Questionable statement in article
neuhauser at chello.cz
Tue Aug 10 19:25:22 UTC 2004
# ges+lists at wingfoot.org / 2004-08-10 14:41:31 -0400:
> Roman Neuhauser said the following on 8/10/2004 2:16 PM:
> ># ges+lists at wingfoot.org / 2004-08-08 23:18:42 -0400:
> >>I don't see development happening (other than system development,
> >>such as the OS) happening in BSD.
> > Apache, and other major software.
> Really? Hmm.. I never knew that Apache is developed for BSD.
> I thought it was developed for *nix and Windows... distributed as C
> source so it could be compiled on your platform as needed. I don't
> recall ever seeing a specific "BSD version' of Apache, other than the
> fact that I've compiled the source or installed the port, which
> essentially just compiles the source as well. What am I missing here?
I see you mix "in BSD" with "for BSD" as you see fit for your
argument. Yes, Apache *is* developed *in BSD*, besides other
operating systems (and *for* BSD, besides other operating systems).
Apache's AcceptFilter is AFAICT a FreeBSD-specific feature, which
would even make it fit your slightly shifted definition ("developed
But you're missing the fact that you're changing the playground in the
middle of the game.
> The point I've been trying to make (and not many are getting yet) is the
> simple fact that if I go to, say, Oracle's website... they're developing
> in Linux. Specifically RedHat Enterprise. Not BSD of any flavor.
> Veritas--Netware and Windows (shudder). Legato--Windows and various
> Linuxes. Who is developing for BSD? Why aren't more doing so? What can
> we do to get them to?
Oh, here we're back at "develop in". You should have said in the
previous mail that you "don't see Oracle, Legato, or Veritas
development happening in BSD". Your previous statement implied much
8:57PM up 14:43, 5 users, load averages: 0.04, 0.01, 0.00
More information about the freebsd-doc