Fwd: [HARDWARE] SMP boxes, Win2k, and a cow

Jim C. Nasby jim at nasby.net
Tue Sep 7 17:58:26 EDT 1999


Well, that depends on your definition of shell... I think it's a very unfair to
compare DOS with any multitasking OS. There's a huge number of assumptions
you can make when you know only one thing is running on the CPU at any given
time, it makes writing the OS almost trivial.

If you are reffering to the -STABLE tag in the email header, that is simply
how FreeBSD differentiates between the tree that is 'production' quality and
the 'beta tree', which is known as -CURRENT. -STABLE is code that has been
tested, whereas -CURRENT changes nightly and comes with no guarantees...
somtimes it won't compile, sometimes it will compile but will crash. Though,
from what I understand, it is normally quite stable for being beta.

On Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 05:06:03PM -0400, ENOJON at delphi.com wrote:
> <<X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE i386>>
> <<Not to be rude, but it sounds like someone needs to read the Linux Advocacy FAQ.
> Many people like to run beta software to see what the new features are like;
> that doesn't make them dumb, it makes them curious and perhapse adventurous.>>
> 
> And, now ...for an unbiased opinion?  
>  
> I have yet to see a shell-based os as "stable" as DOS *cough!*
> --
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe hardware' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> 

-- 
Jim C. Nasby (aka Decibel!)                                  /^\
jim at nasby.net                                               /___\
Freelance lighting designer and database developer         /  |  \
Member: Triangle Fraternity, Sports Car Club of America   /___|___\

Give your computer some brain-candy! http://www.distributed.net Team #1828
--
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe hardware' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net



More information about the Hardware mailing list