Ultimately, it's the similarity between FreeBSD and
Linux that's confusing you, not really the differences.
Good quote candidate...
Regards,
Onno
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, Patrick wrote:
It has to be said that running one distro is easier to manage. At
work we have Win NT Server, Red Hat, FreeBSD and a solitary mail
server running Debian as a result of my evangelising. The diversity
is a pain when for example we want to work on the
A disturbing excerpt from Linux vs. Linux, by Charles Babcock,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Week,
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/2320/tc/2321261.html
And yet, such an optimistic outcome is not a sure thing. Minor
examples of Linux forks already exist. When Tom Stoddard, database
Bill Wohler wrote:
And yet, such an optimistic outcome is not a sure thing. Minor
examples of Linux forks already exist. When Tom Stoddard, database
administrator at BFGoodrich's Avionics Division, loaded backup
software on company servers in Grand Rapids, Mich., he found an
Joey Hess wrote:
Of course it's difficult to tell without any technical details, but my
educated guess would be that the non-free binary-only software they tried
to use was linked with -rpath, so it will only work if some library is in a
specific place. Which is of course, its own fault, and
It has to be said that running one distro is easier to manage. At
work we have Win NT Server, Red Hat, FreeBSD and a solitary mail
server running Debian as a result of my evangelising. The diversity
is a pain when for example we want to work on the FreeBSD box and
no-one knows where any files
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 18:32:46 -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
Of course it's difficult to tell without any technical details, but my
educated guess would be that the non-free binary-only software they tried
to use was linked with -rpath,
I second that guess. I've seen this before, once with the CDE
7 matches
Mail list logo
