Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Chronos <chronos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 12:32:49 +0000
After replacing Michel Talon with a small shell script on Sunday 04 Dec 2005
09:35, the following appeared on stdout:
> When you are the small guy, you try to comply with what the big guy does
> if you are claiming to provide some sort of interoperability.
That goes against my grain, at least. FreeBSD has, AFAICS, always been built
on the philosophy that if something is worth doing, it's worth doing
properly, regardless of what anyone else is doing. Just because the "big
player" in the field has a broken implementation, that does not require
FreeBSD to change from being faithful to the standard. It's up to the
people who are not compliant to change. This is a strength, not a weakness.
Following the same logic, Linux should be a Windows clone.
--
Chronos
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Michel Talon
- Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- References:
- NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Jean-Yves Avenard
- Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Kris Kennaway
- Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Michel Talon
- Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Kris Kennaway
- Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- From: Michel Talon
- NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- Prev by Date: Re: ipfw woes
- Next by Date: kernel - Portability
- Previous by thread: Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- Next by thread: Re: NFS, FreeBSD, lock and SVN
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|