Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!dnlunx!gew
From: gew@dnlunx.UUCP (Weijers G.A.H.)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.unix.wizards,comp.os.misc
Subject: Re: Free Software Foundation (was: Re: Mach, the new standard?)
Message-ID: <259@dnlunx.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 8-Sep-87 11:27:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: dnlunx.259
Posted: Tue Sep  8 11:27:25 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Sep-87 15:51:41 EDT
References: <4950@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <2117@eecae.UUCP>
Organization: Dr Neher Laboratory (PTT)
Lines: 32
Summary: GNU vs. Minix comparison, big vs. small
Xref: mnetor comp.arch:2136 comp.unix.wizards:4191 comp.os.misc:160

In article <2117@eecae.UUCP>, lawitzke@eecae.UUCP (John Lawitzke) writes:
> > 
> > Minix is v7 - (things you didn't know about, and don't want even if
> > you did), the GNU kernel should be 4.3BSD + (things) - (security
> > features).
> > 
> The GNU kermel should be 4.3BSD +(things) + (security features)
> Since GNU will be distributed in a source code form for next to
> nothing cost, it will be very attractive to small schools or
> companies that want to run UNIX but their gurus want source code.

The difference between Minix and the GNU kernel is the delivery date.
Minix is available now for IBM PC clones. Adding features like networking
and MMU/VM support should not be overly difficult. I wonder whether
having a full 4.3BSD on a personal computer is not overkill.
Personally I'd rather have an easily modifiable kernel.
For most purposes V7 is entirely adequate, although it certainly has its
shortcomings.

G. Weijers
PTT Dr. Neher Laboratories
Leidschendam, the Netherlands

disclaimer: the expressed opinions are entirely mine, and not necessarily
the opinions of my employer.


-- 
1
2
3
4