From owner-cvs-all Thu Mar 11 15:44: 6 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD730152D8; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:43:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05305; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:43:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: "Jan B. Koum " Cc: Greg Lehey , David Greenman , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: BSD/OS compatibility (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf .. In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:24:48 PST." <19990311152448.A19522@best.com> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:43:57 -0800 Message-ID: <5303.921195837@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > I think it is better to give people boxes which can be tweaked to the > max then for us to worry about BSDi compatibility. Well, more to the point, we shouldn't just fall over kicking the minute somebody installs us on a "server class" machine that we claim represents our bread-and-butter market. Something similar to this (>64MB memory detection) is what cost us a major magazine performance review against Linux and BSD/OS when we ended up getting tested with 64MB of memory and the other OSes saw and used the full 128MB, skewing the benchmark results against us for the high-load case. That really sucked and we don't need that happening again, a whole lot more than we need to run a very diminishing number of BSD/OS binaries. Most ISVs appear, sadly, to be rapidly abandoning that market and BSDI itself isn't all too healthy these days. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message