Upgrading to FreeBSD 3.2 etc

Dominic Mitchell dom
Thu Sep 2 14:56:56 BST 1999

On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 08:54:59AM +0100, P.A.Osborne wrote:
> Hmm,  here at UKC I and a colleague manage mail/news/web cache etc,  and
> we are now shifting everything to Solaris 7 from earlier versionsover 
> the summer as part of the grand (!) Y2K plan.  Our perception is that 
> 2.5 was the first really changed version of SunOS away from BSD style 
> to SYSV,  2.6 was Sun's first attempt to switch to a microkernel (as 
> most of the core stuff is now packages) but was a bit enthusiastic and 
> 2.7 seems to be the sensible stable release.  I guess that that switched 
> the numbering 2.7 to 7 to avoid confusing new customers and so distinguish 
> between versions.

Actually, in Solaris 2.5, sun started moving back to *BSD practices in a
small way, and further more in 2.6 (I haven't installed 7 yet).  Solaris
has always been SysV since 2.0.  Ironic, they threw away years worth of
bug fixes when they switched the code base....

Solaris 2.x has always been in packages.  It's pkg_add and friends are
an inherited part of SysV.  As to a microkernel, well I think it's
pretty much a traditional Unix architecture, just split into lots of
modules (my -current box has 9 kld's loaded; Most Solaris boxes have
about 50).  Of course, they did completely reengineer the kernel around
threads sometime around 2.4.

Personally, I don't think Solaris got useable until about 2.5.1.

And anyway, 9 times out 10, FreeBSD will do just as well (if not
better).  Solaris is really aimed at the high end of the market...

Also, thanks for mentioning Y2K... I must get all of our 2.6 boxes Y2K
compliant now that I've got the latest sunsolve CD...


More information about the Ukfreebsd mailing list