From: spedpr@thor.cf.ac.uk (Paul Richards) Subject: Re: What files to grab ? Date: 1 Jun 1992 12:14:12 GMT
In article <1992May30.091441.12083@csd.brispoly.ac.uk> dylan@hal.brispoly.ac.uk (Dylan Smith) writes:
|In article <1992May27.113053.4804@klaava.Helsinki.FI> torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds) writes:
|>
|>Haven't tested 386BSD, but I assume it will be pretty good in a month or
|>two, and it's probably quite useable already. If you want NFS and full
|>networking, it's the way to go. Comments, anyone?
|
|I haven't used BSD - it said in the README file that a maths co-processor
|is one of the minimum installation requirements. This means I can't run it
|at all.
|
There is a version of 386bsd that does not need a co-processor (ask in
comp.unix.bsd for details). The coprocesor is not essaential to the
kernel but some of the utilities to set up the HD needed it. Somebody
has fixed this for systems without a coprocessor.
It's already very usable. I've got a system running NFS connected to a
SUN 3/60 and ALMOST everything works. Telnet and ftp work fine but I've
had a few NFS problems. If you have to have networking (which I did)
then it's worth a look. The kernel is not as stable as Linux but it's
getting there very quickly. It does however come with most unix
utilities as part of the distribution.
As a very rough comparison I'd say the kernel is around linux 0.12 level
but the 0.2 kernel due out in June should be running X windows. I
suspect this schedule will be delayed a little though because 0.1 isn't
out yet :-)
Linux users may be interested to know that Linux has been used as an
example on many occasions for bug fixes etc. I hope this swapping of
info increases as both systems have an important role to play in the
future of free unix systems.
-- Paul Richards at Cardiff university, UK.spedpr@uk.ac.cf.thor Internet: spedpr%thor.cf.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk UUCP: spedpr@thor.cf.UUCP or ...!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cf!thor!spedpr +++