Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 00:11:28 -0800 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: Konrad Heuer <kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de> Cc: p_a_r <p_a_r@goplay.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD VS BDS Message-ID: <20000328001128.A10961@orion.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003280921590.21864-100000@gwdu60.gwdg.de>; from kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de on Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 09:39:11AM %2B0200 References: <81491281.2.1636@mx1-12.onmedia.com> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10003280921590.21864-100000@gwdu60.gwdg.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 09:39:11AM +0200, Konrad Heuer wrote: > > The most important strength of NetBSD is its availability on many > different hardware platforms. If you plan to set up your servers on Intel > or DECalpha software, FreeBSD might do better for you. For example, > FreeBSD supports multi-processor systems, NetBSD does not. The FreeBSD > install program is more user-friendly. Just FYI, NetBSD does now have early SMP support. Initial x86 SMP code was commited Feb 22. Obviously, you probably don't want to go running a high-availibility server application on SMP code that's only a month old, but it's coming along. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000328001128.A10961>