🚀 go-pugleaf

geoff@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Geoff Wong) writes:

>I'm running Linux with X in about 100 Megs (with some megs to spare)
>no problems. It is doubtful you'd be able to do this with NetBSD.
>Of course if you want to do some serious networking then NetBSD
>if probably the choice for you; but Linux has good cacheing
>for a single user box sitting on your desk at home (with only
>a loopback for networking).

I'm not having a go at you Geoff this just seemed like a good spot to
have a go :) So..

Lemme step in here for just a minute and say that two old arguments
for/against Linux/NetBSD keep coming up and are simply not valid any
longer. They are:
    (1)	NetBSD _will_ fit in whatever Linux will fit in. NetBSD has
    	had shared libs for some time.
    (2) The Linux networking code _IS_NOT_ unstable. It _was_ unstable
    	but, let's be realistic, it hasn't existed for that long at all
	and it has been written from scratch.  It is true however that 
	NetBSD has more robust networking in so far as NFS on Linux is
	still regarded as a little slow. Otherwise, it's fine.
	believe.
--
Greg Patten                                              Melbourne, Australia
greg@loose.apana.org.au       For information on APANA mail info@apana.org.au
  or check out <a href="http://loose.apana.org.au/">The loose home page</a>