Jason Stone wrote:
I don't agree with the criticism of the security team; it takes a lot of time to test things and make sure that changes and patches work within the larger context of a complete system.
There's that, but you also have to consider ISC's role. They certainly put a lot into testing named on all the common platforms. I'm pretty sure FreeBSD is still one of their test platforms. Not so sure it will continue to be though, given the resources our polished OS seems to be limited to.
And what I like about FreeBSD is that it's a complete system, not just a collection of disjoint parts like some other popular unix-like systems out there....
Don't know if I agree given the way dozens of port versions were unnecessarily incremented recently. http://unix.derkeiler.com/Newsgroups/comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc/2008-06/msg00231.html At least we _can_ easily update bind ports, I mean without waiting for maintainers or QA. <http://unix.derkeiler.com/Newsgroups/comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc/2008-07/msg00058.html> But the real issue here is FreeBSD's response in comparison with other Unix/Linux operating systems. This is a critical time for FreeBSD. If we can't keep up, response-time-wise, patch-wise, finance-wise, or otherwise, our OS won't last long. The competition has gotten too good. Question is, OT but very relevant, how can FreeBSD get some decent corporate sponsorship? Roger Marquis _______________________________________________ freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
