Date: Sat, 06 Dec 1997 15:04:59 -0500 From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> To: Shawn Ramsey <shawn@cpl.net> Cc: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 3.0 -release ? Message-ID: <199712062004.PAA27466@whizzo.TransSys.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Dec 1997 21:22:26 PST." <3488E112.4BD862AF@cpl.net> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971205233523.16807U-100000@picnic.mat.net> <3488E112.4BD862AF@cpl.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > hmmmm... skip BSDI. they want to charge absurd amounts, so make them > > > pay for their own ports.. > > > > Isn't that kind of narrow-minded? Exactly the kind most people accuse > > many commercial companies of. FreeBSD is free, to all comers. Do you > > remember where doscmd came from? > > Why should the FreeBSD people make the port collection work with other > OS's? If thats not what some people were suggesting, forget this post. > :) I see no problem with making them available for other OS's to use, > but that is already the case isnt it? > > I would tend to agree with the statement about BSDI, whether doscmd came > from them or anywhere else...Its a great OS, but not so great company > behind it. At my "day job", we have quite a few machines running BSDI, and have been pretty happy with the support and quality of software. They tend not to be as far out on the "bleeding edge" with features, but this isn't too surprising if you're trying for maximal stability. They've got some very smart and clever people hacking code over there, and with good taste. Your characterization of "... not so great company behind it." is certainly not universally accepted. louie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712062004.PAA27466>