
> On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Andrew Martin wrote:
> 
> > > > > > I'll say it again and again - glibc-2.0 is the _STANDARD_ (actually
> > > > > > reference) platform for Unix.  All Unix.  Not just Linux.
> > > > > > Adopted last year.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 	And...how many Unix (other then Linux) are *actually* using it?
> > > > > Any idea on how we can test whether it is being used or not?
> > > > 
> > > > AFAIK some BSD's are now using it - but I am probably wrong.  I gave up on
> > > > BSD in '92.
> > > 
> > > 	Geez, about the time I gave up on Linux and converted to *BSD
> > > *grin*
> > > 
> > No wonder you're so anti-Linux if you stopped using it in '92. I started with
> > 0.99pl13 in November '93. It must have been around v0.2 in '92 and of course
> > it wasn't stable then....

Linux is a lot more stable.  I've had an old 386 notebook running 
as a DNS server up for 519 days!

> 
> 	Checking now...oops, you are right:
> 
>    Record created on 03-Jun-93.
> 
> 	That was when we created the DNS record for my first company,
> which ran 2/3rds on Linux...so whatever version existed back there.
> 
> 	In Linux's favor here, though...even at that point, if you ran
> Linux on a *non-networked* system (ie. we had some dialup lines into it,
> but not networking)...that thing ran pretty much rock-solid.  It wasn't
> until we actually put some load on her that she wouldn't run for more then
> a day or so at a time...
> 
> 
> 
> 

* Michael J. Rogan,  Network Administrator,   905-624-3020 *
* Mark IV Industries, F-P Electronics & I.V.H.S. Divisions *
* mrogan@fpelectronics.com                 mrogan@ivhs.com *

Tue, 3 Feb 1998 12:27:15 +0000
"Michael J. Rogan" <mrogan@fpelectronics.com>
Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question abou
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Andrew Martin wrote:

> > > > > I'll say it again and again - glibc-2.0 is the _STANDARD_ (actually
> > > > > reference) platform for Unix.  All Unix.  Not just Linux.
> > > > > Adopted last year.
> > > > 
> > > > 	And...how many Unix (other then Linux) are *actually* using it?
> > > > Any idea on how we can test whether it is being used or not?
> > > 
> > > AFAIK some BSD's are now using it - but I am probably wrong.  I gave up on
> > > BSD in '92.
> > 
> > 	Geez, about the time I gave up on Linux and converted to *BSD
> > *grin*
> > 
> No wonder you're so anti-Linux if you stopped using it in '92. I started with
> 0.99pl13 in November '93. It must have been around v0.2 in '92 and of course
> it wasn't stable then....

	Checking now...oops, you are right:

   Record created on 03-Jun-93.

	That was when we created the DNS record for my first company,
which ran 2/3rds on Linux...so whatever version existed back there.

	In Linux's favor here, though...even at that point, if you ran
Linux on a *non-networked* system (ie. we had some dialup lines into it,
but not networking)...that thing ran pretty much rock-solid.  It wasn't
until we actually put some load on her that she wouldn't run for more then
a day or so at a time...



Tue, 3 Feb 1998 10:07:47 -0500 (EST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question about
	regression tests
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, Michael J. Rogan wrote:

> > > No wonder you're so anti-Linux if you stopped using it in '92. I started with
> > > 0.99pl13 in November '93. It must have been around v0.2 in '92 and of course
> > > it wasn't stable then....
> 
> Linux is a lot more stable.  I've had an old 386 notebook running 
> as a DNS server up for 519 days!
	
	Granted, and I had a FreeBSD system running PostgreSQL up for
almost 365 days before an employee accidentally hit the power switch on it
instead of the one beside it *shrug*  I'm not going to switch from what
works for me just because Linux is better then it was 4 years
ago...someday I'd like to add a second system to my home "network" running
Linux, but it wouldn't be my primary system *shrug*



Tue, 3 Feb 1998 12:45:05 -0500 (EST)
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
Re: [HACKERS] (: JDBC+(Sun ~3:pm MST) CVS :) -also question abou