For its excellent backward compatibility: NetBSD 6.1 is still able to run a.out binaries built for NetBSD 1.0
For its system-independant build system. Building NetBSD needs a POSIX system with a C compiler, which does not need to be NetBSD. It first builds the tools for the host, including the compiler itself, and then the target NetBSD system, which may be for another CPU.
For its machine-independant drivers. Have a fancy platform with an odd CPU? If NetBSD has a driver for a chip, it will work a
Theses two OSes are not really for the same usage. NetBSD is good for servers and embedded, but it is not very desktop friendly. It can be used as a desktop, but it required some work that you do not have to do with Fedora.
For Embedded, why bother w/ NetBSD at all - Minix is smaller, but uses the same NetBSD userland. NetBSD is fine for servers. For desktops, I agree w/ you - they'd need to come up w/ their own equivalent of PC-BSD for a desktop OS. Maybe they could re-do the abandoned Desktop BSD distro to be based on NetBSD, borrow PBI/EasyPBI and build a laptop based distro based on that.
However, they may not wish to focus on the desktop at all, and instead, may want to focus on tablets. In which case, they should ta
Minix 2 used to support SPARC in addition to x86. But you're right - right now, Tannenbaum ain't interested in any platform other than ARM, so for people looking at MIPS or PowerPC or SH3/5, it's either Linux or NetBSD or even Windows CE. Incidentally, does Hitachi still do the SuperH CPUs?
Why NetBSD? (Score:5, Informative)
Why NetBSD?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why not Minix? (Score:2)
For Embedded, why bother w/ NetBSD at all - Minix is smaller, but uses the same NetBSD userland. NetBSD is fine for servers. For desktops, I agree w/ you - they'd need to come up w/ their own equivalent of PC-BSD for a desktop OS. Maybe they could re-do the abandoned Desktop BSD distro to be based on NetBSD, borrow PBI/EasyPBI and build a laptop based distro based on that.
However, they may not wish to focus on the desktop at all, and instead, may want to focus on tablets. In which case, they should ta
Re: (Score:2)
For Embedded, why bother w/ NetBSD at all - Minix is smaller, but uses the same NetBSD userland.
Right, but what about kernel support for embedded CPUs? You have ARM, but you could want SH3, SH5, MIPS, PowerPC...
Re:Why not Minix? (Score:2)