[geeks] A Real OS? (was: Re: my capitalization.. etc.)

[alex j avriette]

> Didn't Sun make the move from BSD with Solaris?

i dont think that the current solaris is really either bsd or sysv. you 
can see traces of either in lots of places.

> I have read through the Linux source code.  I agree that the
> coding isn't the best, but it does support the hardware I

its a crude (but i think effective) test to do something like this:

cd /usr/src
grep -d recurse fuck * | wc -l

or use whatever term of anger you choose. last i checked i had 1800 hits 
on the linux source tree and <200 on the openbsd tree. generally such 
comments are inserted when something isnt working. just read through 
them and see what you find. i prefer working in the bsd tree.

>> Remember that Sun used to -ship- a BSD derivative and that at least 
>> one of
>> Sun's founders -created- BSD, back when BSD was just a set of userland
>> utilities.
>
> And yet Sun is on the bandwagon.

i think youre missing the point. i think what pete and i have been 
saying is that linux is just finding itself coincidentally in a bit of 
hype. had the hype happened four years ago, wrt free operating systems, 
linux just wasnt ready, and something else (i'm guessing netbsd) would 
have been used. linux is not an ideal operating system for any of the 
hardware its being sold on (except x86 stuff dell and others are selling 
it on). it does however have the name recognition it needs to be sold -- 
and thus make money for Sun and IBM. its even a little sexy. and thats 
what its about. not the fitness of linux for any particular task. i 
should forward you an email a friend of mine sent me from his boss. the 
gist is, he installed openbsd on their firewall boxes (in place of some 
lame commercial product). the boss sends an email to the department 
saying that "$friend has installed Linux (OpenBSD) on our firewall 
boxes, and they are more secure now than they were, and theyre FREE!" 
anyhow, you get the idea. they dont know, nor do they care what theyre 
using. its all about the hype.

> If they'd put all this together and drop the ego trips then
> you'd have the best of all three.  Instead you have to use

geeks? ego trips? naaaah...

> The BSDs need more hardware vendor support, too.

no, they dont. what makes linux suck is how over-extended it is 
supporting everything. if they would just flatly say "no, we're not 
going to support joebobs backwoods video card," the code wouldnt be in 
your kernel config and it would be easier to know your kernel. the 
developers could focus on more important things. linux supports 
everything. but because they support everything, they support nothing 
"well." except i guess the intel/amd x86 platform.

> What *BSD has over Linux is the lack of the Stallman disease.

do we really want to get into a bsd vs linux war?

> Why the BSD groups aren't working with major companies to get
> them to realize this I don't know.

perhaps because they realize that the more hype there is the lower the 
quality of the OS will be. there's an openbsd faq on this that says, 
sure, be an advocate, but openbsd is not for everyone and will not oust 
X os on the desktop.

> prefer SysV init files and layout.  I'd really prefer to

ick.

> use Solaris x86, but give me a BSD with support for my
> hardware and I'll switch in a heartbeat.

hm. i need solaris for mips.

alex