7 ms·

NetBSD 9.3: A 2022 OS that can run on late-1980s hardware

29 points by lproven 4y ago

balentio 4y ago
[dead]
mrweasel 4y ago
It's awesome that NetBSD can be ported and run on so many wildly different platforms, but do they actually work? I can't seem to figure out if the releases are installed on actual hardware as part of the release process? Some of the tier II platforms are pretty exotic, and there cannot be that many working VAX or Cobalt Microservers machines around anymore.
- nortonham 4y ago
  I think for each tier II arch it can be installed but the extent to which they work varies.
- johnklos 4y ago
  If there's hardware out there, then people are running NetBSD on it. It comes in handy even when people aren't running it as their primary OS. For example, you can netboot NetBSD on your VAX to image disks, to communicate with modern servers and modern peripherals, et cetera, which would be a bit harder with legacy OSes. As it happens, I run NetBSD on a Cobalt which builds NetBSD mipsel pkgsrc packages: https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/1556386525889175552 https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/15563865258891755... I also run NetBSD on some VAXen, also to build pkgsrc packages: https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/1462475158791274503 https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/14624751587912745... NetBSD might not have the best public visibility, but for those of us who appreciate a clean, consistent OS that runs the same on whatever hardware we choose, it's wonderful. If you have an older machine you'd like to keep running, you may end up discovering that NetBSD is preferable to trying to keep some no longer supported Linux variant up and running. Even for modern hardware, it can be preferable - cleaner, smaller, without gratuitous changes from one version to the next...
  - sillywalk 4y ago
    Out of curiosity, a) how long does it take to build all those packages? b) how are the cobalt and VAXen specced out?
    - johnklos 4y ago
      It takes a LONG time, depending on the machine(s) and architectures. pkgsrc has quarterly releases (2022Q1, 2022Q2, and so on). Alpha and UltraSPARC are fast and finish in a month or two, and can build any updates after the first run. SPARC (running on an UltraSPARC Sun Fire V100) and mips64eb (running on an EdgeRouter Lite) finish before the end of the quarter now and then, but I don't count on it. earm and earmv4 may get to the point where they can finish before the end of a quarter because it's trivial to add additional machines, but I haven't had the time or resources to do that yet. Also, there's an issue with distcc and earmv4 I haven't figured out yet. mipsel (Cobalt) and sh3el (Landisk) are not slowpokes, but are run as best effort. The Cobalt is a 250 MHz Cobalt RaQ2 with 256 megs of memory and a 500 gig SATA drive, and the SuperH machine is a 266 MHz SH4 with only 64 megs of memory and a 160 gig IDE disk. Both make use of distcc to help speed compiles. m68k is done by a small cluster of machines: a 1U Amiga 1200 with a Blizzard 1260 (50 MHz m68060), 256 megs of memory, and an SSD on a SATA-IDE, then an IDE-SCSI adapter, two Quadra 605 with 132 megs, two Quadra 610s with 260 megs, and two Quadra 800s with 264 megs. Two of those Macs aren't quite stable yet, but should be fully fixed for the next run. VAX is done by a VAXstation 4000/90 with 128 megs and a 4000/60 with 104 megs, both with fast, modern disks on SATA-IDE-SCSI adapters. Some staging and testing is done using a virtual VAX in simh, but as much actual work as possible is done on real hardware. None of mipsel, sh3el, m68k nor vax are expected to finish a quarter before the quarter is up, but with added hardware and improvements to methods for helping them, more and more packages will be done before the quarters are up. Also, many of a previous quarter's packages are still up to date in the next quarter, so reusing old packages helps lots. Everything is shared using a Raspberry Pi 4 with USB-3 hardware mirrored disk which is running as an NFS server and is also doing distcc for several of the architectures.
      - sillywalk 4y ago
- eschaton 4y ago
