Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 08:54:11 +0100 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Baldur Gislason <baldur@foo.is>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: AOL in Negotiations to Buy Red Hat Message-ID: <20020123085411.A240@lpt.ens.fr> In-Reply-To: <3C4DE7E9.561BE221@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 02:30:01PM -0800 References: <20020122114500.D64626@lpt.ens.fr> <3C4DE7E9.561BE221@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert said on Jan 22, 2002 at 14:30:01: > Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > On that subject, why does everyone compare slackware to the BSDs? > > Rigor. > The BSDs have more academic rigor (though not as much as an > academic project, by half). Slackware also has academic > rigor, where correctness is the most important thing. Maybe definitions differ -- but it seems among linux users, anyway, the distribution which is generally highly regarded for rigour is Debian. Also, a package management system which does not do dependency tracking and upgrades of dependencies (which, as far as I can make out, Slackware's does not) is not "rigorous" or "correct" -- you can seriously hose your system. The BSD system is closer to correctness but still has problems; the portupgrade scripts make things much better but can't handle all situations either. Debian's system really seems to be the best of the lot in this respect. - Rahul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020123085411.A240>