Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 01:58:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Nowlin <mike@argos.org> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: OpenBSD Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9908180147590.19377-100000@jason.argos.org> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.19990817234258.0479b3b0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> One snag, though: OpenBSD, like NetBSD, is cross-platform and is maintained > on quite a few CPUs and machine architectures. Would FreeBSD be willing to > go that route? I'd sure hope so... Let's face it -- even though FreeBSD is (in my opinion) the most "robust" out of the bunch, the x86 architecture isn't going to win any awards for performance.... Cheap, yes. Easy, yes. Works for the most part, yes. But it's still based off of the idea that we need to be backwards-compatible with the late 1700's. The Alpha port of FBSD is A Good Thing (I'm hoping to try it out this weekend on a couple of the Alpha machines I have available for playing with), but the high-end boxes are pretty pricey. You can find multi-processor SPARC machines being practically given away by companies who don't know what they're capable of, not to mention several other platforms. If the code bits are merged together properly (key word), maintaining a multiple-architecture source tree shouldn't be that difficult -- just make sure the machine-dependant parts all end up with the same ways of doing things... After all -- if Microsloth can do it with NT...... :) --mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.05.9908180147590.19377-100000>