New Kernel!

[carl at ucbvax.UUCP]

	This message is in response to Mark Weiser's inquiry about
2.9BSD vs. PSUnix 1.0:

>	How does the "New Kernel!" compare with 2.9 unix on small machines,
>	which claims almost exactly the same advantages that these authors
>	claim?

	We claim many more advantages than those mentioned in John Irwin's
article (260 at psuvax.UUCP).  Namely:

	-	Ours is a complete distribution, not just a new kernel
		(although one would reasonably assume that a C compiler
		and loader are supplied with their version, too).

	-	Many (literally hundreds) of bug fixes and enhancements
		have been made in the user level software as well as the
		kernel.  Much of the new software that will come with
		4.2BSD is also included.

	-	There are impressive speed improvements in system calls,
		illegal instruction traps, and overlay switches.  For
		example, on machines without FP11 floating point boards
		the USG floating point benchmark runs twice as fast on one
		of our systems as it does under System-III (no one has yet
		volunteered a System-V machine for us to test).

	-	The 2.9 file system is twice as fast as V7 or DEC Unix/v7m
		file systems.  Our kernel also knows how to do file system
		updates in the proper order, so that damage is minimized.

	-	Our kernel supports dynamic hardware configuration at boot
		time.  In particular, such issues as separate vs. nonseparate
		I/D cpus and MASSBUS vs. UNIBUS disks and tapes are handled
		transparently so that the same kernel is capable of running
		on many different machines.

	-	Our kernel supports more devices than either V7 or DEC
		Unix/v7m.  Both ECC and DEC standard 144 bad sector
		forwarding is supported for controllers capable of them.

	-	Our kernel also supports vforks and automatic reboots.

	This is in no way an attempt to discourage either the Penn State
group or anyone interested in their software.  Indeed, there are some very
clear advantages to their distribution.  For example:

	-	They are offering support.  We try to be conscientious and
		prompt on bugs reported to us, but make no offer of support.

	-	You wouldn't have to sign the now infamous Berkeley license
		agreement.

	-	It will certainly be cheaper than the $200 we're asking.


			Carl Smith	(ucbvax!carl ; carl at berkeley)

			Manager
			Second Berkeley Software Distribution