Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
That's a very limited view of what portability means.

Driver support for a niche SoC? Good luck getting NetBSD on before Linux. The sheer amount of SoCs supported by the Linux kernel dwarfs anything NetBSD has to offer.

Yeah, NetBSD's support for modern hardware isn't amazing compared to Linux. I love it (and run my personal web server on it!), but the portability thing feels like a meme from the 4.4BSD days, where it ran on basically every workstation platform.

Like sure, it runs on my VAX, my Sun4/75, and my Alpha box, but it doesn't run on my POWER9 workstation nor does it run my Amlogic A311D ARM device (at least in a usable capacity), and I couldn't even get i.MX 8M running. I didn't try super hard, to be fair, but why would I burn cycles getting an OS with less peripheral support running when Linux "just works"?

I don't think Linux "just works" on VAX, Sun4/75, or Alpha.

My experience with Linux on a Sun Sparcstation 20 circa 2000 was that it was slow as hell compared to Net or OpenBSD.

loading story #47223349
I doubt NetBSD "just works" fully on those systems either. I see a lot of rose tinted glasses when NetBSD portability comes up. Those older systems barely get stress tested, as the system has become too large to be self-hosted on them anymore and has to resort to using cross compilation to build a working base.

At least OpenBSD, when it says it supports a platform, _actually supports that platform_, and the system is stable enough that it can build itself.

loading story #47225783