From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 25 08:47:15 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F021F37B401 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (imap.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B08CD43FF2 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:47:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from snowfall@gmx.co.uk) Received: (qmail 6453 invoked by uid 65534); 25 Jun 2003 15:47:11 -0000 Received: from tnt1-109.quicksilver.net.nz (EHLO computer.gmx.co.uk) (202.89.142.109) by mail.gmx.net (mp008) with SMTP; 25 Jun 2003 17:47:11 +0200 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030626021720.05eeb998@pop.gmx.net> X-Sender: 6803933@pop.gmx.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 03:47:20 +1200 To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org From: Craig Carey In-Reply-To: <20030624164709.Q76569@brainguts.no-ip.com> References: <200306231041.29418.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> <002201c33812$5b881e80$c601a8c0@starfly> <20030621202703.GB10127@over-yonder.net> <200306231041.29418.DavidJohnson@Siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux vs. Windows X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:47:16 -0000 At 2003-06-24 16:51 -0700 Tuesday, Eli Scott wrote: > >I know I'm a bit late on this one, but maybe they should run FreeBSD >against Gentoo on the big TechTV Linux vs FreeBSD shootout. I know >whenever I try and advocate FreeBSD to my Linux friends running Gentoo, >they always point to Portage as being a ports killer. ... Here are some 2001 comments by the CEO of Gentoo: : Surprises in ext3 : Daniel Robbins (drobbins@gentoo.org) : President/CEO, Gentoo Technologies, Inc. : December 1, 2001 ... : Andrea's new VM implementation (which first appeared in 2.4.10) was : really great; it really sped up the kernel and made the entire system : more responsive. 2.4.10 was definitely a major turning point in 2.4 : Linux kernel development; up until then, things weren't looking very : good, and many of us were wondering why we weren't FreeBSD developers. ... : Ext3 has a stellar reputation for being a rock-solid filesystem, http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-fs8.html The reputation of the next builds upon the reputation of the earlier filesystems.. Destructive testing could be done if FreeBSD had to come out as the winner. I don't recall quantitative BSDishy articles using a destructive testing methodology as the chief method for getting Linux rejected. It took me about 2 power-offs of Linux (running in PC), to upset KDE so that it could not boot. To die after only 2 power-offs is most unimpressive. That was with the software over the SGI XFS filesystem, which could be quite reliable: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/ Testing would be quicker if VMware was used. [Reinstalling KDE can take a long time] However I was unable to get Linux 2.4.21 and 2.5 to boot inside of VMware whilst the "/" filesystem was XFS. Perhaps crashing KDE does not get the FreeBSD to Linux crashing ratio under 1/35th. Craig Carey