[SPARCbook] Which BSD, and will anyone ever do the pcmcia bridge?

[Koyote]

> Your comments on the lack of the pcmcia bridge chip support, and a
> comfort standpoint from Solaris.
> 
> A casual review of the kernel code shows the same level of support for
> the pcmcia bridge between Linux and the BSD's.

so?

That still does not make me wrong about linux in this case.

> 
> I find the 2.4 kernels that I run to be much snappier then Solaris
> 2.6, and it does not have heat issues. I have had up times of over 100
> days with linux (and then I rebooted for a different issue). Once I
> unpack from my move, I will build a 2.5 kernel on a 3GX, and report
> the results.

sol 2.6 doing what? windowmaker? kde? I find a lot of the subsystems
faster on 2.6- like scsi.

> 
> As for Linux vs BSD speed, be serious. If you want speed, get a
> different machine. You have already said you would use Solaris if you
> can get a 802.11 driver, so now stating speed is important is
> contradictory. The "My OS can context switch 10 usecs faster than
> yours" is a little lame.

Stating that I would go with the 802.11 support over speed does not mean
that I consider speed to be unimportant given the current lack of 802.11
support. MY, but you are capable of reading a lot into things.

Performance is always lame to when consider around linux. Yet- in the
end- it can and does matter. Why do you assume that I should not care
about getting the best possible performance out of old hardware just
because it is old?

Are you really suggesting that I run slower code because the hardware is
slow? or even that it doesn't matter if I make the 'slow' hardware take
performance hits?  

 
> I am sure you would happily use Linux if someone finished off the
> pcmcia issues.

No. I'd use it, but I'd grumble. I'd even support whoever finally got
the support going, but I'd grumble.

Linux is longer so small and tight as to be comfortable to run on older
hardware in general. And all the performance tweaking seems to be
focussed on the x86 stuff.