Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.misc > #11228
| From | Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.misc |
| Subject | Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) |
| Date | 2025-09-07 15:55 +0000 |
| Organization | Dbus-free station. |
| Message-ID | <6p2XZDFac9O7lAFj@violet.siamics.net> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <108ljf3$br9n$5@dont-email.me> <RN-s-KxjrX6THRTW@violet.siamics.net> <108vuq0$2sngv$6@dont-email.me> <KKx97WvtTkldzxgb@violet.siamics.net> <109d9c4$2344i$3@dont-email.me> |
>>>>> On 2025-09-05, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 18:50:29 +0000, Ivan Shmakov wrote: >> I'd hesitate to call Xen at large "Linux-based." If anything, >> there's way more of Linux in the GNU Mach microkernel (consider >> the linux/src/drivers subtree in [3], for instance) than in the >> Xen hypervisor. > Call it what you like, the fact is, Linux supports it without > having to list it as a separate platform. I can't say I can quite grasp the importance of doing it one way or another, but well, I've been loosely working on my own "Debian offshoot" over the past few years, and should it ever come to a release, I'll be sure to test it with Xen and then list "Xen on amd64" alongside "amd64 on bare metal" in its list of supported platforms - NetBSD-style. > You could argue equally well that NetBSD is not "BSD" any more, > because it has diverged too far from the original BSD kernel. That's a good point, actually: as originally defined, "BSD" meant "Berkeley Software Distribution," and given that little (if any) work on NetBSD is (AIUI) currently being done at UCB, I'd say that yes, NetBSD is not "BSD" - and likely never have been. (Similarly, I find claims that "Debian is a free Unix" to be misleading: "GNU's Not Unix" is right on the cover, after all.) NetBSD is a descendant of 386BSD (as, AIUI, are all current "BSDs"), itself a descendant of 4.3BSD, so there /is/ a kind of continuity. (And likely bits of actual 4.3BSD code within NetBSD sources.) No idea if it's of much importance to anyone but OS historians. >> That, however, doesn't mean you can use Linux /by itself/ outside >> of a distribution. (Unless, of course, you're looking for a kernel >> for a new distribution, but I doubt that undermines my point.) > How do you think distributions get created in the first place? > <https://linuxfromscratch.org/> Like I've said, I doubt that undermines my point: you /still/ choose among distributions rather than kernels, even if one (or more) of those distributions is of your own creation. When two decades ago I've put together my own "distribution" (I've never actually /distributed/ it, hence the quotes), the only CPU architecture it supported was "i386" - as that was the only one that I've had at hand and could test it on. How many others Linux supported at the time, I've had no idea - nor any reason to look into: they simply were out of my reach - and thus my concern - at the time. The aforementioned Debian derivative I'm working on currently only supports amd64, though I hope to add riscv64 and (or) arm64 support eventually. From where I stand, adding support for anything beyond that (and especially architectures that aren't in Debian, and for which I thus cannot reuse Debian packages) is too much effort for too uncertain a gain. (Reportedly "i386" support is important for running Steam on Debian, but guess what? I use GOG.) Sure, it'd be nice to have a Debian derivative to run on my i586 boxes (not supported after Jessie), but that's lots of effort, too - and then there's NetBSD that's already "486DX or better." With the above in mind, well, I'm willing to bet that if you ever put together your own distribution, it won't support every architecture Linux itself claims to support, either. >> Suppose someone asks, "what OS would you recommend for running on >> loongarch?" and the best answer we here on Usenet can give is > <https://distrowatch.com/search.php?ostype=All&[...]> ... Or, in other words: "don't ask for recommendations here on Usenet, ask a website instead." What Usenet is even here for, then? Rants?
Back to comp.lang.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-18 04:52 +0200
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-18 16:54 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-18 18:30 +0200
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-19 00:45 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-19 02:44 +0200
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-20 00:47 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-20 00:43 +0000
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-20 23:58 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-21 02:59 +0000
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-23 00:42 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-23 02:29 +0200
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-23 02:36 +0000
Economizing resource requirements (was Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-21 21:02 +0200
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-10-04 01:11 +0000
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-04 03:37 +0000
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-10-07 22:03 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-07 22:04 +0000
Various digressions (was Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures?) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-10-08 01:27 +0200
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-10-10 01:11 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-10 01:39 +0000
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-10-11 12:47 +0100
Re: Algol 68 / Genie - opinions on local procedures? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-10-08 17:04 +0000
simplicity / complexity Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-08-26 18:42 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-27 00:28 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-08-30 19:10 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-30 22:43 +0000
[OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-09-04 18:50 +0000
Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-05 00:03 +0000
Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-09-07 15:55 +0000
Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-09-07 21:17 +0000
Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-09-05 12:02 +0000
Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-09-07 16:30 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-27 07:53 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-08-30 19:39 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-30 22:45 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-08-31 13:35 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-31 22:40 +0000
[OT] free software Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> - 2025-09-04 18:25 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-10-08 14:03 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-10-08 16:21 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-08 08:08 -0700
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-08 21:18 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-08 14:31 -0700
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-09 00:09 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-09 08:44 -0700
Re: simplicity / complexity Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-10-09 21:52 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-10-09 15:21 -0700
Re: simplicity / complexity antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-10-09 00:34 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-10-09 03:48 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2025-10-08 14:53 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2025-10-08 15:24 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-10-09 01:39 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-10-09 04:00 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-10-09 14:19 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2025-10-09 14:48 +0000
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-10-10 12:36 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-10-10 12:09 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-31 08:32 +0200
Re: simplicity / complexity Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-31 08:34 +0200
csiph-web