While I agree no one needs BSD on Debian, you seem to be highly focused on speed which means little.
Originally Posted by CthuIhux
Being fast does not make an option sane.
Look at the earlier benckmarks by phoronix, it shows that a full FreeBSD is slower then both kfreebsd and Linux. All the benckmarks say the same thing, Linux is the only sane option.
We can always build our own kernels.
Which is saner then stock FreeBSD, and other crapBSD who enable debugging in the default release kernels. Not only does this reduce the already pathetic performance but also makes it less secure as hackers can debug the kernel for exact vulnerabilities.
Well the FreeBSD guys shouldn't be helping because the whole idea seems extremely odd to me. I don't see it as protecting the sacred but rather not getting involved in stupid. I just don't see a rational explanation for this kludge and suspect the BSD developers see it the same way.
It’s want you get what a Linux distribution project gets contaminated with midless BSD fanboys. They make the excuse of “Oh hey! We should have more then two kernels cause Linux does not do everything… bullshit bullshit” and then waste huge numbers of developer time and effort into it. Too get the scale of such wastage, consider this: The usage of the kfreebsd branch is only 0.00001% of debian systems, yet the percentage of development effort put into kfreebsd is around 40%. This isn’t help by the fact that the FreeBSD camp refuses to help in the development stating that their “sacred” BSD kernel shouldn’t be mixed with GNU “crap”.
By the way BSD is a good alternative to Linux to have around. I really hate to see the we/they attitude that the two camps have, the more open OS's the better in my mind.