Re: flowtable usable or not

> Apparently you've missed all the times that I've given that exact advice. :)
>
> But your analogy is severely flawed. Flowtable was an experimental
> feature that theoretically might have increased performance for some
> work flows, but turned out to be fatally flawed. The ports system is an
> essential part of the FreeBSD operating *system*, depended on by
> virtually 100% of FreeBSD users.

Certainly fatally flawed without any user support. Just as many new
features have been.

> Users don't have any obligation to help us debug new/experimental features.

Correct. However, I'm not sure the analogy is flawed. I am, to some
degree, guilty of the same sin. I now run Ubuntu and have never had a
single problem keeping my package system up date, in stark contrast to
my experiences of slow and nightmarishly error-ridden port updates. I
know there are users who have operated without such problems. It is
entirely possible that they're simply smarter than I am. I similarly
feel no compunction to use a FreeBSD feature (the ports system) that I
can't rely on.

Cheers
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"