* On 2010-11-12 at 16:26 GMT, Johnny Billquist wrote: > What? That NetBSD no longer supports most of the architectures it used to?
Unless you've redefined the meaning of 'most' I think that's a pretty wild and inaccurate claim. > Maybe it's time to change the "of course it runs NetBSD" to "is it > an x86? Then it also runs NetBSD in addition to Linux, FreeBSD and > OpenBSD, not to forget Solaris and Windows". Why do you and mouse have this insatiable appetite to focus on x86? Seems quite disrespectful to the many people who continue to improve and add support for platforms to NetBSD which aren't x86-based. Personally I think there is huge merit to having an off-shoot of an older NetBSD which can still be developed for older systems like VAX, and have advocated for this in the past. After all, are you really interested in the features NetBSD is adding over time? Which parts of -current are you dying to run on the VAX which makes you angry at the suggestion of dropping support for it? Lua? Rump? NPF? ATF? Modules? My guess, actually, is that the vast majority of new code going into NetBSD is things you would advocate against anyway as they do not make sense for your architecture. Create a fork (forks are good!), rip out all this bloat we've been adding for the past N years, merge in bits you do like, and concentrate on keeping things small, fast, and suited for your systems. Everyone wins. However these discussions always end up with wild accusations (e.g. your 'no longer supports most' statement above) and go nowhere. It would be nice if someone would prove me wrong this time. -- Jonathan Perkin The NetBSD Project http://www.perkin.org.uk/ http://www.netbsd.org/
