Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:55:56 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: dg@root.com Cc: terry@lambert.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, dennis@etinc.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation Message-ID: <199701201955.MAA16041@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199701201923.LAA01371@root.com> from "David Greenman" at Jan 20, 97 11:23:48 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >1) Linux has ELF. > > Linux often wishes they didn't. > > >2) FreeBSD does not. > >3) ELF is desirable > > ELF is a bloated abomination that has numerous architectural problems and > is good at making things slower. Begging the admirals pardon, sir... but isn't it true that most commercial UNIX developement for SCO and Solaris platforms is now ELF? Compare and contrast the amount of developement for commercial vs. "free UNIX" platforms. And isn't it also true that most component-software for Intel (meaning all of the ActiveX stuff) is also ELF, and could potentially be utilized by an ELF-based system? ELF is right for reasons other than "it's a fine implementation" (which it isn't). > >4) Linux is doing something right that FreeBSD isn't. > > Yeah, they are better at marketing than we are. They've also been around > for two years longer than we have. All things considered, I think we're doing > rather well. They haven't been around for two years more... you are unfairly thowing out the 386BSD efforts in order to get FreeBSD a more defensible place on the lifecycle curve. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701201955.MAA16041>