Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!CERN.ch!tifrvax.tifr.res.in!bhiksha From: bhiksha@tifrvax.tifr.res.in (R Bhiksha Raj) Subject: RE: Stable *BSD for Intel Message-ID: <11MAR94.11383499@tifrvax.tifr.res.in> Sender: news@news.cern.ch (USENET News System) Organization: Tata Institute of Fundamental Research References: <2l4r3i$cb6@hq.hq.af.mil> <2l81of$rmp@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <CMGMoA.F03@apollo.hp.com> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 1994 11:38:34 GMT Lines: 16 >2) In my experience, NetBSD 0.9 is *not* stable on machines with two > IDE drives, because of bugs in the wd.c driver. I did not > experience these problems with either 386bsd 0.1 or NetBSD 0.8. > It may well be quite stable on non-IDE systems. I've been beating hell out of my NetBSD-0.9 box with two IDE drives (Seagate), for the better part of 6 months now. I've also been beating hell out of my Sparc Station I. For the record, the SSI has crashed far more times than my NetBSD box has (about half a doz times in 6 months, only 2 unexplained). Neither of them has lost a file ever :-) Just my 2 cents... bhiksha