Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 13th May 2006 18:32 UTC, submitted by Valour
SoftwareInReview, well, reviews FreeBSD 6.1, and concludes: "Overall I found FreeBSD 6.1 to be another step in the right direction, and I think it's encouraging that there weren't any revolutionary base system changes in this release. Sometimes big changes are unavoidable, but historically the FreeBSD team has bungled such leaps as the switch to the ULE scheduler, the introduction of SMP, and the liberation of the base system from the big giant lock. Sometimes you have to stop and make sure that what you presently have is working properly, and it looks like now is that time for FreeBSD. I applaud their efforts with 6.1 and look forward to testing 6.2."
Thread beginning with comment 124415
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-03-11
Member since:2006-01-01
Member since:2006-02-15
Member since:2006-01-01
Member since:
2006-01-23
once again, having been exposed to both systems for a decade i do not understand why people think ports are such a huge deal. i would take apt/dpkg over them in almost any case. if i could make one significant improvement in freebsd it would be to adopt the debian package model. not to say ports doesn't work, its simply far less elegant than modern package management chains. and very often it breaks
Once again, no serious FreeBSD user wants apt/dpkg. Compiling software is much more flexible. Also there _are_ packages, which you can install with pkg_add -rv. So use Debian if you want to go with stupid apt-get.