From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 19 12:05:39 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 922E910656CE for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:05:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from demuel@thephinix.org) Received: from mail.thephinix.org (92-237-248-183.cable.ubr07.basl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.237.248.183]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F08428FC14 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:05:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from demuel@thephinix.org) Received: (qmail 85769 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2009 11:41:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO www.thephinix.org) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Jun 2009 11:41:49 -0000 Received: from 10.200.200.243 (SquirrelMail authenticated user demuel) by www.thephinix.org with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:41:49 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6101e8c40906190408h5b6a4496td12e2b9e4872459e@mail.gmail.com> References: <735E59909DEB44AF92825EA7C65CF430@ionicoffice.ionic.co.uk> <00265389C30B444288C246DF37651D0C249024DD1B@server-02.playsafesa.com> <6101e8c40906190408h5b6a4496td12e2b9e4872459e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:41:49 +0100 (BST) From: demuel@thephinix.org To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, misc@openbsd.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Cc: Subject: Re: Open Vs Free BSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:05:40 -0000 Oh why can't this versus this versus that never dies? There had been raging debate about which OSes is much better compared to the others since time immemorial. Sure, each one has its own merits over the others and vice versa. So why feeding this issue up since up to this very moment, there is no winner. > and the security is in netbsd: > > http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?security+8+NetBSD-5.0 > http://www.netbsd.org/~elad/recent/recent06.pdf > > On 6/19/09, Ivan Voras wrote: >> Kim Attree wrote: >> >>> NetBSD runs on just about anything. That's it's primary goal. Since I >>> don't >>> have any weird hardware, I've never had a use for NetBSD. >> >> I don't use NetBSD either but some recent development that come from >> that camp are very interesting: >> >> * Journalling UFS ("smart" journalling, not gjournal) >> * PUFFS (BSD implementation of FUSE-like system [file system in >> userland]) >> * They had Xen dom0 and domU for years >> * They are starting to show decent results in SMP support, including a >> new scheduler (a bit similar to ULE); their GENERIC has SMP included >> * Possibly superpages, I'm not sure how to parse "Merged amd64 and i386 >> pmap. Large pages are always used if available" >> * I think they are working on their own ZFS port >> * They have ported or reimplemented Linux LVM (read+write+admin) >> >> There are of course other things; see for example >> http://www.netbsd.org/releases/formal-5/NetBSD-5.0.html >> >> I have a feeling the project has been revitalized in the last few years. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >