Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 21:28:24 +0200 From: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> To: Josef El-Rayes <j.el-rayes@daemon.li> Cc: Christian Brueffer <brueffer@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/news press.xml Message-ID: <20031013192824.GB560@nosferatu.blackend.org> In-Reply-To: <20031013184118.GA213@jenny.daemon.li> References: <200310121932.h9CJWoh0043786@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031013180352.GA560@nosferatu.blackend.org> <20031013184118.GA213@jenny.daemon.li>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 08:41:18PM +0200, Josef El-Rayes wrote: > Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > This article is not really serious, and does not give a good/real idea > > of what is FreeBSD, and also provides bad informations. > > which parts of the article are mentioning? why do you think the article > is not serious? > When the author is quite imprecise about sysinstall, especially about the fact we cannot go back and correct previous choices, etc... He also states "The locate database was wiped." by sysinstall and the logs as well. The only way to do that is restarting an install process from the beginning... According to the author systinstall is not reliable. He quickly mentions a guide but does not give any link or direction to find it. The guy complains about sysinstall of 5.0-R and says about 4.8-R "I've been told the install scripts are much better, and configuration is simpler." (Hmm now when I think about "The locate database was wiped.", after reading the article, I doubt he used locate.updatedb to create the database :) ) He states that the "linux emulator" was broken without more details, the word "broken" is quite short in my opinion, and (I can be wrong on that point) I don't remember about this linuxemu problem. He talks about Linux version of OO.org when a native FreeBSD version exists... He said that he had to edit default settings in /etc/rc.firewall, the right way is well documented in one article and in the Handbook. Most of time when the author complains, it's just cause of a lack of doc. reading. Even when the comparaison with Linux is in favor of FreeBSD, we just see he does not understand the things: "It's now common to run top and see that 100MB of my 384MB is unused. No Linux distro was ever so conservative under similar circumstances -- usually leaving less than 30MB free." Of course, he does mention the power of ports but after he spent time to complain about broken apps... When I read that article I just think about a freebsd-question@ thread. Btw he said "If you ask advice, you'll get polite versions of "RTFM" mostly." that is also quite "short" as statement. Marc
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031013192824.GB560>