From owner-freebsd-advocacy  Wed Jul 14 17:58:38 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Received: from shell.webmaster.com (mail.webmaster.com [209.133.28.73])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5878E15487; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 17:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from davids@webmaster.com)
Received: from whenever ([209.133.29.2]) by shell.webmaster.com
          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-12345L500S10000V35)
          with SMTP id com; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 17:58:08 -0700
From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: "Tani Hosokawa" <unknown@riverstyx.net>,
	"Brett Glass" <brett@lariat.org>
Cc: <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>, <advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject: RE: NT vs Linux vs FreeBSD
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 17:58:08 -0700
Message-ID: <000101bece5d$1a9b0540$021d85d1@youwant.to>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9907141739150.689-100000@avarice.riverstyx.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG


> Any time I've ever heard of this particular point being raised it was to
> boost FreeBSD, since it's easier to develop for a single platform.  For
> example, the NTP people dropped official support of Linux because of the
> frequency of changes to the kernel, as well as the difficulty in making it
> work on all flavours of Linux.  They mentioned FreeBSD specifically as a
> more stable platform developer-wise.

	Amusing, considering that the latest versions of NTP run fine on Linux and
break on FreeBSD.

	DS



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message