Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 12:56:29 -0700 From: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD's UFS vs Ext4 Message-ID: <20100208195629.GB8690@guilt.hydra> In-Reply-To: <4B6F4631.6050501@mailinglist.ahhyes.net> References: <4B6ED119.2060308@mailinglist.ahhyes.net> <20100207172150.GA59080@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk> <4B6F4631.6050501@mailinglist.ahhyes.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--XOIedfhf+7KOe/yw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:01:05AM +1100, alex wrote: > Frank Shute wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 01:41:29AM +1100, alex wrote: > > =20 > >>I see a number of factors putting freebsd behind: > >> > >>* The teams stubbornness with compiler/base tools (wont move away from= =20 > >>gcc 4.2.1 because they just cant accept the GPL2) > > > >They don't like the license, that's not stubbornness. >=20 > Wow thats a good reason to use ancient compilers and assemblers. Sometimes, license choice *is* a good reason to make some sacrifices in short-term convenience. --=20 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] --XOIedfhf+7KOe/yw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAktwbG0ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKW5pACgkyiGNhw3yruwRqFNcZrPQdyZ 11AAn2KTiES2taYxkem57bzNPPoAlod8 =QqkW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XOIedfhf+7KOe/yw--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100208195629.GB8690>