On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 10:45:46PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: > On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 07:37:04PM +0000, David Holland wrote: > > > I would argue that this has happened already - FreeBSD and NetBSD are > > > the results... at least from the outside, this is how it looks like, > > > with FreeBSD focusing on few platforms but modernizing itself quite > > > a bit (kernel preempting, zfs, ...) and NetBSD focusing on "it runs > > > everywhere". > > > > Yes, see, this is the problem. "It runs everywhere" now means "it is > > an OS for junkyard machines". That was never the intent when that was > > NetBSD's market positioning, 15+ years ago. Nor is it the reality now. > > This is not what I said "for junkyard machines". It does run on amd64 > as well, after all :-) > > But you can't really argue the point that priorities are quite different > here - "focused on portability, really good cross-build system, etc." > vs. "newest features and maximum efficiency on modern hardware".
Yes, I can. That's all market positioning from 15-20 years ago; it has little or no current relevance, either for NetBSD or FreeBSD. > and until someone shows > up and asks us about supporting yet another OpenBSD offshot, I'm not going > to care. Fair enough :-) -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org