Theo de Raadt schrieb:
The reason why I bother this list is that I am impressed of OpenBSD from
the technical point of view. I like its consistency and purity. But in
business environments or comparable organizations where money is an
issue, one needs to think about system management very carefully, since
it has a direct impact on money as well. That's why I can't understand
people can really live with the 6 months lifecycle.
I don't understand this whole conversation.
Oh, I didn't know my English was so bad ;)
Instead, what those vendors give people is a 5 year patch-every-month
cycle.
It is actually a 'patch-every-week' cycle, speaking of SuSE. And there
you don't have this clear distinction between OS and 'programs' since
they distribute patches for everything. When one buys a SuSE Linux
Enterprise Server, you get binary patches for kernel+modules and
applications like MySQL, Apache etc. for five years. Don't ask me *how*
they do it - but they do quite well.
That is completely unsustainable. The pieces we build upon are
advancing too fast.
I couldn't tell Linux is advancing slower.
I don't buy into that method of operating system componentizatio at
all, that you can just keep patching and patching. It was not true 15
years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years ago, and I see no proof that it will
be true ever in the future.
Well, you may be right when asking for the technically 'better' system -
what I didn't do (*please* no flames now ;) ).
--
Stephan A. Rickauer
----------------------------
Institut f|r Neuroinformatik
Universitdt / ETH Z|rich
Winterthurerstriasse 190
CH-8057 Z|rich
Tel: +41 44 635 30 50
Sek: +41 44 635 30 52
Fax: +41 44 635 30 53
http://www.ini.ethz.ch
----------------------------
