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"