Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Jul 2011 17:36 UTC, submitted by vivainio
Linux Linux.FR has an interview with Lennart Poettering of PulseAudio and systemd fame (among others). Regarding PulseAudio: "I can understand why people were upset, but quite frankly we didn't really have another option than to push it into the distributions when we did. While PulseAudio certainly wasn't bug-free when the distributions picked it up the majority of issues were actually not in PulseAudio itself but simply in the audio drivers. PulseAudio's timer-based scheduling requires correct timing information supplied by the audio driver, and back then the drivers weren't really providing that. And that not because the drivers were really broken, but more because the hardware was, and the drivers just lacked the right set of work-arounds, quirks and fixes to compensate for it."
Thread beginning with comment 480179
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

But really, when was the last time we have seen any significant progress in the BSDs?


There's lot of progress but mainly not in the end-user desktop space.

I haven't seen something similar in BSDs.


It's called stability and maturity. That said, there's plenty of new stuff with, for example, each new OpenBSD release. Not exciting stuff like "we replaced the init system and now everything is wild, broken and crazy" but I can live without that in my infrastructure.

Edited 2011-07-09 02:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

"But really, when was the last time we have seen any significant progress in the BSDs?


There's lot of progress but mainly not in the end-user desktop space.

I haven't seen something similar in BSDs.


It's called stability and maturity. That said, there's plenty of new stuff with, for example, each new OpenBSD release. Not exciting stuff like "we replaced the init system and now everything is wild, broken and crazy" but I can live without that in my infrastructure.
"

It seems like we have to agree to disagree.

Linux isn't any less stable or mature for having cutting edge init systems like systemd. In fact, I'm glad most of the innovation in this area and others are being done on Linux. Also, I believe this is one of the strong points of Linux, that you can choose whatever is best for you.

If you want rock solid init systems there is always sysvinit, runit, etc. If you want to play and experiment with new stuff there is systemd, etc.

I'm not saying BSD is bad, it has its place as other OSs, but Linux isn't any less stable or mature for having different init systems, this is called choice, use the best tool for the job.

Trying to hide the fact that there isn't any progress or innovation in BSD with "stability "stability and maturity" is just silly.

Edited 2011-07-09 23:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1