Re: Re: Wow, hadn't realized this list was active
On Tue, Dec 21, 1999 at 04:57:11PM -0500, dan wrote:
> Thats good. I had gotten a different feeling from irc.openprojects.net
> channel #debian, they felt that if it wasn't the easy way out for Debian,
> then it shouldn't be done.
#debian is (in my experience) full of debian users, like debian-user,
rather than Debian developers. Of course the interests of Debian developers
decide what actually happens in Debian.
> How can you judge the FreeBSD userland to know you want to replace it with
> the Debian userland if you've never, and never plan on, work with the
> FreeBSD userland?
> You'd be surprised to know that being a FreeBSD admin is at _LEAST_
> as easy as being a debian admin. While YMMV, for me its a thousand times
> easier.
I find that surprising, since Debian admin seems easy enough to me.
I like the way Debian actually configures software during installation;
FreeBSD (3.2 at least) doesn't seem to do much of that.
> You don't want ext2fs. Its an icky filesystem that corrupts very easily.
> I speak from experience.
I don't buy this. If it were a big problem, we wouldn't be running it.
Somebody would have coded something better.
I don't think there is any resistance to any Debian/BSD mixing
on the Debian side. After all, we've had forks (Corel Linux) and
we're used to lots of distributions using the linux kernel.
To be honest, I don't particularly see the need to run Debian userspace
on a FreeBSD kernel, because I don't believe that the FreeBSD kernel
is either better or worse than the Linux kernel in most cases. If you
have proof otherwise I'd like to see it. I've heard plenty of
zealotry.
For my purposes, the linux kernel is better .. unless you have
ham radio support in the BSD kernel now. Otherwise there's not much
difference.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome.
Reply to: