I didn't see the post asking about NetBSD, but I can answer it a bit:
I think NetBSD is like other BSD in that:
1. untar, cd, ./configure, make, install doesn't usually work. They
put stuff in different places and not everyone in the Linux world cares
enough to account for them.
2. Out of the box, NetBSD is not optimized for anything. It will run
on crummier hardware than you will likely have (and will run on your
toaster), but will not take full advantage of the great hardware you
likely have. Shared memory settings are too low and require a kernel
recompile, for instance.
3. The latest and greatest hardware is not supported. The latest and
greatest software is not in the ports|pkgsrc collection. For example,
since TCL went to 8.4, the package maintainer for pltcl won't create one
because the working solution is not "clean" enough. The seeming
slowness to adopt new stuff makes NetBSD rock solid stable. However, I
just had to migrate my work system from NetBSD to Linux because IT
bought servers with new whiz-bang RAID controllers that are not (yet)
supported by NetBSD.
4. It is beautifully clean, compact, secure and consistent.
I learned a lot from my experience with NetBSD. More than I would have
with Linux. Linux is too easy.
I am learning a lot from my experience with PostgreSQL. MS SQL Server
is too easy.
- Ian
>>> Geoffrey <esoteric@3times25.net> 01/21/05 10:15 AM >>>
Patrick Welche wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 03:23:47PM -0200, Bruno Almeida do Lago wrote:
>
>>Any info about NetBSD?
>
>
> That's all we use - no problems, so never had to do any comparisons..
Hmmm, with that attitude, we'd all still be riding horse and buggies..
--
Until later, Geoffrey
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
