Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 09:16:40 +0100 From: Nik Clayton <nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk> To: Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: Jonathan Walther <krooger@debian.org>, Jesus Monroy <jesus.monroy@usa.net>, Seth <seth@freebie.dp.ny.frb.org>, advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Linux vs. NT, take 2.] Message-ID: <19990629091640.A10948@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.10.9906291600210.10115-100000@bragg>; from Kris Kennaway on Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 04:04:53PM %2B0930 References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990628194210.32578A-100000@lambdamoo.to> <Pine.OSF.4.10.9906291600210.10115-100000@bragg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 04:04:53PM +0930, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> BTW, unless I'm mistaken FreeBSD was also benchmarked in this test by Mike
> Smith et al.
Could Mike Smith (or someone else involved in the testing) please confirm
or deny this?
A comment from Mike last week certainly seemed to imply that FreeBSD was
involved in these tests, but I haven't seen it mentioned in any of the
articles I've read about it.
N
--
[intentional self-reference] can be easily accommodated using a blessed,
non-self-referential dummy head-node whose own object destructor severs
the links.
-- Tom Christiansen in <375143b5@cs.colorado.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990629091640.A10948>