[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: openBSD vs. Debian?
- To: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: openBSD vs. Debian?
- From: Ralph Kube <ralph_kube_(_at_)_gmx_(_dot_)_net>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 01:00:41 +0200
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 04:13:05PM -0400, Matthew Weigel wrote:
> > > by that argument, windows is the most technically advanced OS there is.
> > I wouldn't consider windows as anything to be just nearly as advanced as
> > any unix system on the deeper levels of the OS.
> What you consider true, and what your argument *claims* is true, are
> two different things.
I didn't mean to discuss abou windows on this list since I think there
shouldn't be any traffic wasted on this. Sorry to have this started.
> You are parroting opinions and pulling them from whole cloth without
> any real understanding.
> Why do I say that? The phrase "kernel stuff."
> Hardware support doesn't make anything technically advanced (cf
> Windows, *again*), and in fact OpenBSD had good USB support before
> Linux. Most of the filesystems available for Linux are crap, and the
> ones that aren't crap are simply ported from other systems.
> UFS+softupdates is a good filesystem, much better than what most Linux
> users find themselves using (ext2-3).
Sorry about being so vague but I didn't have the intention to start such
an in-depth discussion. To get more precise:
When I said "technically advanced" I should have used "technologically
advanced". I meant that linux has support for e.g. bluetooth, lvm,
framebuffer, whereas OpenBSD lacks it.
UFS+softupdates is better than ext. But if you consider the age of
ext2 it still performes well. ext3 is the journaling extension to ext2.
Also softupdates and journaling are 2 different ways to keep the
meta-data up to date. You are right that linux supports many non-native
FS, but they still are a part of linux, adding more choices to the user
and more value to the whole thing.
> Something tells me that if OpenBSD's website didn't make that claim,
> you wouldn't think it was true.
Well, the website was the first place I gathered informations about
OpenBSD. Also following the discussions on this list told me that people
value security very much.