Re: Dragonflybsd Presentation

[EM1897@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 2/22/2005 10:37:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, Bill Hacker <wbh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>Eduardo Tongson wrote:
>
>> UPDATED
>> 
>> http://spunge.org/~glassjaw/dfly.pdf
>> size: 133337 bytes
>> 
>> After all the suggestions, corrections and comments
>> I hope I didn't fuct up somewhere.
>> but as usual corrections are very welcome
>> 
>> DragonFlyBSD community thank you very much...
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Eduardo Tongson     
[snip]
>Page 11.
>
>I *shudder* when I see the word 'distro', as it implies Linanarchy - 
>where items seem to be collected on the whim of any of 200+ entities.
>
>The BSD's have traditionally been more of a 'whole' system, where 
>everything needed is there, tested at soem point in time, and proven to 
>work together.
>
>Despite code changes and a tilt toward binary vs source dissemination, I 
>have seen no departure from that proven model.
>
>Can a word be found that better reflects BSD-style cohesiveness? 
>'Releases' comes first to my mind....

I think you are missing the point of the separation of
kernel and "system". A HUGE advantage LINUX has is the
ability to pop in virtually any version kernel without
having to change the "distribution". While an artifact
might be entrepreneurial companies seeing an opportunity
to do things a bit differently, thus creating variants 
that you may not like, it is a major pitfall of the BSDs.
Upgrading entire systems in the field to bump your kernel
up is a big issue. With LINUX you only have to upgrade
the pieces that you care about, and the kernel. A "release"
should only include things that change, not all new
binaries.