In a message dated 1/18/05 7:35:10 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I do not know if you are aware, but somebody else has
already had this idea. The website is
www.dragonflybsd.org.
But please, learn how to be calm in the face of
adversity, and not resort to name calling
In a message dated 1/19/05 2:27:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If I had to install a dozen more servers today, they would all get
FreeBSD. It makes extremely good use of whatever hardware you care to
give it. Indeed, FreeBSD can turn even junky old PCs into productive
too bad, because I know the answer. Cheers.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 1/18/05 4:41:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Gary,
Maybe if you offered solutions instead of whining and bashing all the
time people would be interested in what you have to say. All we've ever
seen you do is throw out insults and complain. If FreeBSD is
In a message dated 1/16/05 7:43:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now i am really puzzled because i cannot understand why 4.x behaves
relatively good compared to 5.x on this specific issue. Is there a
good explanation or does one have to investigate this further?
Also, as
In a message dated 1/16/05 7:43:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
stheg
P.S. (to the list in general) Why do all of the questions about FBSD
performance, especially 4.x vs 5.x, come from people posting from
Windows boxes? Theories?
Because performance is a server issue and
On Jan 14, 2005, at 11:05 PM, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Welcome back to my killfile (although I doubt you'll stay there long
because of your desperate need to hear your own voice).
Kris
Now, I understand his/her/it's words are harsh, but is killing them
really a fair alternative? Well, I guess I
In a message dated 1/13/05 11:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
BS Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
BS that need support for the latest hardware.
It's not a question of latest, it's a question of which hardware.
FreeBSD, like all operating
In a message dated 1/14/05 1:07:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Not necessarily. The interesting question hasn't been addressed yet.
In a message dated 1/14/05 8:12:09 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People on the FreeBSD and Debian GNU/Linux mailing lists are very
kind and help you in any case, if you ask questions politely and you
have searched and read tha manuals first.
So, why do we start always
In a message dated 1/13/05 9:05:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Someone who begins with their first post on the questions list with
invective and insults instead of asking a question will, not surprisingly,
not receive much positive response. People here are interested in
In a message dated 1/14/05 1:46:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
On Jan 14, 2005, at 12:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available,
In a message dated 1/14/05 1:54:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So your claim that its a heavy-duty server platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems
In a message dated 1/14/05 2:05:07 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's too bad he's now choosing to be even more antisocial
by changing his email address to avoid the procmail filters of those
for whom his rantings have lost their amusementKris
No, I've changed my address
In a message dated 1/14/05 5:56:01 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why are you abandoning support for new hardware in 4.x
when you admit that 5.x is not ready? It makes no sense at all.
Jamie, you have a fundamental lack of understanding about how the
FreeBSD community
In a message dated 1/14/05 6:47:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I know how linux, windows, openbsd and every other major open
source project works, and I know how FreeBSD
used to work. I don't know of any other open source project
that abandons its best version to spend
In a message dated 1/14/05 7:07:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why doesn't someone just answer the question? When Watson finally
admitted publically that 5.x has networking issues it ended the last
discussion. Just answer the question.
17 matches
Mail list logo
