3 ms·
Code aside, the goals for each project are vastly different. There's nothing to be gained by consolidation.
by E39M5S62 1y ago
Code aside, the goals for each project are vastly different. There's nothing to be gained by consolidation.
- nobodyandproud 1y agoEvery Linux distro has different goals. But a unified kernel (more or less). For hardware, can a single device driver be made for all variants of BSD? If so, then I agree.
- cperciva 1y agoThere's a lot of shared code.
- spauldo 1y agoYou aren't going to see OpenBSD share a kernel with anyone - it's too different and makes trade-offs the others won't accept. And NetBSD doesn't need the heavyweight kernel FreeBSD uses. From what I've seen, the BSD community swaps code around on a regular basis. But they pick and choose what code to use based on their own goals. It seems to work pretty well.
- nobodyandproud 1y agoI know nobody will touch this with a ten foot pole, but from a thousand mile view the BSDs seem like a good candidate for a microkernel.
- AtlasBarfed 1y agoWhat are the goals/specialization/actual use of each? FreeBSD: I always got the impression this was trying to be full modern UNIX but non-linux NetBSD: I guess this is for older/less powerful computers based on comments here? OpenBSD: ???Security??? Dragonfly: a schism over threading, but FreeBSD?