Subject: Re: FreeBSD Bus DMA
To: None <email@example.com>
From: John S. Dyson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/11/1998 23:32:09
Perry E. Metzger said:
> > How are you measuring it? Probably with unloaded system or LL benchmarks.
> No. I was doing real work. Doing things like trying to compile TeX and
> such. I couldn't find any significant difference -- maybe a couple
> percent at best, and not always in your favor, either.
That doesn't discount our results. Of course, there are real reaons
for differences, and you'll figure it out.
> > You can do it. It is pretty obvious if you actually try it. Our
> > people are happy about the change in compile times (it is massive.)
> It is, in fact, nonexistant from what I can tell.
As it is 2-3X.
> Give us the numbers. Numbers beat words.
You know, you can continue on with your infereor to bothe
FreeBSD and Linux performance. You can work to fix the problem,
or continue to badger about me helping you.
> No, we never booted or distributed SunOS or Solaris kernels claiming
> they were NetBSD kernels, and never used SunOS or Solaris kernels with
> NetBSD Userlands saying this was "NetBSD/Sparc". We never put SunOS or
> Solaris kernels into our source tree as "NetBSD/Sparc".
Your CVS tree is encumbered, right? How would I ever know it anyway?
> It is true that we have used other operating systems during bootstrap,
> but we haven't called them our own, no.
OS != kernel, but you don't know that, right?
> > >
> > I am going to frame your first sentence, simply because it is
> > seldom heard from a NetBSD person. A FreeBSD kernel is soon to run
> > on an Alpha,
> When a kernel that isn't a NetBSD kernel is running, and your port is
> finished enough for users (that is, its something people would care to
> use day to day), then you will have finished doing the work. Right
> now, you've yet to boot a FreeBSD/Alpha kernel that you actually wrote.
The really cool thing is *I DON"T CARE AS MUCH AS YOU DO* :-).
> > but why should you care, since FreeBSD is so inferior, right?
> As it doesn't exist, how can one comment on its merits?
FreeBSD does exist. Bzzzt.
> So you are claiming we have no functioning ports?
IMO, the two that I have messed with do not meet the standards
of what I would consider to be FreeBSD.
> I don't know what your "standards" are. I currently have a firewall in
> production at a Big New York Company that's been running for over a
> year without rebooting or having any observable performance issues.
I don't care, because Linux can do the same thing. Linux has
some problems also, but that doesn't meant that it cant be used.
> Say what you mean.
I have been.
> Embarassed? By what, exactly? What in our code base is "embarassing"?
> Or is this like your benchmarks?
Doesn't work right, unless used precisely correctly. I guess
the term is "fragile."
John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
email@example.com | it just makes you look stupid,
firstname.lastname@example.org | and it irritates the pig.