Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 14:07:09 -0500 (EST) From: "Dan Ts'o" <dan@tsolab.org> To: keith@lightningweb.com (Keith Woodman) Cc: tsprad@set.spradley.tmi.net, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Confusion Message-ID: <199903191907.OAA03449@tsolab.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990319093254.20358A-100000@nefertiti.lightningweb.com> from Keith Woodman at "Mar 19, 99 09:49:37 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Not every person that installs an OS > has the choice in the OS that is being installed. The person who suggested > someone be fired on the spot for not reading the .txt is being a bit harsh > I think, even though for the most part, I agree with the coment. Telling > your boss that it would be best not to install the first > version of a SMP kernel, after he just spent 10k on a dual proc system is what > get's you fired. If you tell you boss "Since SMP adds further complexity and FreeBSD is already going to be new to us, I recommend starting off with the non-SMP version first and then migrating to the SMP version once we have a little more experience.", I don't know any reasonable manager that wouldn't consider this advice -- certainly not fired you instead. There *are* other choices of SMP Unix, not to dissuade from FreeBSD, some them were perhaps a little more shaken down at the time of the release of 3.0. All it takes is a little investigation as to the best choice at any particular time. The point is, that there *are* choices, contrary to what you say. If you boss was insisting not only on the specific OS, but the specific release, contrary to any advice you might give, or what research and user feedback might indicate, then frankly he deserves what he gets. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903191907.OAA03449>