Re: Interview with Matt on bsdtalk about 1.6

[Matthew Dillon <dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

:On Thu, July 13, 2006 10:01 am, Dimitri Kovalov wrote:
:
:> I listen to this. Very interesting. I only challange one
:> thing. You say that 1.6 is more stable than FreeBSD 4.x.
:> How can you make this claim? FreeBSD 4.x is installed in
:> 1000s of servers and network devices for many years, and I
:> don't hear of anyone using Dragonfly for more than a
:> corporate server or firewall. So how can you claim such
:> stability before it is battle tested?
:
:Because a good number of the issues fixed date back to FreeBSD 4.x?

    Because I'm an optimist.  It's definitely more of a gut feeling then
    anything specific, from having used and worked on FreeBSD almost
    exclusively until I started the DragonFly project.

    In anycase, I really do think that DragonFly is now more stable then
    FreeBSD-4 ever was.  And, yes, a good chunk of the bugs that have been
    fixed, in particular to the buffer cache and softupdates, but also 
    issues with IPSEC, the tcp stack, and a few others, were all present
    in FreeBSD-4.

					-Matt
					Matthew Dillon 
					<dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>