[nycbug-talk] review of "state of demon address"
Wed Oct 20 03:46:45 EDT 2004
On Oct 20, 2004, at 2:37, Isaac Levy wrote:
> Hey George,
> On Oct 19, 2004, at 7:35 PM, G. Rosamond wrote:
>> if i get some positive comments here, i will submit to the nycbug
>> site. There's nothing wrong with us putting up pieces like this in
>> our library section, IMHO.
>> yes, i write compulsively and i did not even reread this.
>> * * * *
> Yo- I'd ask that you not post this (well written) rebuttal to the
> site, UNTIL, you read the response Dru gave me last month here:
> While I agree with 99% of what you wrote, (sup' with whimping out on
> the Darwin section Gman?, [it's equally, insultingly, lame with
> disinformation]), I think your time could be better spent directly
> writing about *BSD stuff, SOLID, INFORMED, and TRUSTED information.
> Where's the pages we can point to which explain the culture,
> development cycles, and strengths of the various *BSD's? (And explain
> why they're not 'distros'.)
Other points of improvement are symmetric multi-threading (SMT), NetBSD
and OpenBSD binary support, next-generation on-the-fly file
de-fragmentation, integration of TrustedBSD security hooks, support for
Java 1.5, XHTML 2.0 and CSS 3.0, and a myriad of minor improvements
sure to make thousands of developers and end-users happy. Clearly,
Darwin is the most inclusive and feature-complete BSD -- and, indeed,
UNIX -- out there.
Ok, I'll bite. First of all, since when does Darwin support NetBSD and
OpenBSD binaries? I would be pretty surprised if this was the case, I
sure didn't notice. Not that it would do you much good anyway. I
heard that NetBSD (perhaps it was FreeBSD) has a compatibility layer
*to* Darwin, but not *from* Darwin. As for TrustedBSD security hooks,
that at least sounds reasonable, but I haven't heard anything about it
either way. Java 1.5, XHTML, and CSS related software IS NOT PART OF
DARWIN FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, that shit ONLY ships with OS X proper.
More information about the talk