Re: Solaris: The Most Advanced OS?
James Strandboge wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 11:11 -0600, Mike McCarty wrote:
I used Solaris for many years for serious embedded development work,
[snip]
I have to reboot my Windows machines). I only saw Solaris crash
two times in over five years.
Probably depends on what you are doing. I have servers running 2.4
kernels that only have to be rebooted for kernel upgrades. Otherwise
they are very solid. Not to mention, if you are comparing commodity
hardware to Sun's, then these issues you are having could very well be
hardware related (you didn't mention hardware, so I thought I'd toss
that out).
I'm running on a Compaq Presario 2.7MHz machine. The lockups I've had
with Linux have, AFAICT, not been hardware related, and I would be
one who should know.
That sort of weirdness never happened with Solaris. I've also been
unable to umount the floppy, when I know there was no process using
it, using Linux.
This is probably fam running in the background. This is a known issue
and many people just don't use fam as a result. gamin with an inotify
kernel is/will be much better.
I just checked, and
$ ps -A | grep fam
4415 ? 00:00:04 fam
So perhaps that is it. I wouldn't know.
Linux seems to be more of a hacker/fiddler's dream, while Solaris
is more of a let's get the job done, it just runs sort of deal.
Hmm... I use and rely on GNU/Linux in production for my day to day work
without incident, and am quite happy with it.
That said, I will say that I really do NOT like the 2.6 kernel
development model. With so much development happening on a 'stable'
I ran the Red Hat 6.2 release for some time several years ago,
and found it diffcult to keep up. I'm using 2.6 (I have used several
releases of it) and found it much easier, but also much less solid
than Solaris.
kernel, you can't help but introduce new bugs (there were no less than
12 'stable' patches to the 2.6.11 alone). Leaving it up to the
distributors is a disservice to them and users because backporting
security patches from the latest upstream to Debian's stable kernel is
hard since the 2.6 series is such a moving target. Of course, it is not
like this hasn't been discussed before....
Agreed.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
Reply to: