You mean "it's", learn proper English you fucking idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by soupbowl
And you are wrong in pretty much every point you've made.
Printable View
You mean "it's", learn proper English you fucking idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by soupbowl
And you are wrong in pretty much every point you've made.
You mean "on", learn proper English you fucking idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by asdx
Which points?
I tgought you were running Pulse Audio on Arch. So, if you had problems with ALSA you can run OSS on Linux as well. However, any modern Linux distribution uses Pulse Audio which may help you with your problems (properly configured like in Ubuntu, because in Arch I had to make one tweak). Why are you calling OOM killer and similar hacks? They're not hacks, but normal features. If there's no OOM killer in BSD I would rather fear to run it on something serious. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by LightBit
Stop trolling and making misleading comparisons. There's no "Linux" distribution as far as I know, so what are you talking about? There are many problems with BSD, Windows and OS X, so if someone broke your wifi once it doesn't mean it's happening frequently. The same happens with newer BSD releases - new regressions are introduced, so we can call it a Regression BSD OS, don't you think? Linux hardware support is superior compared to BSD, Solaris, OS X and Windows (when we exclude third party drivers). There are many Linux distributions that have different goals. If you want superior stability choose Debian and RHEL, when you want great desktop experience choose Kubuntu and Ubuntu. It's such simple. When comes to graphic stack you have a choice. Linux running proprietary nVidia or AMD drivers are sometimes faster than Windows in real tests:Quote:
Originally Posted by soupbowl
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...w,3121-21.html
And it's not true "all Open Source drivers are crap", because they're usually more stable than proprietary equivalents and support features like KMS.
PS. new Windows Service Packs break things, so not only I have to care about new Windows releases, but also about patches.
This is good news - they've stuck perfectly to their release schedule for many years.
Some of the software provided is out of date, but they freeze versions a while before releasing to concentrate on bugfixes. It's a shame that it doesn't have KMS, but it is being worked on (by one guy, who I believe also has a full-time job, hence it's taking a while).
Their "-current" flavour has more up to date software (firefox 12 etc.), and despite being their development version, it's remarkably stable.
I see no reason for any arguments here - I don't use FreeBSD, but I'm happy that they continue to make progress and put out new releases - it doesn't hurt me, and if they do something very good then it will make its way into systems that I do use.
I'm not sure for BSD, but Solaris doesn't overcommit memory. Reliable OS should never overcommit memory.Quote:
Originally Posted by kraftman
Citation needed. I suppose there are reasons why people choose Linux instead of Solaris when comes to running critical workloads. It seems nearly everyone knows Linux is more reliable. Btw. Linux is not Solaris, so you can choose preferred behavior:Quote:
Originally Posted by LightBit
echo [n] /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
Citation: http://developers.sun.com/solaris/ar...ubprocess.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by kraftman
Maybe they choose it because most distributions are free. And it is popular.
Overcommiting on Linux can't be fully disabled. It is also hard to find all hacks and disable them.
Linus: ""regression testing"? What's that? If it compiles, it is good, if it boots up it is perfect." (http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/li...04.1/0149.html)
Killing random processes instead of the singular process eating all of your RAM is a hack, and a bad one.Quote:
Originally Posted by kraftman
DNS servers not serious enough for you?Quote:
BSD's aren't more stable and they're not used in serious computing unlike Linux.
Is this citation about Solaris hack that causes something like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by LightBit
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2...ice-rss-memory
It also seems Solaris kills processes even without OOM:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp....4d?fwc=1&pli=1
That's a HACK.
Linux, IBM AIX, and HP-UX are using memory overcommiting, so it's Solaris staying behind as usual. What's more interesting memory overcommiting is tunable in Linux. Yeah, enterprise, HPC and stock exchanges chose Linux, because Linux distributions are free and more popular. Stop kidding me:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/...ture/207800195Quote:
As a result of mergers and acquisitions, the New York Stock Exchange has migrated over the last few years from HP-UX to IBM AIX to Sun Solaris to Linux.
Why do you think overcommiting can't be fully disabled? Any back up? Only trolls call features hacks and you are spreading FUD. As we can see professionals are betting on Linux and this shows it's more reliable. Linus makes kernel not distributions and there are other people who make testing. Ubuntu for example has QA and test farms, RHEL does a lot of testing, too. You're still comparing apples to oranges.Quote:
Overcommiting on Linux can't be fully disabled. It is also hard to find all hacks and disable them.
Linus: ""regression testing"? What's that? If it compiles, it is good, if it boots up it is perfect." (http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/li...04.1/0149.html)