Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The assertion is often made by dragonfly project supporters that > dragonfly has "much better" stability than FreeBSD. It is not clear > by what metric this is being objectively evaluated (if at all). ... > Obviously one panic does not demonstrate wide-ranging system > instability, but it does point to a possible selection bias amongst > the project supporters, who may not be looking hard enough for the > stability problems that exist.
The very definition of "supporter" implicitly contains selection bias. I daresay one cannot be an unbiased supporter and a human being at the same time. Thus what you say here reads to me like a tautology. Pointing to various events is all well and good (e.g. the stress2 panic for DragonFly, unplugging mounted USB storage devices from FreeBSD), and I understand the need for advocacy and challenge among various supporters of projects...but I am keenly interested in some sort of objective metric for stability beyond stress test panics and unfixable bugs. Does an objective metric of stability actually exist? ( If you say "uptime" I'll take that as a "no" ;) ) If it does, I would really like to learn what that metric is. Do you know of any current low-project-bias work that has been done in this area? Thanks in advance. :) -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< Envy devours good deeds, as a fire devours fuel.