  You’d be surprised! I have a lot of vintage hardware, and run a NetBSD server primarily as a way to boot it up over the network in either its original operating system or to run NetBSD. For example, I have some Sun-3 and Sun-4 (pre-SPARCstation) systems on which I’ll run both NetBSD and SunOS, some VAX and HP hardware where I’ll use netbooted NetBSD to image internal or attached disks, etc.
nortonham 4y ago
I thought this was actually not that great of a write up, although it's from the perspective of someone who has never used it. I've used it off on and on for a few years now, but never as my main OS. The install process the author describes (in virtualbox) didn't sound right. When I install it, I don't need to reboot then use sysinst...I use sysinst during the install process to install pkgin, add a user, config my network etc, etc; then when I reboot and login I can config doas/sudo to my liking and start installing binary packages via pkgin. It's all pretty straightforward in my opinion. Later on, the author compares installing net to arch and gentoo. I find NetBSD much easier to install both of those. Something else that irked me was describing NetBSD as "not like just another linux distro." well, of course not, it's a completely independent OS! I did agree about the documentation, and about looking for help online. In my first experience using Net, googling isn't really useful for more complex problems. You can find help on the mailing lists, unitedbsd.com, and reddit, but a new user wouldn't know that. Free and Open have better documentation, and linux has countless online resources. But net's problem re: documentation is just a question of manpower.
- lproven 4y ago
  [Author and poster of the article here] > I thought this was actually not that great of a write up I am sorry to hear that. :-( If you have the time and the inclination, I'd like to learn more about why, so that I can perhaps improve future articles. > although it's from the perspective of someone who has never used it. Yes, that is correct. I am writing for a general non-specialist audience of IT people who are mainly familiar with Windows, and I am trying to describe the pros and cons of alternative OSes, with very limited time and length. > I've used it off on and on for a few years now, but never as my main OS. This is not the first time I've installed (or, sometimes, _tried_ to install) NetBSD but it's the first time I had reason to give it a concerted effort. > The install process the author describes (in virtualbox) didn't sound right. I have heard that from several people. All I did was very simple: download the ISO; create a VM; boot the ISO in the VM and proceed from there, as far as possible, just accepting defaults. (For context: I have been using xNix OSes since 1988. I am a NetBSD newbie but not a PC or Unix newbie.) If that doesn't work, or delivers poor results, then IMHO those are problems, and I describe them as such. > When I install it, I don't need to reboot then use sysinst... Like I said: I mostly accepted defaults. I had never even heard of `sysinst` before I started. > I use sysinst during the install process to install pkgin, add a user, config my network etc, etc; Maybe I could, but I didn't know how or that I should know to do these things. They are apparently not defaults. I think they should be. > then when I reboot and login I can config doas/sudo to my liking Why should a new user have to configure these things? I don't think they should. They are normal parts of the xNix world since Mac OS X 10.0 came out 21 years ago. They should be there, working, enabled and ready to go, right on the install medium before installation. > and start installing binary packages via pkgin. One of my commenters on the Reg said that they had never even heard of "pkgin" and that I was doing it wrong. I submit that is evidence of the extreme fragmentation of the NetBSD community. I also submit that this stuff should be on, enabled and available, by default, from the first boot. > It's all pretty straightforward in my opinion. I disagree. > Later on, the author compares installing net to arch and gentoo. I find NetBSD much easier to install both of those. I strongly