On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:54:06PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: > hmm, on Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:14:27AM +0000, Jacob Meuser said that > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 02:09:32AM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: > > > hmm, on Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 06:46:27PM +0000, Jacob Meuser said that > > > > so who's benchmarking install/upgrade time? lost time due to > > > > instability? lost time due to gratuitous API changes? lost time > > > > "tuning" setups? lost time searching on google instead of reading > > > > manuals? > > > > > and that's > > > why your argument limps > > > > when henning replied to the request for stupid benchmarks with an > > observation, you said that wasn't what you wanted. so you reply to > > my requests with observations and say my "argument limps"? > > your implied arguments being: openbsd is better in the questions > you lined up. all i said was, it's not that black and white > every time.
not necessarily. I would expect OpenBSD to do well, because those things are more important to the developers than getting the highest rating for a particularly specific use case (i.e. a benchmark). but I really am curious if there are such data. -- jake...@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
