Hi, On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm not sure where is that remark headed to. And I don't think >> (re)packaging a business-centric version would harm -- please correct >> me if I'm wrong. >> > > The problem with "enterprise" is that they ship their own kernel which is > heavily modified. Not one, but rather multiple kernels (which includes the generic one). Which otherwise are possible to build with the vanilla distro, but it might take a lot of tweaking time to get there and you got no QA for that either. > If you want enterprise go for OSX :) I think it's the best enterprise BSDish > system ;) Why not help the people already using FreeBSD at their workplace get better arguments to keep and grow the FreeBSD base ? ;) > Also there are more packages for FreeBSD available then for RH, and I can > assure you that > all programs that you actually use (like ssh, apache, perl and etc) you have > to manually compile to fit your needs. I tend to disagree in this particular context -- business usage relies on stability which implies a small set of very well tested packages, not necessarily the latest version. >> >> >>>> >>>> While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the >>>> admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter whether the >>>> service has been enabled or not -- that is the "<svc>_enable" keyword >>>> should have effect only in the bootup/automatic contexts. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Like keywords - forcestart forcerestart forcestop ?!?! >>> >> >> Yes, I am always reminded of that :). >> Well, to tell you the truth, I do not know of any other OS which >> requires prefixing with "force" the start/stop actions in order to act >> on the service at the command line, and personally I wish it weren't >> the case. >> > > Well I bet you can find this in most linux distros that copy FreeBSD. What > about gentoo? Umm, I have used Gentoo and I do not remember having to use "forcestart" at the command line... > Anyway I think that the beauty of the current rc/ng system in freebsd is > that it's very easy to understand and use it. > Not like those nasty XML config files that makes you blind. > There are small fixes that can be applied to make the system even better, > but rewriting it just for the sport looks like wasting too much power :) > But after all FreeBSD innovate do not imitate ;) > > Anyway it's may be just me, but I do not think that the rc system in freebsd > is the showstopper, that needs funding or more ppl looking at it. Right. And I'm going to stop here -- if you want to continue we can go off-the-list. > And btw burdening the rc subsystem to monitor your daemons is overkill too. > It will never work as good as real monitoring software, > and will only bloat things. There are tons of utilities that can do this. Umm, one should not need huge monitoring software packages to accomplish such (simple?) tasks. The inittab/ttys systems comes to my mind when I say this... ;). Over & out, Adrian. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
