On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 14:00 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ben Hutchings writes ("Re: A few observations about systemd"):
> > What's more, neither of the 'ports' to other kernels increases hardware
> > support.
>
> What they do provide is healthy competition for Linux. There are
> reasons why some users prefer the BSD kernel to Linux. Talking as if
> increased hardware support were the sole criterion to prefer one
> kernel to another is to miss those reasons.
>
> There are some serious problems with the Linux kernel. I still run it
> but I am much more comfortable that there is a choice.
The question is why that choice has to exist within Debian.
> > I fundamentally disagree with the idea that all our packages must avoid
> > relying on certain features because some developers want to experiment
> > with FreeBSD (which already has a Linux emulation layer) or Hurd (a
> > long-running joke) and they are lacking these features. This doesn't
> > serve users, it serves those developers.
>
> I don't know how many Debian kFreeBSD users there are. But neither do
> you.
Current popcon counts for the release architecture are:
i386 : 64901
amd64 : 42128
armel : 1248
powerpc : 592
sparc : 249
ia64 : 63
kfreebsd-amd64 : 40
mipsel : 39
kfreebsd-i386 : 36
s390 : 11
mips : 7
The graphs seem to show each of the kFreeBSD architectures going from
about 20 installations before 'squeeze' release, increasing sharply,
then dropping to their current values. I don't doubt there are users
outside of the project itself. There just aren't very many.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Absolutum obsoletum. (If it works, it's out of date.) - Stafford Beer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part