From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Jul 14 18: 6:49 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B74B14CCF; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 18:06:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA02007; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 19:05:54 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.19990714190320.04556180@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 19:05:29 -0600 To: "David Schwartz" From: Brett Glass Subject: RE: NT vs Linux vs FreeBSD Cc: , In-Reply-To: <000001bece5d$1a099ab0$021d85d1@youwant.to> References: <4.2.0.58.19990714182909.045589a0@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 05:58 PM 7/14/99 -0700, David Schwartz wrote: > Regardless, two FreeBSD-3.2 machines running different 'distributions' are >probably going to be a lot more alike than two Linux-2.0.36 machines running >different distributions. > > My belief is that this is both a good thing and a bad thing. It could be either! It depends upon the way in which those systems are alike. For example, if the userland commands are similar, it's less likely that a person who runs or administers one will have trouble with another. But it's also good to have distributions tailored for different needs. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message