Re: FreeBSD 7, DragonFly's status

[Dave Hayes <dave@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> 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 - dave@jetcafe.org 
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<

Envy devours good deeds, as a fire devours fuel.