Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:19:04 -0400
From:      Michael Sierchio <>
To:        Sam George <>
Subject:   Re: Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <20110717071059.25971662@scorpio> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
IMHO what has helped Linux is the existence of commercial
distributions with support - Red Hat, SUSE, etc.  The only attempts to
do this for BSD have been undercapitalized and/or half-hearted.

But I find the general premise of the discussion to be - how to say
this politely? - stupid.  Things that interest me are relevant, things
that don't presumably are not, until they are.

- Michael  (FreeBSD since 2.2.2)

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Sam George <> wrote:
> On 7/17/2011 05:10, Jerry wrote:
>> While I usually consider Slashdot nothing more than a bunch of
>> juveniles ranting against Microsoft; however, I did find this rather
>> interesting post this morning.
>> "Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore"
>> <
>> Interestingly enough, a great deal of it is true. It might be
>> interesting to know how others feel about it. Obviously, asking that
>> question on this forum is like playing against a stacked deck; however,
>> it still might prove interesting.
> Having come to BSD from Linux less than a month ago, I find it interestin=
> that the very thing, which Mr. Pottering is encouraging in Linux
> development, is what has lead me to search for other options besides Linu=
> =A0Of late Linux has been loosing the 'plays well with others award'. =A0=
> they cut the .AppleDouble support from the appletalk drivers, then they
> refused to let the ReiserFS code into the kernel, and I suppose their lac=
> of implementing ZFS is possibly same motivation (given that they _do_ hav=
> the man power to port the code).
> If they feel that they are an end-all and be-all and don't need to suppor=
> "legacy" systems, obscure hardware, or other ways of doing things, well,
> I'll find another way. =A0This thing is about Freedom, if they cut that f=
> their development plan, then it's time to say farewell.
> Pottering seems to have forgotten, or perhaps he is too young to remember=
> Linux was a 'toy OS'. =A0And if it's too big a burden to support 'toy OS'=
> then Pottering is no different from the people who worked at the big
> companies twenty years ago.
> Getting back to the message I'm replying to, I disagree with mr pottering=
> basis statements: "If Debian was my project I'd try to focus on making (o=
> keeping) it _professionally relevant_" =A0-- I'll translate this as: If i=
> ain't business and making money, drop it. =A0"...we want to make sure Lin=
> enters the mainstream all across the board." =A0-- =A0This sounds like de=
> systems to me, but there is much more to the world than the shrinking mar=
> share of the desktop. =A0UNIX was born in the research world as a pet pro=
> to have fun -- written after hours. =A0BSD continued that journey toward
> freedom recoding the parts of UNIX that had been stripped out by
> unscrupulous business dealings. =A0Hopefully Linux won't turn out to be a=
> evolutionary miss-step, but...
> If Kerningham and Richie were focused on staying 'professionally relevant=
> UNIX would never have /existed/, and as its decedents, neither would have
> BSD or Linux. =A0Is BSD relevant? =A0Looks like it's /essential/ given th=
> context of the question.
> Live Free.
> Sam George
> _______________________________________________
> mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.o=

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>