Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.misc > #11229
| From | Ivan Shmakov <ivan@siamics.netREMOVE.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.misc |
| Subject | Re: [OT] NetBSD vs. Linux(-based systems) |
| Date | 2025-09-07 16:30 +0000 |
| Organization | Dbus-free station. |
| Message-ID | <eRTQWW_2BLFpCkxs@violet.siamics.net> (permalink) |
| References | <107u4ha$2osd4$1@dont-email.me> <RN-s-KxjrX6THRTW@violet.siamics.net> <108vuq0$2sngv$6@dont-email.me> <KKx97WvtTkldzxgb@violet.siamics.net> <109ejg1$2c5$1@reader1.panix.com> |
>>>>> On 2025-09-05, Dan Cross wrote: >>>>> In article <KKx97WvtTkldzxgb@violet.siamics.net>, Ivan Shmakov wrote: >>>>> On 2025-08-30, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > FYI, you are arguing with a known troll. It is unlikely to turn > into a productive exercise, so caveat emptor. I'm inclined to define productive public discussion as one that's informative and interesting to read. Given that I've actually ended up learning a couple of things along the way, I'd say it /was/ productive, in a way. With no "views" and "likes" counts here on Usenet, I have no way of measuring how interesting the subthread was to others (being ill-suited for the group as it is), so I kinda hope for the best. >> When hardware-assisted virtualization /is/ available, the things >> certainly get easier: pretty much anything that can run under, >> say, Qemu, can be run under Xen HVM. The performance may suffer, >> though, should your domU system happen to lack virtio drivers and >> should thus need to resort to using emulated peripherals instead. > Yes. With Xen, you've got the Xen VMM running on the bare metal and > then any OS capable of supporting Xen's Dom0 requirements running as > Dom0, and essentially any OS running as a DomU guest. > So to summarize, you've got a hypervisor that descended from an > old version of Linux, but was heavily modified, running a gaggle > of other systems, none of which necessarily needs to be Linux. Glad to know I wasn't too off the mark in this case. >>> Linux doesn't count these as separate platforms. They're just >>> considered a standard part of regular platform support. >> Which means one needs to be careful when comparing architecture >> support between different kernels. > I gathered your point was that neither Dom0 nor DomU _had_ to be > Linux, and that's true. More to the point here is that my opponent took offense at http://netbsd.org/ports/ listing "Xen" as one of the supported "platforms" - apparently for the sole reason that Linux does it differently. > Note that the troll likes to subtlely change the point that he's > arguing. Well, in a properly set up public debate, there's ought to be a prior agreement on who's arguing what. This is Usenet, however, so we all figure out what points we do and do not want to argue along the way. I doubt I can rightfully blame a person for not sharing my preferences about on what to argue about - especially as I don't pay them for having an argument with me. >> That said, I've last tinkered with Linux around the days of 2.0.36 >> (IIRC), and I don't recall reading any Linux sources newer than >> version 4. If you have experience patching newer Linux kernels, and >> in particular if you find the code easy to follow, - please share. > He doesn't. That's what I suspect as well. I'd still be delighted to be proven wrong.
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