> I agree, but you should admit that OpenBSD is clearly a looser in > regard to "pure performances" (e.g. I/O, compression, encryption, > etc.)
Yes, if my goal is to have ZOMG AWEZUMZ benchmarks, clearly OpenBSD is a douchebag. But if I want a system that doesn't make me want to initiate a mass- casualty event, I'm afraid it's a clear winner. For those unable to read between the lines of the above: Internet troll is, once again, on the Internet