disagree. For example, Arch has comprehensive docs. That means "JFGI" and get useful answers. NetBSD does not, as I attempted to describe and illustrate with links. Commentary on that: docs hidden inside PDF files are not enough. Take the Arch wiki as an example of How This Should Be Done. > Something else that irked me was describing NetBSD as "not like just another linux distro." well, of course not, it's a completely independent OS! I am fully aware of that, and the more informed of my readers are, too. However, consider the motto of Distrowatch: "Put the fun back in computing. Use Linux, BSD." For non-specialists, all PC Unixes are one. (And I agree.) They are just points on a spectrum. They are all just free implementations of the basic xNix design. Some run on lots of platforms, including RISC and vintage kit. Some run on nothing but modern x86-64 PCs with UEFI. For a non-expert viewer those are minor implementation details, akin to weird arcane disagreements over the wording of different free software licences. Normal people do not know or care. (Maybe they should; that is a totally different argument and one I am not interested in here. In real life, they don't.) So, yes, NetBSD is competing directly against Linux distros at the weird, hard, DIY end of the spectrum, and the 2 best examples of that I can think of (that any interested non-specialist might have ever heard of) are Arch and Gentoo. > I did agree about the documentation, and about looking for help online. Well, good, glad to hear it, and thank you. :-) > In my first experience using Net, googling isn't really useful for more complex problems. I concur. > You can find help on the mailing lists, Not when you have an editor phoning you up and saying "Liam, where is my copy? I need it now!" Which is directly analagous to someone trying this at home at 2AM when the partner and kids are asleep and there's nobody to help and they don't know who to ask. I spend lots of time on mailing lists but they are no help when you need an answer RIGHT NOW OR ELSE. > unitedbsd.com, Never heard of it. :-( > and reddit Been a Redditor for 15 years or so. I know when the narwhal bacons. But I rarely get much useful info from it. > but a new user wouldn't know that. ... Which is indeed the mindset I try to put myself in when writing this stuff. > Free and Open have better documentation And better support for modern hardware, and better installation programs, and better defaults, and _still_ IMHO neither is very good and neither competes with anything except the worst, weirdest, most niche Linux distros. Sorry if that hurts feelings but it's the truth as I see it, with considerable expert knowledge. > and linux has countless online resources. It does, yes. And that needs to be factored in, for users, for developers, and for documentarians. For instance a FAQ for openSUSE is "what is the SUSE equivalent of Ubuntu's `build-essential`?" This angers the openSUSE faithful who don't know or care, but it's a perfectly fair question. Anyone trying to install openSUSE in Virtualbox needs to find this out to install the guest additions. Also, for comparison, openSUSE has no command to update GRUB. These are failings. And someone in there knows, because if you accidentally type Debian APT commands in openSUSE, they work. It silently accepts them, translates them to Zypper commands and tries to do it. This is The Right Thing To Do. If only the principle were applied more widely, and it understood that having a package aliased to "build-essential" and a command aliased to `update-grub` would help people who only know Ubuntu who wanted to try out openSUSE in a VM. Well, 99% of the potential users of NetBSD already have some basic Linux knowledge. So a very good way to explain things is to give answers to questions in terms of Linux tools. So a good answer to "how to install software" is "The NetBSD equivalent of `apt` and `yum` or `dnf` is called `pkgin`..." and then ensure it's installed by default and available to all. I could go on but this is already a long answer. But net's problem re: documentation is just a question of manpower.
nortonham 4y ago
