FreeBSD: Not Exactly Dead 184
quantumice writes "It would seem that despite being dead and there only being six of us who use it, FreeBSD has clocked up nearly 2.5 million active sites according to Netcraft. So by my estimates that must mean that I and each of my 5 friends run 416 667 sites. That might explain my high bandwidth usage."
Uptimes (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Free/Net/OpenBSD may not be dead (Score:3, Informative)
I can't find the original source though... pity...
Re:I have.. (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, it's the Windows installer that writes the incorrect partition table. When the Linux installer comes along it writes out a correct partition table that then prevents Windows from booting. But don't let the facts get in the way of a rant.
Re:Uptimes (Score:3, Informative)
It's not remotely an indication of FreeBSD's quality.
Are you serious??? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I have.. (Score:2, Informative)
BTW, AFAIK Unix wasn't the 1st system with Internet connection:
(taken from "The Art of Unix Programming" by Eric S. Raymond)Of course nobody is giving VMS any credit no matter what it accomplishes anyway ... ;)
Guess you're in for a history lesson, too.
Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (Score:1, Informative)
And while I appreciate the value of FreeBSD--I like its start-up script placement, its ports system, its feel of efficiency--I do not like its less than stellar hardware support. While poor hardware support was a problem in Linux (for me at least) seven years ago when I first started using it, it is no longer an issue: everything I have is correctly detected in Linux. Not everything is correctly detected in FreeBSD.
So, the only advantages FreeBSD has over some Linux distributions are its init scripts, its ease of upgrade, and its uniformity. Slackware uses *BSD style init scripts. Using slackgrade I can update my installed packages. And I am willing to sacrifice uniformity for a larger selection of software.
If there wasn't Slackware, maybe I'd use FreeBSD. Or maybe I'd use Gentoo
The reason you dont see other OSs on there (Score:2, Informative)
Additionally HP-UX, Linux, NetApp NetCache, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD cycle back to zero after 497 days, exactly as if the machine had been rebooted at that precise point. Thus it is not possible to see a HP-UX, Linux or Solaris system with an uptime measurement above 497 days.
The *BSDs is very neat, and will probably be my OS of choice on my next computer (selling my mac and either getting a laptop or desktop PC), but lets not get carried away
-Tezkah, user 7 of 7!?
Re:Gentlemen (Score:1, Informative)
Re:The purpose of this story? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Question (Score:4, Informative)
I myself use Gentoo because I prefer Linux over the *BSDs I've tried, but Gentoo lets me build from source VERY easily.
Re:Uptimes (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Uptimes (Score:1, Informative)
For those who just can't be bothered to check out their FAQ:
"What is 'Uptime' ?
The 'uptime' as presented in these reports is the "time since last reboot" of the front end computer or computers that are hosting a site. We can detect this by looking at the data that we record when we sample a site. We can detect how long the responding computer(s) hosting a web site has been running, and by recording these samples over a long period of time we can plot graphs that show this as a line. Note that this is not the same as the availability of a site."
Sounds like they're accounting for the wraparound.
Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell (Score:2, Informative)
"There are currently two separate efforts for building a Debian distribution based on FreeBSD's kernel. Both are work in progress in experimental stage, and we have not fully decided yet which of them will become the official Debian GNU/FreeBSD."
-http://www.debian.org/ports/freebsd/index