[rescue] DEC keyboards

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

Thu, 16 Nov 2006 @ 02:16 -0500, der Mouse said:

> >> Compare the size of sys/arch/ with the size of the rest of sys/
> >> sometime....
> > On my FreeBSD machine, sys is 100MB, the arch dirs are around 8MB.
> 
> Wow.  How many arches does it support?

Not very many.  It's nothing like NetBSD.

Mostly: Alpha, i386, ia64, sparc, and sparc64.

Also, BSD tends to abstract busses out of the rest so the code can be
shared in different architectures. For example, PCI is used by Alpha,
sparc, and i386.

FreeBSD might have ports to other systems, but not in the main tree as
far as I can tell.

Remember it started out focused mainly on i386, and then moved to Alpha
and SPARC later.

> > Alas, I have removed my /usr/src on NetBSD because I'm out of space
> > there.
> 
> > What is the ratio there?
> 
> Obviously, the exact numbers depend on which NetBSD rev you look at.
> 
> The most convenient for me is the 1.4T I froze at in 2000; for that, du
> reports that sys takes 78198 of which sys/arch accounts for 42790;
> sys/arch is just a hair over 54.72% of sys.

Makes sense. NetBSD supports a ton of machines.

I could never stick with a release that old though.

My primary email/gateway/news machine is a Sun SS5, and the speed
increase in the new releases is significant.

> I've also been supping -current; for that, sys takes 161206, of which
> 73285 is sys/arch, making the arch/ files about 45.46% of the total.
> (Interesting; despite the new ports, there's proportionately more MI
> code now.  I don't know whether this indicates good refactoring or just
> that the MI code is bloa^Wgrowing faster than new ports are appearing.)

I'd say it is improvement myself, although NetBSD is having trouble with
its direction lately.

The recent "he said, she said" flamewars between Wasabi and others was
pretty disgusting.

-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- ["Consulting wouldn't be what it is today
without Microsoft Windows" -- Chris Pinkham]