On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 02:25:52 +0100 m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote: I'm not taking a stance on the wider issue, just wanted to comment on these two points.
> On Mar 06, Wouter Verhelst <wou...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > Should Debian reject using <any widely deployed and important > > > system > > > component> just to support toy ports which are used by a dozen of > > > component> people? > > Except that kFreeBSD is not a toy port. > > > > FreeBSD is a serious operating system that is used by many people in > > system-critical applications, which runs on modern hardware and > > outperforms the hell of Linux in some regards. > Let's accept that this is true for the sake of the argument. > Still, the kFreeBSD ports are not FreeBSD. They have 106 systems > reporting to popcon, compared to 120000 Linux systems just for amd64 > and i386. > With such a users base you do not dictate developement of an OS which > has 1000 times more users: you do your best to not stand in the way > if you want a future. I'm reminded of this thread [1] over the s390 port. Popcon isn't accurate. Its numbers can't be relied on. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/09/msg00078.html > > The kFreeBSD port has some features over Linux that makes it an > > interesting option for some use cases, such as ZFS, jails, and more. > Which, which very good approximation, nobody uses. > And let's not forget that there has been no real stable release yet. The lack of a stable release (where this means 'shipped as a full release arch for Debian') will be another factor in the popcon score: The appearance that its not yet ready for use. thanks, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK7FOSS) http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group *** I've changed GPG key to 6C097260 ***
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
