Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.aix:48716 comp.unix.bsd:15544 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:7715 comp.unix.solaris:28185 comp.unix.unixware:15089 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!unixhub!news.Stanford.EDU!nntp.stanford.edu!castor From: castor@hassle.Stanford.EDU (Castor Fu) Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.unixware Subject: Re: Unix for PC Date: 08 Dec 1994 21:27:02 GMT Organization: Stanford University Lines: 28 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <CASTOR.94Dec8132703@hassle.Stanford.EDU> References: <3bvmo1$hgr@cascade.pnw.net> <3c0cir$5i2@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <STEINAR.HAUG.94Dec6203939@runit.sintef.no> <3c2met$kmn@mail.fwi.uva.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: hassle.stanford.edu In-reply-to: casper@fwi.uva.nl's message of 6 Dec 1994 22:52:29 +0100 >>>>> "Casper" == Casper H S Dik <casper@fwi.uva.nl> writes: Casper> Steinar.Haug@runit.sintef.no (Steinar Haug) writes: >> I'd rather suggest that they consider installing some patches >> for 4.1.3. Our general impression here is that 4.1.3 (suitably >> patched) is still much more stable than 2.3 (suitably >> patched). Uptime of 59 days is *not* particularly impressive - >> we have many 4.1.3 systems which have been up much longer than >> that. Casper> (Is this going to be another my uptime is bigger than Casper> yours battle?). Heck, why not? Casper> We have average uptimes > 100 days. (Averaged over > 100 Casper> machines) Some machines stay up for 450+ days. One of our two DEC Alpha's running OSF/1 2.0 has been up 71 days so far, and I DON'T think there are many people that would consider this a mature or particularly robust OS. The other system is primary file and mail server and seems to crash about every two weeks. -castor -- -- My current net peeve -v Castor Fu, (castor@drizzle.stanford.edu) looser: 1. less tightly connected 2. less morally restrained . . . loser: One suffering defeat, error, etc. ex ."Losers use looser incorrectly"