>We fear that there may be unhappy comments from outraged NetBSD enthusiasts I'm not outraged, just not impressed by what seems like a very quick look at the OS. NetBSD does a lot of good work for such a small project. If anyone is interested in it, there is a small but friendly and helpful NetBSD community online. The NetBSD subreddit and unitedbsd.com are two resources you can use if you have questions.
- lproven 4y ago
  I tried to answer your points on that in the top comment. Yes, it was a quick look. Yes, it did not build on much prior NetBSD knowledge, or knowledge of the other BSDs. This is intentional. Yes, I do have prior xNix knowledge and experience. I have used and/or worked on AIX, SunOS and Solaris, SCO Xenix and SCO UNIX, Mac OS X 10.0 through to macOS 10.14, and Linux since kernel 1.2 or so. You may find it interesting to compare my recent articles on the other BSDs: FreeBSD 13.1 – https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/20/freebsd_131/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/20/freebsd_131/ OpenBSD 7.1 – https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/22/openbsd_71_released_including_apple/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/22/openbsd_71_released_i... I personally consider it a failing that what little coverage I have seen of the BSDs generally is by BSD users who are already familiar with it. All the BSDs put together are a minute fraction of the Linux user base. That means non-specialists will probably know a bit about Linux but probably know nothing at all about BSD. So, I tried to review them on the basis of my own considerable Linux experience. I have been using Linux since 1996, and I have been a full-time salaried employee at both Red Hat and SUSE. I'm also an Ubuntu community member and have used every version since it first launched, and I have been volunteering help on the Ubuntu support mailing list since 2004. So, you know, yes, reasonably clueful, I think. :-) If I had problems installing NetBSD, and I did, then I think pretty much anyone would.
Jaruzel 4y ago
I still couldn't get it to install on my DEC AlphaStation. No matter how hard I tried. :(
- johnklos 4y ago
  Have you tried with NetBSD-current? NetBSD 9 had many issues, particularly on multiprocesor machines, which have all been fixed. My dual processor AlphaServer DS25 is completely happy now.
- rocket_surgeron 4y ago
  I'm running NetBSD on a Digital AlphaStation 200 4/233 with no issues. That's a low-end model based on commodity PC hardware, if you have one of the more big-irony ones, there are some PCI and SRM quirks you need to work around so if your SCSI controller is in a 64-bit PCI slot the disks may not work but if it is in a 32-bit slot they will. On some models SRM can't boot from IDE at all. It's my home's NTP server :-)
johnklos 4y ago
Hmmm... I wonder what went wrong that the author ended up with a shell without line editing and without a properly defined path. I'm sure the article would've been much different were it not for whatever caused that.
- drewg123 4y ago
  I wonder if he wound up in single user mode using /bin/sh on his first boot, and then after installing stuff, he rebooted at some point and would up with a proper shell?
  - lproven 4y ago
    No. I am a fairly clueful xNix user and I have been working with xNix boxes on a professional basis for over ⅓ of a century. When I say "CLI editing didn't work", I mean "I can't use the cursor keys to move left and right." TBH I do not care if some weird Emacs keys work. I personally detest both Emacs and Vi. I am very even-handed like that. :-D I am a fairly competent Unix user -- I am typing on an xNix box right now -- but I am also a Mac user and I have been using Macs since System 6 and Windows since v2.01. I tend to prefer GUIs and GUI editors.
- lproven 4y ago
  The author is the same person who submitted the link. Me. My username matches the byline on the article: I am using my real name. So feel free to ask away. I am here and I am listening. :-) FWIW I do still have the VM here on my machine, so if you want me to, I can check stuff. However do note that as I said in the article, once I managed to install Xfce, a lot of things magically started working, including CLI editing on the console.

