Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.Hawaii.Edu!news.caldera.com!enews.sgi.com!news.corp.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!news.mathworks.com!howland.erols.net!worldnet.att.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!news.uoregon.edu!linux0.unsl.edu.ar!ralsina
From: ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar (Roberto Alsina)
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux or FreeBSD (or something else?)
Date: 3 Apr 1997 14:24:40 GMT
Organization: Universidad Nacional de San Luis - Argentina
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <slrn5k7ff2.8ke.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar>
References: <5hcbac$r22@news.gvsu.edu> <333cddd8.1017100@news.sprynet.com> <slrn5jm1c6.foh.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar> <3344cd56.1499074@news.sprynet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wwwsearch.unl.edu.ar
X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.3.2 UNIX)
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.os.linux:19767 comp.os.linux.misc:167966 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:38438
In article <3344cd56.1499074@news.sprynet.com>, Goatboy wrote:
>>People has been using remote shells over 9600 bauds for decades (on vt100s).
>>Actually, the speed of my local console is still set to 9600! (I don't
>>know if that does something, anyway)
>>Remote shells over a 28.8 are very useful.
>
>Are you saying it's tolerable to run afterstep remotely on a 28.8?
You don't need to run AfterStep remotely. Just run the app you want
remotely, and AfterStep local.
And remote shells usually means something like telnet.
>
>>I like djgpp. It's gcc, yes, but it's *not* the same thing as gcc on Linux.
>>On djgpp you have no fork, no multithreading, no IPC...
>>And you can't use DDD to debug it, which is a sin :-)
>
>That's why they buy apps like Borland C++ or Visual Basic which are
>leaps and bounds better than GCC for development.
Well, it's a matter of taste, and the job that you have to do (and in
fact I think I was replying to something related to DOS development
tools, which VB certainly isn't).
Visual Basic is useless if you need it to work on anything but windows,
and until the last version, it was *way* too slow.
Borland C++ is a nice C++, but it shares the limits of all windows
development tools, and Borland's DOS compiler is no better than gcc.
Personally, my favorite development platform on Windows today is Delphi,
and my fav. overall is gcc/xemacs/ddd/Qt/dlgedit on Linux (It's extremely
nice, and Qt in particular has some *very* good design ideas).
>
>>You can change OS, but you can't change *the OS*. It's MS property!
>
>You can change it. And if u want to distribute ur change, you make a
>patch. You just can't resell the OS with ur changes. U can do that
>with Linux, but who'd want to dl an entire OS just to get ur change.
>That's why u make the patch. And guess what? U can do that with win95
>or NT also.
You mean binary patches? You can't be serious!
Binary patches are a useless hack, limited in what they can do, imposible
to debug, and in general a *very* bad idea. Not to mention that you
probably had to break your license (see the "no reverse engineering"
clause) in order to make them.
And in Linux you don't have to "dl an entire OS just to get ur change".
If your change is worth something, it's likely to be included on the next
release.
--
("\''/").__..-''"`-. . Roberto Alsina
`9_ 9 ) `-. ( ).`-._.`) ralsina@unl.edu.ar
(_Y_.)' ._ ) `._`. " -.-' Centro de Telematica
_..`-'_..-_/ /-'_.' Universidad Nacional del Litoral
(l)-'' ((i).' ((!.' Santa Fe - Argentina