

Is this a reply to the right comment? I am not sure this makes sense here.
Is this a reply to the right comment? I am not sure this makes sense here.
Oof, the web isn’t as light as it used to be. Some websites won’t even OPEN now with <2GB of RAM. Yes, it is that sloppy.
Be aware that depending on your workload and/or deployment processes, OpenBSD may or may not be a better choice. For example, OpenBSD has a very secure default install, but containerization tools like Docker are not available. Additionally, if you require specialized hardware (e.g., a specific network card), OpenBSD may not have the required drivers available. However, if you prioritize security and want a system that is less prone to attacks and malware, OpenBSD could be a good option for you. Here’s a checklist of things to consider before making the switch:
Overall, switching to OpenBSD can be a rewarding experience if you take the necessary precautions and prepare yourself well. Good luck with your migration! Let me know if you need further assistance or have any other questions related to OpenBSD or Linux operating systems.
The problem is 100% Kent. Linus and the rest of the main contributors have a certain way they like to run and operate. Kent has again and again shown that he doesn’t like working that way and keeps sneaking stuff into patchsets.
You can be a 500% genius, but if you’re working as a team member (which anyone doing a sizeable contribution to the kernel is), then you have to learn how to play in the sandbox.
I can’t see any possible future where BCacheFS stays in the kernel. Kent is starting a fight he cannot win. If he doesn’t want to play nice, then his FS will have to be maintained as a kernel patch, which will forever be a limiting factor in its adoption. It’s too bad he doesn’t just swallow his pride and play by the rules.
btrfs is no perfect piece of software either, so it’s good to know there are alternatives out there.