29 points by lproven 4y ago

[dead]

It's awesome that NetBSD can be ported and run on so many wildly different platforms, but do they actually work? I can't seem to figure out if the releases are installed on actual hardware as part of the release process? Some of the tier II platforms are pretty exotic, and there cannot be that many working VAX or Cobalt Microservers machines around anymore.

nortonham 4y ago
I think for each tier II arch it can be installed but the extent to which they work varies.
johnklos 4y ago
If there's hardware out there, then people are running NetBSD on it. It comes in handy even when people aren't running it as their primary OS. For example, you can netboot NetBSD on your VAX to image disks, to communicate with modern servers and modern peripherals, et cetera, which would be a bit harder with legacy OSes. As it happens, I run NetBSD on a Cobalt which builds NetBSD mipsel pkgsrc packages: https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/1556386525889175552 https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/15563865258891755... I also run NetBSD on some VAXen, also to build pkgsrc packages: https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/1462475158791274503 https://twitter.com/AnachronistJohn/status/14624751587912745... NetBSD might not have the best public visibility, but for those of us who appreciate a clean, consistent OS that runs the same on whatever hardware we choose, it's wonderful. If you have an older machine you'd like to keep running, you may end up discovering that NetBSD is preferable to trying to keep some no longer supported Linux variant up and running. Even for modern hardware, it can be preferable - cleaner, smaller, without gratuitous changes from one version to the next...
- sillywalk 4y ago
  Out of curiosity, a) how long does it take to build all those packages? b) how are the cobalt and VAXen specced out?
  - johnklos 4y ago
    It takes a LONG time, depending on the machine(s) and architectures. pkgsrc has quarterly releases (2022Q1, 2022Q2, and so on). Alpha and UltraSPARC are fast and finish in a month or two, and can build any updates after the first run. SPARC (running on an UltraSPARC Sun Fire V100) and mips64eb (running on an EdgeRouter Lite) finish before the end of the quarter now and then, but I don't count on it. earm and earmv4 may get to the point where they can finish before the end of a quarter because it's trivial to add additional machines, but I haven't had the time or resources to do that yet. Also, there's an issue with distcc and earmv4 I haven't figured out yet. mipsel (Cobalt) and sh3el (Landisk) are not slowpokes, but are run as best effort. The Cobalt is a 250 MHz Cobalt RaQ2 with 256 megs of memory and a 500 gig SATA drive, and the SuperH machine is a 266 MHz SH4 with only 64 megs of memory and a 160 gig IDE disk. Both make use of distcc to help speed compiles. m68k is done by a small cluster of machines: a 1U Amiga 1200 with a Blizzard 1260 (50 MHz m68060), 256 megs of memory, and an SSD on a SATA-IDE, then an IDE-SCSI adapter, two Quadra 605 with 132 megs, two Quadra 610s with 260 megs, and two Quadra 800s with 264 megs. Two of those Macs aren't quite stable yet, but should be fully fixed for the next run. VAX is done by a VAXstation 4000/90 with 128 megs and a 4000/60 with 104 megs, both with fast, modern disks on SATA-IDE-SCSI adapters. Some staging and testing is done using a virtual VAX in simh, but as much actual work as possible is done on real hardware. None of mipsel, sh3el, m68k nor vax are expected to finish a quarter before the quarter is up, but with added hardware and improvements to methods for helping them, more and more packages will be done before the quarters are up. Also, many of a previous quarter's packages are still up to date in the next quarter, so reusing old packages helps lots. Everything is shared using a Raspberry Pi 4 with USB-3 hardware mirrored disk which is running as an NFS server and is also doing distcc for several of the architectures.
    - sillywalk 4y ago
eschaton 4y ago
You’d be surprised! I have a lot of vintage hardware, and run a NetBSD server primarily as a way to boot it up over the network in either its original operating system or to run NetBSD. For example, I have some Sun-3 and Sun-4 (pre-SPARCstation) systems on which I’ll run both NetBSD and SunOS, some VAX and HP hardware where I’ll use netbooted NetBSD to image internal or attached disks, etc.

nortonham 4y ago

I thought this was actually not that great of a write up, although it's from the perspective of someone who has never used it. I've used it off on and on for a few years now, but never as my main OS. The install process the author describes (in virtualbox) didn't sound right. When I install it, I don't need to reboot then use sysinst...I use sysinst during the install process to install pkgin, add a user, config my network etc, etc; then when I reboot and login I can config doas/sudo to my liking and start installing binary packages via pkgin. It's all pretty straightforward in my opinion. Later on, the author compares installing net to arch and gentoo. I find NetBSD much easier to install both of those. Something else that irked me was describing NetBSD as "not like just another linux distro." well, of course not, it's a completely independent OS! I did agree about the documentation, and about looking for help online. In my first experience using Net, googling isn't really useful for more complex problems. You can find help on the mailing lists, unitedbsd.com, and reddit, but a new user wouldn't know that. Free and Open have better documentation, and linux has countless online resources. But net's problem re: documentation is just a question of manpower.

