[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Status of NetBSD port?



On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 06:56:21PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 12:36:05PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 05:16:42PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > The second effort was started up by Robert Millan and uses glibc. I'm 
> > > not clear on how this interacts with stuff that's more tightly bound to 
> > > the kernel, but I'd expect it to contain at least as much GNU userland 
> > > as the other one.
> > 
> > This confuses me; http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/porting.html doesn't
> > mention that glibc runs on any BSD platform.
> 
> I'm not sure what the state of the *BSD patches is in terms of
> integration with upstream source. There's an alioth project on this, 
> IIRC.

Not that good, really.

> > But then it brings up the question: say I want to install Debian
> > GNU/NetBSD to do some experimentation.  How do I choose which option I
> > want?  There Debian NetBSD port page doesn't seem to differentiate.
> 
> Personally, I think the NetBSD libc choice is more pragmatic and easier 
> to deal with - I'd expect Robert to disagree :) The port page only 
> refers to the native libc port. That probably ought to be updated.

It's definitely easier to deal with - at the very least, it's a lot
easier to develop on. glibc is a confusing mess by comparison.

> > I have no problem with installing NetBSD on a machine, then untarring or
> > unpacking some .debs into a chrooted area, and going from there.  What
> > about the "experimental install floppies" from October 2002?
> 
> Yeah, that's probably going to be saner in the near future. The 
> "Experimental install floppies" ran the NetBSD installer, and then at 
> the last moment ran debootstrap, but never worked desperately well...

Stupid question, but why not just use debootstrap to make a tarball, and
then hack the NetBSD installer to use that tarball? Then it's just a
matter of bypassing any damage their installer does to /etc.

> > Speaking of the toolchain...  given that gcc is used directly by the
> > NetBSD folks, what exactly is the pain in this department?  Couldn't we
> > just build our .debs of it the same way they build and install it?
> 
> I'd been using Debian source of gcc with minor patches. gcc-3.3 has 
> decent NetBSD support without patching.

The BSD's haven't always had their patches merged into upstream. I'm not
sure why. I do know that the problem has existed with all three BSD's in
varying degrees.  Things do seem to be better now than they've been in
the past, though.

	---Nathan



Reply to: