FreeBSD Is Slowly But Surely Trying To Catch Up With Linux Graphics Drivers

[TeamBlackFox]

The lineage is a bit different:

UNIX v7
l
=
l
4.4BSD-lite
l
386BSD
l l
FreeBSD NetBSD
l l l
DFBSD MidnightBSD OpenBSD

So if that graphic makes sense, 4.4BSD-lite, the last major BSD release, can be traced to UNIX v7 by Bell Labs. 386BSD was forked from the 4.4BSD-lite code, and NetBSD and FreeBSD broke off there, and from there, DragonFlyBSD and MidnightBSD broke off FreeBSD, and OpenBSD off NetBSD

[profoundWHALE]

IIRC, NetBSD and FreeBSD split into their respective groups because FreeBSD devs wanted performance while NetBSD wanted portability. As to why OpenBSD went with NetBSD... I would only really be able to make guesses.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Edit note:

During Jean-S?bastien's talk today in Bordeaux, he covered their challenges and the progress their making in porting these graphics drivers to FreeBSD from Linux.

replace with:

During Jean-S?bastien's talk today in Bordeaux, he covered the challenges and progress they're [they are] making in porting these graphics drivers to FreeBSD from Linux.

[jacob]

IIRC(too lazy for a quickl google) Net/Open*SD were forks of FreeBSD. One targetted at supporting more archs and the other "better" security.

Actually OpenBSD and FreeBSD are forks from NetBSD, one targetted at flattering Theo's ego, the other at practicality.

[stevenc]

The lineage is a bit different:
386BSD
l l
FreeBSD NetBSD
l l l
DFBSD MidnightBSD OpenBSD

could have just linked to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U...ory-simple.svg !

[beetreetime]

Most of the open-source Linux graphics code is MIT/BSD.

In my opinion, that should have been fixed years ago.

As to why OpenBSD went with NetBSD... I would only really be able to make guesses.

Because BSD developers have antisocial tendencies. But de Raadt is even worse. The same can be said for why Matt Dillon left FreeBSD to make DragonflyBSD. This is pretty much how new BSDs are born.

[System25]

Really interesting way to say "freebsd graphics suxx".

FreeBSD Is Slowly But Surely Trying To Catch Up With Linux Graphics Drivers

It is amazingly politically correct statement. IMHO, directly telling FreeBSD suxx when it comes to graphics would be more adequate to reflect actual state of things. IIRC, FBSD nuts did exactly nothing right until UMS has been ditched and newer drivers stopped working. So of course now they're forced to "catch up".

they're now using Mesa 9.1 rather than Mesa 7.6.

Hmm, maybe they should check calendar and mailing list announces. It is 2014, October. MESA 10.3 is out. And MESA 9.1 to MESA 10.3 is like wooden biplane to Airbus A380. One should be really masochistically inclined to use MESA 9.1 these days. I wonder if it operational with GCN-based GPUs, for example.

[wikinevick]

Actually OpenBSD and FreeBSD are forks from NetBSD, one targetted at flattering Theo's ego, the other at practicality.

Ugh.. no ,no ... FreeBSD and NetBSD forked from 386-BSD at nearly the same time. NetBSD centered on portability, while freeBSD wanted to excel on the PC port. OpenBSD did fork (much later) from NetBSD when Theo was kicked out of it due to his particular character (and rudeness).

[Rallos Zek]

Actually OpenBSD and FreeBSD are forks from NetBSD, one targetted at flattering Theo's ego, the other at practicality.

Nope. FreeBSD and NetBSD were started within months of each other and both are forks if you can call them that of 386BSDs patchkit.

[Adarion]

Well. As predicted the other free operating systems can participate from a strong Linux position. Good parts of userland are shared anyway, but the stronger Linux becomes, the better for all the others, too. Just because HW vendors can't ignore it any longer and have to support it. Specs, drivers and stuff. And once a driver is in the free BSD folks can participate. In best case it is even MIT or BSD licensed so they can actually copy/paste it into their kernel and adjust only the kernel specific parts. Good for everybody.