Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CD-Sized Image Of BSD-Based TrueOS Released For Servers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
    Keep spreading FUD about me and about Linux? When comes to "better networking": according to w3tech BSD server market share is 1% and Linux is 38%. According to Security Space Linux is 38% to 78% and BSD is less than 5%. According to netcraft Linux is much more reliable than *BSD. BSD file system is an old piece of utter shit (I'm not talking about the one stolen from solaris) and Linux has few far more advanced file systems (including ZFS). BSD isn't used in any serious markets, so bullshit about its file system being advanced is nothing, but wishful thinking. So, no advantages at all, but huge disadvantages and a lot of crap from BSD troll.
    The fact that the FreeBSD Foundation receives donations from very big companies with huge market share in their sectors and that FreeBSD work is regularly sponsored by big names like NetFlix and DARPA/ARFL suggests that you are as wrong as can be.

    As for ZFS, it is advanced. That is an objective and indisputable fact. It sure wasn't 'stolen' from Solaris either - that's not how open-source works

    As for UFS - when used with soft updates, GJournal, and other GEOM framework features, it's well comparable to EXT4 - a simple, stable filesystem building on a rock-solid foundation.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by kpedersen (BSD Troll) View Post
      <Utter bullshit claiming BSD is popular>...
      http://aboutthebsds.wordpress.com/20...sage-dwindles/

      @pawlerson
      kpedersen (true name:Karsten Pedersen) is a regular participant in BSD activities (http://dk.linkedin.com/in/karstenlangpedersen). He's a hardcore member of the BSD troll club. So there's no hope to talk sense into him.
      Last edited by jake_lesser; 09-13-2014, 09:40 PM.

      Comment


      • #13
        ZFS is not Advance

        Originally posted by JX8p View Post
        As for ZFS, it is advanced. That is an objective and indisputable fact.
        ZFS is not advance, it is significantly better compared to stone UFS and UFS2 and a little better compared to ext2. But compared to BTRFS and EXT4. ZFS is a piece of shit, slow, needs more then 4GB of RAM, corruptible, an scalable, can't complete with embedded devices. Plus ZFS is not a F(ail)BSD advantage. Linus now has it and it works far better on Linux then F(ail)BSD.

        Also, UFS2 is a total piece of shit even with soft updates and journalling. It's journelling is nothing to shit compared to EXT4FS.

        It sure wasn't 'stolen' from Solaris either - that's not how open-source works
        BSD always steal shit. Remember USL vs BSDI? The stupid BSD fucks at Berkeley thought they could get away with violating USL copyright so they got smashed in the ass at court. UC California then disbanded them due to this blatant academic misconduct causing BSD to become the fragmented mess it is today.

        Comment


        • #14
          Woe!! Opera is dropping FreeBSD. last time I hear is FreeBSD users mostly use opera. I wonder what will happen now.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
            FreeBSD and ZFS are fantastic. Both great projects with a perfect UNIX pedigree
            No, FreeBSD and ZFS are not fantastic project. All they produce is shitty performance and usability and contribute to fragmentation in the FLOSS community.

            ... but that said. I am also very interested in Hammer2 from DragonFlyBSD. I do look forward to the completion of the ongoing work to port it to OpenBSD. Really exciting stuff.
            HAHAHA... What a joke, You should see Hammer's performance compared to ZFS, BTRFS, EXT4FS and even EXT2FS. Greg K Hartmann even said Matt Dillion shouldn't waste time making his shitty OS like Linux when He could simply make Linus better. BTW. Good luck with porting Hammer2 to OpenBSD. MadDog Dillion has adopted the Linux/Systemd way of making his shit run on his OS only and run it well.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by wikinevick View Post
              Most importantly, it doesn't have the systemd aberration.
              Actually, that is one reason not to use TrueOS no FakeOS. Systemd is vital to modern system administration. Plus, Linux's networking code far out performs BSD's.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
                Frankly. I could humour you but largely we agree. FreeBSD does have an exceptional filesystem, ZFS, pioneered by Sun Microsystems, one of the most innovative companies to have ever existed.

                As many sources state, including this presentation: http://wiki.illumos.org/download/att...1/zfs_last.pdf
                "ZFS is the last word in filesystems"... so I am pretty much forbidden to mention any others. Sorry
                Linux also has ZFS support. However, you said its other file systems (so UFS1 and 2) are also more advanced and I want to hear about their advantages. Personally, ZFS is a big, memory hungry cow, so I wouldn't ever use it.

                FreeBSD and ZFS are fantastic. Both great projects with a perfect UNIX pedigree

                ... but that said. I am also very interested in Hammer2 from DragonFlyBSD. I do look forward to the completion of the ongoing work to port it to OpenBSD. Really exciting stuff.
                You rather meant both that killed UNIX spirit. Original UNIX didn't even support SMP. Hammer comes from OS that follows Linux way of doing stuff. It's an only BSD that I like.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by wikinevick View Post
                  Oh netcraft ... you'll have to crosscheck because anything coming from Apple and the Sony Playstation uses the BSD networking stack. Netflix claims that their 30% share of US Internet traffic is powered by BSD.
                  Just toys, not serious stuff. Netflix itself is a single company. Compare their 30% to other companies and we got 1 to 5% like my sources claim.

                  I am not talking about linux, which I admit is a fine kernel. TrueOS is a complete OS centered around ZFS and it's just wonderful: the "boot environments" are awesome. UFS2 is no toy either, soft updates is a technology that only the BSDs have been able to achieve.
                  Soft updates is an only nice feature of BSD file system, but there's nothing special about it. Ext4 has more features than UFS2 and is faster.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by JX8p View Post
                    The fact that the FreeBSD Foundation receives donations from very big companies with huge market share in their sectors and that FreeBSD work is regularly sponsored by big names like NetFlix and DARPA/ARFL suggests that you are as wrong as can be.
                    That donations and companies are nothing compared to those who support Linux. Furthermore, netflix said they've chosen FreeBSD, because they're familiar with it. I showed you facts about *BSD market share and it's usage is very small in comparison to Linux.

                    As for ZFS, it is advanced. That is an objective and indisputable fact. It sure wasn't 'stolen' from Solaris either - that's not how open-source works
                    I didn't mean stolen in its pure sense. An only original and worth mentioning BSD file system is probably HAMMER.

                    As for UFS - when used with soft updates, GJournal, and other GEOM framework features, it's well comparable to EXT4 - a simple, stable filesystem building on a rock-solid foundation.
                    That simply means Ext4 is more advanced.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by JX8p View Post
                      As for UFS - when used with soft updates, GJournal, and other GEOM framework features, it's well comparable to EXT4 - a simple, stable filesystem building on a rock-solid foundation.
                      I forgot to add: when you use GJournal it is recommended to turn soft updates off. I guess reality has proven soft updates as too complex and unstable to be suitable in modern file systems. That's probably why ZFS is so advocated to use in FreeBSD instead of UFS2+soft updates.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X