On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 01:10:54PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: > > Where I work right now, we have bsd and debian on servers. > > All user computers run debian or mandrake right now (and > > we're going to move those to debian). We dont let them choose. > > It is mandatory. We use bsd and some debian on servers, and > > they will use free software on computers. > > > > The main reason is not freedom or fighting proprietary > > software. It is (1) getting work done and (2) when we got > > unix-alike everywhere it makes our job as system admins > > and network admins easier. > > I curious (and not wanting to start a new flame war) about the decision > tree to put debain on the workstations instead of BSD everywhere. What > factors were involved? Where there logistical issues that debian sovled > better in this case than BSD? Is it OpenBSD or another?
I guess it's not a problem of what those Debian do that a BSD could not do but because the people we are building systems and tools around are working with very advanced mathematics, use some software and tools which do require a Linux base. We could have the whole thing work from BSD code of course. But we dont have the time and we work for people who really wants to have things done. When you have a lack of time, a lot of work and people that judge on things that work and those which dont you get a very low tolerance for stuff that does not immediatly work once installed, and when configured properly. -- unzip ; strip ; touch ; grep ; find ; finger ; mount ; fsck ; more ; yes ; fsck ; umount ; sleep
