The future of NetBSD
jeff.rollin at gmail.com
Thu Aug 31 20:36:12 UTC 2006
On 31/08/06, Andy Ruhl <acruhl at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/31/06, Charles M. Hannum <mycroft at mit.edu> wrote:
> > Actually, defining (poorly) the OS to include so much else has been a
> > liability for NetBSD in many ways. It has massively slowed the adoption
> > of new software versions (e.g. GCC), for one. It also contributed to
> > the perception that a better package system and automatic updates were
> > not a serious issue.
> It would be interesting to hear more discussion on this.
> If there is a continuum that is what the definition of an OS is, with
> a bare kernel on the left and something like SuSE with multiple gigs
> of junk on the right, NetBSD is toward the left. I think consensus is
> among NetBSD people is that this is a good thing. If you want
> something, put it in pkgsrc.
To be fair, it's easy to remove 'junk' from SuSE, and not much harder to
pile junk into a working Gentoo, Slackware or NetBSD installation.
Ironically one complaint that's often voiced at SuSE is that its selection
of rpm junk isn't as extensive as other distros'.
More information about the freebsd-chat