In message: <>
            "David O'Brien" <> writes:
: On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 01:28:24AM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
: >     FWIW, NetBSD's charter has been to run their OS on a number of
: > architectures, not just a primary set of architectures; OpenBSD's
: > charter differs -- if we all were NetBSD or OpenBSD, then we'd all be
: > using the same thing.  But we aren't and that's probably not going to
: > change anytime soon [at least not without community backing and a
: We aren't?  At this point it seems any architecture an be brought into
: FreeBSD without regard to critical mass or ability to support it to the
: standards of our past.  I do believe FreeBSD's character does not include
: chasing every embedded platform where there is energy and talent for the
: initial port.

FreeBSD's charter includes whatever people have the time and energy to
support.  This means a lot more embedded platforms that I ever thought
possible because FreeBSD is getting easier to move to new embedded
platforms.  This is a good thing, as it brings more people and energy
to the project and makes the base support for those platforms better.

We don't have quite as many problems as the NetBSD/OpenBSD crowd in
this respect.  They tend to define a new MACHIINE more often then we
have (or will).  The need for sys/arch is less severe here than there
because we don't have 40 different MACHINEs.

_______________________________________________ mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to ""

Reply via email to