Re: [tlug] [OT] Intel core duo errata

["Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com>]

On 06/07/07, Daniel A. Ramaley <daniel.ramaley@example.com> wrote:

> On Friday 06 July 2007 03:00, Nguyen Vu Hung wrote:
>
> >1. OpenBSD: Slow. Long release cycle. Security oriented. Stable.
> >2. Linux: Fast. Short release cycle. Feature oriented.
>
> I don't think all of the attributes you grant OpenBSD are entirely
> accurate. It certainly isn't slow. And new versions of OpenBSD are
> released very regularly: every 6 months.

I think he was perhaps talking about the kernel, not the userland. BSD
kernel development proceeds slowly and conservatively. Of course, bugs
get fixed aggressively, but drivers and crazy new architectures lag.

Which is not a bad thing; it is just, as Nguyen-san was pointing out
(Nguyen, what should we call you? Vu Hung? Nguyen?), a different
philosophy of development. I don't think you'd find many experienced
sysadmins who would argue that the Linux kernel is more stable than
the BSD one.

But Linux's experimental culture has led to some really cool shite
that has flowed back into some of the other Unices, just as Linux has
borrowed tried-and-true stuff from them.

--
Cheers,
Josh