lproven 4y ago
[Author and poster of the article here] > I thought this was actually not that great of a write up I am sorry to hear that. :-( If you have the time and the inclination, I'd like to learn more about why, so that I can perhaps improve future articles. > although it's from the perspective of someone who has never used it. Yes, that is correct. I am writing for a general non-specialist audience of IT people who are mainly familiar with Windows, and I am trying to describe the pros and cons of alternative OSes, with very limited time and length. > I've used it off on and on for a few years now, but never as my main OS. This is not the first time I've installed (or, sometimes, _tried_ to install) NetBSD but it's the first time I had reason to give it a concerted effort. > The install process the author describes (in virtualbox) didn't sound right. I have heard that from several people. All I did was very simple: download the ISO; create a VM; boot the ISO in the VM and proceed from there, as far as possible, just accepting defaults. (For context: I have been using xNix OSes since 1988. I am a NetBSD newbie but not a PC or Unix newbie.) If that doesn't work, or delivers poor results, then IMHO those are problems, and I describe them as such. > When I install it, I don't need to reboot then use sysinst... Like I said: I mostly accepted defaults. I had never even heard of `sysinst` before I started. > I use sysinst during the install process to install pkgin, add a user, config my network etc, etc; Maybe I could, but I didn't know how or that I should know to do these things. They are apparently not defaults. I think they should be. > then when I reboot and login I can config doas/sudo to my liking Why should a new user have to configure these things? I don't think they should. They are normal parts of the xNix world since Mac OS X 10.0 came out 21 years ago. They should be there, working, enabled and ready to go, right on the install medium before installation. > and start installing binary packages via pkgin. One of my commenters on the Reg said that they had never even heard of "pkgin" and that I was doing it wrong. I submit that is evidence of the extreme fragmentation of the NetBSD community. I also submit that this stuff should be on, enabled and available, by default, from the first boot. > It's all pretty straightforward in my opinion. I disagree. > Later on, the author compares installing net to arch and gentoo. I find NetBSD much easier to install both of those. I strongly disagree. For example, Arch has comprehensive docs. That means "JFGI" and get useful answers. NetBSD does not, as I attempted to describe and illustrate with links. Commentary on that: docs hidden inside PDF files are not enough. Take the Arch wiki as an example of How This Should Be Done. > Something else that irked me was describing NetBSD as "not like just another linux distro." well, of course not, it's a completely independent OS! I am fully aware of that, and the more informed of my readers are, too. However, consider the motto of Distrowatch: "Put the fun back in computing. Use Linux, BSD." For non-specialists, all PC Unixes are one. (And I agree.) They are just points on a spectrum. They are all just free implementations of the basic xNix design. Some run on lots of platforms, including RISC and vintage kit. Some run on nothing but modern x86-64 PCs with UEFI. For a non-expert viewer those are minor implementation details, akin to weird arcane disagreements over the wording of different free software licences. Normal people do not know or care. (Maybe they should; that is a totally different argument and one I am not interested in here. In real life, they don't.) So, yes, NetBSD is competing directly against Linux distros at the weird, hard, DIY end of the spectrum, and the 2 best examples of that I can think of (that any interested non-specialist might have ever heard of) are Arch and Gentoo. > I did agree about the documentation, and about looking for help online. Well, good, glad to hear it, and thank you. :-) > In my first experience using Net, googling isn't really useful for more complex problems. I concur. > You can find help on the mailing lists, Not when you have an editor phoning you up and saying "Liam, where is my copy? I need it now!" Which is directly analagous to someone trying this at home at 2AM when the partner and kids are asleep and there's nobody to help and they don't know who to ask. I spend lots of time on mailing lists but they are no help when you need an answer RIGHT NOW OR ELSE. > unitedbsd.com, Never heard of it. :-( > and reddit Been a Redditor for 15 years or so. I know when the narwhal bacons. But I rarely get much useful info from it. > but a new user wouldn't know that. ... Which is indeed the mindset I try to put myself in when writing this stuff. > Free and Open have better documentation And better support for modern hardware, and better installation programs, and better defaults, and _still_ IMHO neither is very good and neither competes with anything except the worst, weirdest, most niche Linux distros. Sorry if that hurts feelings but it's the truth as I see it, with considerable expert knowledge. > and linux has countless online resources. It does, yes. And that needs to be factored in, for users, for developers, and for documentarians. For instance a FAQ for openSUSE is "what is the SUSE equivalent of Ubuntu's `build-essential`?" This angers the openSUSE faithful who don't know or care, but it's a perfectly fair question. Anyone trying to install openSUSE in Virtualbox needs to find this out to install the guest additions. Also, for comparison, openSUSE has no command to update GRUB. These are failings. And someone in there knows, because if you accidentally type Debian APT commands in openSUSE, they work. It silently accepts them, translates them to Zypper commands and tries to do it. This is The Right Thing To Do. If only the principle were applied more widely, and it understood that having a package aliased to "build-essential" and a command aliased to `update-grub` would help people who only know Ubuntu who wanted to try out openSUSE in a VM. Well, 99% of the potential users of NetBSD already have some basic Linux knowledge. So a very good way to explain things is to give answers to questions in terms of Linux tools. So a good answer to "how to install software" is "The NetBSD equivalent of `apt` and `yum` or `dnf` is called `pkgin`..." and then ensure it's installed by default and available to all. I could go on but this is already a long answer. But net's problem re: documentation is just a question of manpower.

