From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Apr 7 22: 8:36 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from obie.softweyr.com (obie.softweyr.com [204.68.178.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F406837B931 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 22:08:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.com (Foolstrustidentd@obie.softweyr.com [204.68.178.33]) by obie.softweyr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA24990; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 23:08:13 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Message-ID: <38EEBED5.F2D245D@softweyr.com> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 23:08:37 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Holloway Cc: Ugen Antsilevitch , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is traditional unixes kernel really stable ? References: <200004072315.QAA01455@papermill.wrs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG David Holloway wrote: > > In message <38EE6AA7.55DEA97D@xonix.com>, Ugen Antsilevitch writes: > > > >Gustavo V G C Rios wrote: > > > >QNX is great and all the power to it. This is FreeBSD and it is unix and BSD > >and as such it is what it is. If it would take a QNX approach then it would > >not be FreeBSD but something rather different. Thats the answer... > > Yeah I wouldn't want to have to retaliate with > shameless plugs of vxWorks. Because that might cause me to go off on a rant about how inappropriate both are for making well-behaved internet servers. Portability my ass. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message