Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!news.mathworks.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!szdc!szdc-e!news From: "John S. Dyson" <dyson@freebsd.org> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs BSD Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 22:53:41 -0500 Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine Lines: 39 Message-ID: <32F955C5.2781E494@freebsd.org> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5c155c$p6u@raven.eva.net> <5c19pg$rf6@lynx.dac.neu.edu> <5c39sk$ddl@troma.rv.tis.com> <5c8jlm$50u@cynic.portal.ca> <m23evrulla.fsf@desk.crynwr.com> <5cdqos$e6k@camel1.mindspring.com> <Pine.SOL.3.91.970201040446.16129A-100000@ux8.cso.uiuc.edu> <32F378FC.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <slrn5ekm26.5ml.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar> <32F68743.2781E494@freebsd.org> <slrn5feb63.93l.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar> <32F73973.167EB0E7@freebsd.org> <slrn5fejrn.353.bet@onyx.interactive.net> <32F788CE.7DA1@indy.celebration.net> <ywtvi87rgwh.fsf@math.ucsb.edu> <32F8A363.41C67EA6@freebsd.org> <ywtraiu7krv.fsf@math.ucsb.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT i386) Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:157050 comp.os.linux.advocacy:82979 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2401 Axel Boldt wrote: > > "John S. Dyson" <dyson@freebsd.org> writes: > > > Axel Boldt wrote: > > > > "John S. Dyson" <dyson@indy.celebration.net> writes: > > > > > If you are comparing a FreeBSD V2.1 kernel with Linux 2.X, you'll > > > > find that Linux is faster in many ways. FreeBSD V2.1 is of the > > > > Linux 1.2.X vintage, and we sorely need to release a 2.2 kernel > > > > > Of course, the main reason for upgrading is for performance and > > > > stability, > > > > You just admitted above that the current released version of Linux is > > > faster than the current released version of FreeBSD, so "performance" > > > is a vaporware argument. > > > Actually I said "in many ways" which means NOT in every way. > > Even 2.1.X is faster in very important ways than the latest > > greatest Linux kernel. There are ways that each performs > > very well, however 2.1.X comes out behind in some LL benchmarks > > (which are questionable in measuring real world perf.) > > You perform a pretty funny dance here. Linux wins most tests, but > those are the unimportant ones, I got it right? Now give a criterion > for "importance" please, so that we can talk business. > Actually, it is not a funny dance. And note that I am speaking only of the soon-to-be "old" 2.1.X series. The new stuff is much faster, and already many people are using it. For them, it is already "released." Unfortunately, we have put off a formal release of our 2.2 series too long :-(. John