nortonham 4y ago

>We fear that there may be unhappy comments from outraged NetBSD enthusiasts I'm not outraged, just not impressed by what seems like a very quick look at the OS. NetBSD does a lot of good work for such a small project. If anyone is interested in it, there is a small but friendly and helpful NetBSD community online. The NetBSD subreddit and unitedbsd.com are two resources you can use if you have questions.

lproven 4y ago
I tried to answer your points on that in the top comment. Yes, it was a quick look. Yes, it did not build on much prior NetBSD knowledge, or knowledge of the other BSDs. This is intentional. Yes, I do have prior xNix knowledge and experience. I have used and/or worked on AIX, SunOS and Solaris, SCO Xenix and SCO UNIX, Mac OS X 10.0 through to macOS 10.14, and Linux since kernel 1.2 or so. You may find it interesting to compare my recent articles on the other BSDs: FreeBSD 13.1 – https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/20/freebsd_131/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/20/freebsd_131/ OpenBSD 7.1 – https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/22/openbsd_71_released_including_apple/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/22/openbsd_71_released_i... I personally consider it a failing that what little coverage I have seen of the BSDs generally is by BSD users who are already familiar with it. All the BSDs put together are a minute fraction of the Linux user base. That means non-specialists will probably know a bit about Linux but probably know nothing at all about BSD. So, I tried to review them on the basis of my own considerable Linux experience. I have been using Linux since 1996, and I have been a full-time salaried employee at both Red Hat and SUSE. I'm also an Ubuntu community member and have used every version since it first launched, and I have been volunteering help on the Ubuntu support mailing list since 2004. So, you know, yes, reasonably clueful, I think. :-) If I had problems installing NetBSD, and I did, then I think pretty much anyone would.

Jaruzel 4y ago

I still couldn't get it to install on my DEC AlphaStation. No matter how hard I tried. :(

johnklos 4y ago
Have you tried with NetBSD-current? NetBSD 9 had many issues, particularly on multiprocesor machines, which have all been fixed. My dual processor AlphaServer DS25 is completely happy now.
rocket_surgeron 4y ago
I'm running NetBSD on a Digital AlphaStation 200 4/233 with no issues. That's a low-end model based on commodity PC hardware, if you have one of the more big-irony ones, there are some PCI and SRM quirks you need to work around so if your SCSI controller is in a 64-bit PCI slot the disks may not work but if it is in a 32-bit slot they will. On some models SRM can't boot from IDE at all. It's my home's NTP server :-)

johnklos 4y ago

Hmmm... I wonder what went wrong that the author ended up with a shell without line editing and without a properly defined path. I'm sure the article would've been much different were it not for whatever caused that.

drewg123 4y ago
I wonder if he wound up in single user mode using /bin/sh on his first boot, and then after installing stuff, he rebooted at some point and would up with a proper shell?
- lproven 4y ago
  No. I am a fairly clueful xNix user and I have been working with xNix boxes on a professional basis for over ⅓ of a century. When I say "CLI editing didn't work", I mean "I can't use the cursor keys to move left and right." TBH I do not care if some weird Emacs keys work. I personally detest both Emacs and Vi. I am very even-handed like that. :-D I am a fairly competent Unix user -- I am typing on an xNix box right now -- but I am also a Mac user and I have been using Macs since System 6 and Windows since v2.01. I tend to prefer GUIs and GUI editors.
lproven 4y ago
The author is the same person who submitted the link. Me. My username matches the byline on the article: I am using my real name. So feel free to ask away. I am here and I am listening. :-) FWIW I do still have the VM here on my machine, so if you want me to, I can check stuff. However do note that as I said in the article, once I managed to install Xfce, a lot of things magically started working, including CLI editing on the console.