Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OS Review: NetBSD 1.6.2 on SPARC64

Posted by michael on from the esoterica dept.

JigSaw writes "NetBSD is the king of operating system portability, running on 40+ different hardware platforms, including x86, MIPS, and even the Sega Dreamcast. So it comes as no surprise that among the supported platforms, NetBSD runs on Tony Bourke's Sun Ultra 5. Here is his review."

8 of 58 comments (clear)

  1. the only alternate OS for NeXT boxen? by Artifex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I haven't looked recently, but other than NeXTStep, the only OS I ever found that could run on my basic black slab was NetBSD, and even that had to be strapped from a bootserver, with no local disk support. I'm not sure whether it's more a testament to the wacky hardware or how tenacious the NetBSD teams have been that they were able to do this at all...

    --
    Get off my launchpad!
  2. The only real competitor to Linux... by DesScorp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...in the embedded space, that is. I see NetBSD turning up in a lot of devices now, including our new office copier of all things.

    Competition is a good thing, mmmmmkay, as some here would say.

    I have to wonder what's driving Net's adoption in the embedded space. Is it technical merit, or the the BSD license allowing vendors to keep their changes closed?

    I'm just glad to see that Netcraft was wrong :P

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:The only real competitor to Linux... by DashEvil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that really clean stable code + a license to do whatever you want with it is really all the reason they need.

      --
      -If God wanted people to be better than me, he would have made them that way.
    2. Re:The only real competitor to Linux... by Homology · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I have to wonder what's driving Net's adoption in the embedded space. Is it technical merit, or the the BSD license allowing vendors to keep their changes closed?

      I've often wondered why some companies choose to use Linux when they are unwilling to show their source code. It clearly has not been to the advantage of the companies involved to be exposed as not complying with the GPL. It is risky business decision to choose to ignore license issues.

      Perhaps more attention will be given to the *BSD family with it's technically very good OS and a free license.

  3. Ultra 5? Oh please no by keesh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you're going to review an OS on an UltraSparc box, please pick anything other than the u5/10. The u5/10 is basically a PC clone with an ultrasparc processor. It has a pisspoor IDE chipset, a crippled CPU (IIi has far less cache than a II), a crippled PCI backplane, low memory bandwidth and a PC-like chipset. A far better measure of how well an OS has been ported is an Ultra 2.

    (and yes, I do know what I'm talking about, and I have sparc-related code in the Linux kernel to prove it :) )

    1. Re:Ultra 5? Oh please no by 680x0 · · Score: 4, Informative
      A far better measure of how well an OS has been ported is an Ultra 2.
      I have an Ultra 1 (UltraSparc @ 167MHz), and I have to say that my experience installing NetBSD 1.6.1 was quite similar to his experience (panic during install, no binary packages available, etc.) And, besides, the review seemed to focus on the app side of things, not the driver/hardware side.

      That said, I don't think there's anything major that can't be fixed. Once installed, it's run flawlessly, and the only package I couldn't compile from pkgsrc is Apache 2.x (I installed Apache 1.x instead).

      I've had the (32-bit) sparc port of NetBSD running solidly on a SparcStation-2 for over a year and a half (it's my DHCP/NTP/DNS server).

  4. I *hate* OSNews reviews by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why, oh why, do I keep letting myself be suckered into reading these piles of drivel? I know I'll lose an IQ point every time I do, but I just can't keep from looking.

    For example, I have no idea why you would ever not use pkgsrc (or ports) to build packages whenever possible. The reviewer goes on for half a page about his troubles compiling OpenSSL from source. No kidding? That's why we have pkgsrc and ports - someone else has already solved all the little problems for you!

    Likewise, he's incredulous that his locally-built package using uber-elite optimization flags runs faster than the downloadable binary package. Frankly, that's like being amazed that a locally-built Debian package may be faster than the generic i386 package that you can download.

    I honestly don't know why they label these diatribes as "reviews", when they should be called "a day spent with a system I don't understand".

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  5. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    a 64-bit kernel with 32-bit userland.
    NetBSD wants to have 64-bit userland.