FreeBSD Kernel Internals Documentation

Jerry jerry at
Sun Jan 1 14:14:25 UTC 2012

On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 22:56:45 +1000
Da Rock articulated:

> On 01/01/12 21:42, Jerry wrote:
> > On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 09:03:38 +1000
> > Da Rock articulated:
> >
> >> Mac doesn't support all hardware from what I understand, and the
> >> only system with 100% hardware support is Winblows. Given the
> >> design philosophy of Winblows, how well written do you think the
> >> hardware drivers are coded? For that matter, how well do you think
> >> the hardware is made? From my meanderings on this list and others
> >> a lot of hardware needs software compensation for it to work as
> >> well as it does on FreeBSD and even linux.
> > I am sure that you will be happy to supply verifiable documentation
> > to support your claims.
> If you want to verify, then by all means parouse this list and others 
> (even in the linux community) over the past _five_ (thats 5) years.

I am not sure what "parouse" means. There are a Shane, Dawn and Nicole
Parouse. Are you referring to them? Perhaps you meant "peruse". In any
case, I did not make the claim therefore I am not required to obtain,
nor verify the existence of such data. While I don't dispute that you
might actually be able to find one or two such devices, would you care
to investigate the totally number of devices, especially higher end
devices that work fully under Windows as opposed to either not working
or working is a crippled state on FreeBSD? I tend not to include Ubuntu
since they have made huge strides in making hardware work correctly
under their environment. Seems strange that they can achieve what
FreeBSD considers either unobtainable or unnecessary (sour grapes).

{OK, let the "blame game" begin --  after all, it is ALWAYS someone
elses fault}

> > As for the the quality of the "hardware", that would be solely
> > dependent on the devices manufacturer. The drivers are obviously
> > coded in a fashion that allows the device to operate in its
> > environment. Any further discussion is impossible without defining
> > some specific parameters.
> A lot of hardware is now run using firmware, which may or may not 
> contain a bug or two which may work better in M$ behemoth but will 
> usually die a lot faster, and reduce its usable life- not to mention 
> speed. A lot of updates include "fixes" for these, which may or may
> not solve the problems.

And the world may or may not end on Dec 21, 2012 or a meteor may or may
not strike the earth today, or WTF are you babbling about?
Throwing in a citation or two would certainly help. Furthermore, what is
your problem with updates? I am notified of several everyday,
sometimes actually running into the hundreds and on two occasions the
thousands on FreeBSD. You might really want to rethink that statement.
And remember, those are only for applications on my PC. I don't know
the  actually number of updates issued per day by FreeBSD for its
entire ports collection.

By the way, any firmware, software, whatever, designed for any
environment may or may not contain a "bug". You have now officially won
the award the most retarded statement I have heard to start off the new
year. Congratulations!

> > The basic problem is that open-sore users are by and large suffering
> > from a "sour grapes" philosophy. It is a common "school yard"
> > phenomena; however, it is usually outgrown at some time in an
> > individuals lifetime. However, unfortunately, that is not written in
> > concrete either.
> >
> > "Tempora mutantur", however with the exception of Ubuntu the rest of
> > the open-sore community, to various degrees, continue to stagnate.
> I'm sorry but I'm really pissed off tonight and you're attitude is 
> really rubbing me the wrong way. If you want to be best mates with
> Gates and his horde then by all means... but this is a genuine
> discussion in an attempt to resolve _these_ issues, and clarify
> points as to why things are a certain way. If you don't agree, then
> be silent and ignore what you perceive to be crap, or at the very
> least _try_ not to be so aggressive and offensive. A lot of us on
> this list do this as common courtesy.

Ah, there we are. That good old socialist/fascist call to arms,
"You're either with us, or against us." You so clearly define what is
the basic problem with FreeBSD in general. The "sour grapes" attitude
is so clearly self evident. You would rather spend your time defending
something that doesn't work as fully functional as it could be if the
developers stopped patting themselves on the back for accomplishing
what other OSs had already done 3 or more years earlier and rather
attempted to bring the OS on par with those competing OSs.

Yes indeed, New Year, same old bullshit.

Jerry ♔

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
If it smells it's chemistry, if it crawls it's biology, if it doesn't
work it's physics.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list