View Single Post
Old 17th July 2014
fn8t's Avatar
fn8t fn8t is offline
Real Name: Ego
Shell Scout
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Tao
Posts: 120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oko View Post
That being said NetBSD is in deep crisis for many years now and worse than a crisis is denial of NetBSD project leadership about it. When Charles Hannum in 2006 predicted collapse of the project if the things don't change he was quickly occused of betrayal. After Wasabi Systems went out of buseness NetBSD was left with nothing IMHO but npf vaporware and similar.
I've been quite addicted to OpenBSD for a little while now. However, I haven't been around through much of BSD history. I used and enjoyed FreeBSD for sometime, but it is not the OS for me. I have just begun looking into NetBSD and as far as I can tell it seems very hobbyist like. I am assuming that it is not NetBSD's goal to only be a Hobbyist platform. What is this deep crisis that NetBSD faces? What choice(s), whether acknowledging it or not, is destroying the OS?

Since I have no real history on this subject, I'd really appreciate any input you can advance, time permitting.

I first became interested in NetBSD since it seems to lack many implementations. It seems to be very undeveloped in areas where productivity type initiatives would normally exist. It seems to be very "Stock" or "Base Like". To me, a hobbyist, this is nice since I'd like to learn how to implement my own innovations on a project to project scenario. This gives me a an almost clean slate.

With OpenBSD I find that everything seems to be engineered in a efficient manner. There isn't a lot of unnecessary bull wrapped up into the simplest of utilities and tools, like many other platforms. When I want to setup and use a machine for regular productive use, it seems like the OpenBSD developers know exactly the method in which I'd like to approach configuration while at the same time providing me with the results I'd expect from that approach. I can not thank those persons responsible for OpenBSD enough.
Reply With Quote