Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on August 10, 2004 02:29 PM
I think that this labelling of the DragonFly BSD community is absolutely outrageous! Because two users post posts attacking the validity of the article, we are all unprofessional?! Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous?
I must also say that the review is totally bogus. We do have (in-progress) documentation that is accessible within 3 clicks from our main site.
Two weeks ago, the forknibbler.com documentation was underway. I can find references to all these things with a simple Google search.
I really don't want to come across as elitist, but it really doesn't appear to me, as an active contributor to DragonFly BSD, that this person even did a half-hearted attempt at getting support: I read all our mailing lists, I'm active in the #DragonFlyBSD channel of EFNet (although it's not an official community, many contributors and developers hang out there). The DragonFlyBSD log that Justin Sherril maintains contains lots of up-to-date information on changes.
My thoughts on the review:
The first 3 paragraphs are full of untruths: the main points that are made (it doesn't work properly yet, it's not suitable for a desktop system and there was a critical error in DragonFly in the 1.0 release). DragonFly BSD has been working for me for four months now since I started doing development in that camp, I use it on my laptop in a workstation environment and I'll let you guys read the stuff that my fellow installer teammates posted about the 1.0 bug that was quite obscure that Chris Pressey and I fixed very quickly in cohort with Matt Dillon. Considering this (the installer) project was started in June by Hiten, Chris, Scott and myself (with others eagerly joining development in the time thereafter and before the release), I think we did a damn good job at making mostly bug-free and functional software in a little less than 2 months.
The fourth paragraph implies that our installer has the same functionality as sysinstall, which it certainly does not. Our 1.0A installer will only install from a livecd environment at the moment (no FTP/NFS/other install methods). The installer is a work in progress, and we're all working hard to make it better.
The DragonFly BSD CD does not contain packages because we don't want to bloat our distribution. That's why our ISO stays around 72MB in size.
There are a lot more differences in our source tree than are listed on the page. Check out the diaries for more on the site.
No offense meant, but I really don't think you're the most qualified person to perform benchmarks of DragonFly BSD, and the benchmarks you discuss in the next paragraph are benchmarks based on fairly specific hardware, instead of a more general purpose system. You also showed no interest in getting help with your problems before writing this somewhat defamatory post on newsforge, so I think you should leave benchmarking to somebody who has more of an eye for working with members of the team to do benchmarking: a fairly tedious process that needs fairly nitpicky information. You don't appear to be cut out for this work.
I understand that you don't mean to be negative in your review, and I appreciate the goodwill. But the negative comments you've made on DragonFly are all bunk, and hence your review's substantial material comes down to mostly: ``I'm impressed with the work Matt Dillon and the DragonFly team have done''.
Before the rest of you start associating this post with the thoughts / actions / feelings of other DragonFly users, members, their dogs, their goldfish or their benefactors: these are my opinions and experiences only. Don't try applying any of what I say to ``the DragonFly BSD community''.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Bogus.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 10, 2004 02:29 PMI must also say that the review is totally bogus. We do have (in-progress) documentation that is accessible within 3 clicks from our main site.
Two weeks ago, the forknibbler.com documentation was underway. I can find references to all these things with a simple Google search.
I really don't want to come across as elitist, but it really doesn't appear to me, as an active contributor to DragonFly BSD, that this person even did a half-hearted attempt at getting support: I read all our mailing lists, I'm active in the #DragonFlyBSD channel of EFNet (although it's not an official community, many contributors and developers hang out there). The DragonFlyBSD log that Justin Sherril maintains contains lots of up-to-date information on changes.
My thoughts on the review:
The first 3 paragraphs are full of untruths: the main points that are made (it doesn't work properly yet, it's not suitable for a desktop system and there was a critical error in DragonFly in the 1.0 release). DragonFly BSD has been working for me for four months now since I started doing development in that camp, I use it on my laptop in a workstation environment and I'll let you guys read the stuff that my fellow installer teammates posted about the 1.0 bug that was quite obscure that Chris Pressey and I fixed very quickly in cohort with Matt Dillon. Considering this (the installer) project was started in June by Hiten, Chris, Scott and myself (with others eagerly joining development in the time thereafter and before the release), I think we did a damn good job at making mostly bug-free and functional software in a little less than 2 months.
The fourth paragraph implies that our installer has the same functionality as sysinstall, which it certainly does not. Our 1.0A installer will only install from a livecd environment at the moment (no FTP/NFS/other install methods). The installer is a work in progress, and we're all working hard to make it better.
The DragonFly BSD CD does not contain packages because we don't want to bloat our distribution. That's why our ISO stays around 72MB in size.
There are a lot more differences in our source tree than are listed on the page. Check out the diaries for more on the site.
No offense meant, but I really don't think you're the most qualified person to perform benchmarks of DragonFly BSD, and the benchmarks you discuss in the next paragraph are benchmarks based on fairly specific hardware, instead of a more general purpose system. You also showed no interest in getting help with your problems before writing this somewhat defamatory post on newsforge, so I think you should leave benchmarking to somebody who has more of an eye for working with members of the team to do benchmarking: a fairly tedious process that needs fairly nitpicky information. You don't appear to be cut out for this work.
I understand that you don't mean to be negative in your review, and I appreciate the goodwill. But the negative comments you've made on DragonFly are all bunk, and hence your review's substantial material comes down to mostly: ``I'm impressed with the work Matt Dillon and the DragonFly team have done''.
Before the rest of you start associating this post with the thoughts / actions / feelings of other DragonFly users, members, their dogs, their goldfish or their benefactors: these are my opinions and experiences only. Don't try applying any of what I say to ``the DragonFly BSD community''.
#