From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Apr 20 11:56:31 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA06130 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA06124 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA08286; Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:53:33 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199704201853.LAA08286@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) To: james@wgold.demon.co.uk (James Mansion) Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:53:33 -0700 (MST) Cc: skynyrd@opus.cts.cwu.edu, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <3357C6DD.2482@wgold.demon.co.uk> from "James Mansion" at Apr 18, 97 08:09:17 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Well, personally I think the problem is that if I say 'FreeBSD does > not have SMP support', then I mean 'finished and working' and by > implication given the way the (admirable, IMHO) release process > works, this means that stable releases don't have it. > > Trouble is, people pop up and say 'yes it does have SMP support'. > > This is confusing, to say the least. I think there is a bit of semantic confusion here. You are not drawing a distinction between "XXX has SMP support" and "XXX supports SMP". I don't know if anyone in any of the free UNIX camps have stated that "XXX supports SMP". FreeBSD supports "ls". FreeBSD has "sendmail" support. See the difference? (BTW: This is about to become mute; the current discussion on the SMP list is how to get the code main-lined). Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.