's). OpenStep was the user land API's from the NextStep operating system, packaged up to run on many other systems.

      The Mach kernel was adapted for multiple processors a long time ago, but I don't think the support was completed until Apple released OS X. So basically, NetBSD SMP support is something independent from Mac OS X's.

  4. Take it Tux? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hell, I was karma capped for a while, I can live with the negative mods...

    Take it tux

    This is a joke, I've set up both Linux and FreeBSD, Linux has more apps, FreeBSD is cleaner. I've used Solaris, SCO, Tru64, AIX, HPUX, SunOS, even DG/UX on a Motorla 88K. Pick whatever works best for you and be happy with it.