O. Hartmann schrieb: > Anton Shterenlikht wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:15:52PM -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> the end. Take Gentoo Linux: it's a Linux distribution riddled with >>> choices -- so many bloody choices that one has to make to get a >>> working system, that just one library going south with the wrong >>> option can set you back hours or days in order to get up and going >>> again... we shouldn't go down that road or we'll just be begging for >>> pain, if not from a support end, then from a user endpoint because >>> we'll be more efficient manufacturers of rope than ever before, and >>> users will be isolated from folks trying to reproduce their issues. >> >> As a FBSD user I'm really happy with the current balance between >> freedom of choice and order. This was the thing that attracted me >> first to FBSD (v 4.9), after being thoroughly confused by linux anarchy. >>>> From my point of view this is the ideal balance, and this is what makes >> FBSD stand apart from linux and other BSDs. >> >> Too much choice is not always a good thing. >> >> yours >> anton >> > > .. but having NO or a very RESTRICTED choice could lead to a dead end, > see performance, modern parallel techniques (OpenMP) and new OpenMP? In the core of an operating system? mkay... > built-in-silica -features. If the 'dictated choice' of the compiler > leads also development of the OS's interna (by taking care of having no > specific features like SSE3/4/4.1/4.2 for basic libc-features like > memcopy etc due to the danger the compiler/binutils will not target this > in all cases or whilst the development of the compiler stagnated and > therefore those features could not be used), this could also be the end > for the OS. The end of the world is near! Please, people, keep realistic. > Switching back to an hopeless outdated relict from the past (pcc) means > having years of development and invention bringing those compiler suits > back to the recent state of the art and this means the OS that relies on > those strange political directions could end up behind competitors. This > may sound stupid for several people here, but Within the 13 years with > FreeBSD now, I saw many departments switching from FreeBSD to Linux and > moneyflow is in most cases directed towards expected profit. Since BSD > isn't developed as an academic approach of an OS, it is highly dependend > on a pseudo-commercial success finding new donations hiring developer > (not scientists, what a pitty). I wonder if this has anything to do with the massive amounts of $$$ firms like HP and IBM pour into marketing for the Linux hype...Received on Fri Jan 16 2009 - 10:05:37 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:40 UTC