Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jul 2011 12:07:24 -0700
From:      Arthur Barlow <>
Subject:   Re: Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore
Message-ID:  <>

Next in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:00:49 +0200
> From: Jerome Herman <>
> Subject: Re: Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore
> To:
> Message-ID: <>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1; format=3Dflowed
> On 17/07/2011 15:02, "C. Bergstr=F6m" wrote:
>> =A0On 07/17/11 07:43 PM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
>>> Op 17-7-2011 14:17 schreef Subbsd:
>>>> community decreases. It is a pity that many developers of FreeBSD have
>>>> left in Apple, the small part works over {NET,OPEN,DRAGONFLY}.BSD but
>>>> as a whole it already absolutely small small groups of people.
>>> And do you feel this will be the end of FreeBSD?
>> I doubt that *BSD will *end*, but at which point does lack of usage
>> make an OS irrelevant?
>> 1) Is it used in production? =A0If so does it serve a critical role?
>> 2) What commercial support options are available? =A0(Also what popular
>> commercial/proprietary software are available )
>> 3) How well is it keeping pace with existing sw and hw technologies?
>> 4) How focused and productive is the development community?
>> I have some personal views on the above, but I consider *BSD severely
>> lacking in a few areas. =A0(No I can't personally help and only kick
>> these questions off from the sidelines)
>> Software typically exists to solve a problem. =A0What problem is *BSD
>> trying to solve? =A0If something serves a purpose then there should be
>> no denying it's future relevance.
> The problem *BSD is trying to solve (in my humble opinion) is reliable
> long term maintenance, from developers and sysadmin point of view.
> Linux frequent API/ABI breaks makes it a real hell to maintain. And the
> ever changing method of configuration/ever moving location of
> configuration files doesn't help.
> =A0*BSD are stable in every sense of the word.
> This of course implies that there are a lot fewer "advanced" features in
> BSD than in Linux (by advanced I actually mean hyped). But then again
> most of these features end up in the rubbish can with Linux. SE-Linux ?
> Realtime ? Hal ? Containers ? You do not want to look in what state they
> are in. And you hardly want to learn how to use them as the entire thing
> is very likely to change completely before 6 months are passed.
> Jerome Herman

I'm sick and tired of Linux people reinventing the wheel five or six
times with very little if any benefit to the end user.  Thank goodness
for more sensible *NIX types with BSD.

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