Subject: Re: 3 Lisps, 3 Ways of Specifying OS From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.net> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 21:42:29 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3212689347044644@naggum.net> * Rajappa Iyer | Not trying to start a Linux vs. FreeBSD flamewar [...] I shall attempt to keep that in mind. | Contrast this to the number of combinations that an ISV may have to deal | with a Linux distribution. The base system is a (IMHO hodge podge) | collection of independently maintained packages. It doesn't matter how | good your packaging system is: you cannot precisely define the | environment unless you specify the version numbers of several packages. Nice try with yet more FUD, though. Debian delivers exactly as well-defined releases as FreeBSD does. 2.2r3 is the current release. FreeBSD folks need to figure out that while they have a definitve edge compared to the worst Linux distributions, that does not mean they have that an edge compared to the best Linux distributions. Why anyone would want to compare themselves to anybhing _but_ the best is beyond me. I guess it is the only way some people _think_ they can win, at least until someone points it out to them, but from what I have seen of FreeBSD, it is a worthy competitor even for the best of the Linuxes and should not have had to resort to such game-playing. /// -- Norway is now run by a priest from the fundamentalist Christian People's Party, the fifth largest party representing one eighth of the electorate. -- The purpose of computing is insight, not numbers. -- Richard Hamming