From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Apr 14 07:09:46 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA15656
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 07:09:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA15530
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 07:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA29969; Mon, 14 Apr 1997 10:16:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970414100835.00b44700@etinc.com>
X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 10:08:38 -0400
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu>, jbryant@tfs.net
From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial vendors registry
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

At 11:41 PM 4/13/97 -0400, David S. Miller wrote:
>   From: Jim Bryant <jbryant@argus.lcs.mit.edu>
>   Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 22:13:31 -0500 (CDT)
>
>   Case in point...  Lin[s]ux...  
> [ ... ]
>   bad networking, even worse VM...
>
>Care to back these claims up with factual information?  I've studied
>both FreeBSD's and Linux's vm/net subsystems at great length, and I
>would love to know what I might have overlooked during my studies.

Any second year CS student can tell that the networking code is
crap just by looking at it. 'Can't say I know much about the VM
subsystem though.

db