> Stable? Linux? They've never had a stable version out there yet. I
> started messing with Linux at 0.96 or something like that. It'd crash
> consistantly on my 386DX/40, then I tried Slackware 2.3, then Slack
> 3.0.... Slack 3.0 would run on my 386DX/40, but took 10 minutes to
> give me a shell prompt, then when I asked it to do anything, it would
> spontaniously die. I've NEVER had FreeBSD do that EVER. Now, yanking
> the HD power cable did annoy it a bit, and the time I accidentally
> half-removed the ethernet card, but other than that its never crashed
> on any of my hardware.... From the 4 meg 386SX/16 (which ran as my
> webserver during a really sad part of the evolution of my ISP - the
> time when the real webserver pretended to die) to the 48-meg Cyrix
> 6x86/P166+...
>
Somebody piss in your wheaties ?
> Now, my big question is why does Livingston support Cracker Jack Box
> Prize un!x (Linux) and not a stable business OS like FreeBSD? BSDI
> bins don't generally like to work for me, and when they do they are
> wasteful on CPU and memory..
>
Probably because there are many more Linux users than FreeBSD users, and
it seems FreeBSD users have a piss poor attitude about any thing that
doesn't go there way.
> And, plus, FreeBSD doesn't put out a new "stable" release every two
> days... Things are actually tested and work when released.
If you like to work with old hardware that is the way it should be, but
some people actually like to use some of the newer hardware that comes
out daily.
>
> Thank you, Drive through
> Jacob Suter
>
Now a serious question, I am seriously considering using FreeBSD here for
a webserver, because I have heard it does handle more simultaneous
connections better than Linux. Is this a reasonable observation on my
part? One other question, when I have problems will I have to deal with
attitudes like your's or is the FreeBSD community a pretty friendly one,
like the Linux users?
Later
Kelley