Benchmark (Phoronix): FreeBSD 9.0-RC2 vs. Oracle Linux 6.1 Server

[O. Hartmann]

On 12/20/11 10:01, Christer Solskogen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Alexander Yerenkow <yerenkow at gmail.com> wrote:
>> FreeBSD currently have very obscure, closed community. To get in touch, you
>> need to subscribe to several mail lists, constantly read them, I've just
>> found recently (my shame of course) in mail list that there is service (
>> pub.allbsd.org) which constantly building current versions. This is great,
>> but at homepage of freebsd.org there is no word about it :)
> 
> That's because it's not official. Do you take the risk? Would a
> multi-milion-dollar company do that?
> For your private server, sure it's probably fine. But how do you know
> that those files are not contaminated?
> (That being said, the purpose of that service is good. And the files
> there a most probably 100% fine. But if it's not official... then..)
> 

Well, then, FreeBSD is with priority for multi-million-euro companies?

No one knows whether those companies like Suse or similar are not
undermined by the US agencies or those from Telaviv. What about
Microsoft and its funny Zero-Day bugs? Do you trust that company, which
does not give any insight in its code? This shit is even more widespread
in governments, agencies and defence than "real" traitors.

Even a multi-million-what-so-ever has to decide on their own what to
get, where to get it from and this is obviously not argument NOT giving
such valuable informations the community at hand like  pub.allbsd.org.

For years outdated stuff from a Period when freeBSD 4.X outperformed the
Linux crap is sometimes still present on the FreeBSD pages (luckily,
those has gone after a load of discussion).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 292 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/attachments/20111220/198f9145/signature.pgp