Robby Workman wrote:
> On 2008-04-30, Realto Margarino <rm@justlinux.ca> wrote:
>> Robby Workman <newsgroups@rlworkman.net> says:
>>> On 2008-04-30, GuestUser <guestuser@mailer-fake.org> wrote:
>>>> What are your thoughts about Slackware versus OpenBSD as a highly stable
>>>> and secure infrastructure server for the following roles - firewall,
>>>> gateway, file and print, DNS, and SMTP mail?
>>
>>> With which one are you *most* familiar? Use that one.
>>> I *like* OpenBSD; it's installed in another partition on my laptop;
>>> If I weren't using Slackware, I'd definitely be an OpenBSD user.
>>> However, "secure by default" is not very useful if the admin can't
>>> maintain it securely or has to do insecure things in order to use it.
>> How is BSD for packages these days? The last time we did an
>> install, admittedly 4 or 5 years ago, the big packages were two or
>> three revisions behind.
>
>
> Some of them are a bit "behind" and some are current, but I have yet
> to find one that doesn't "just work" when installed. Quality and
> stability is more important than having that "new and shiny" version
> number.
>
> -RW
well i tried to use ports on firefox
a month ago (freebsd 7.0) and after downloading it (may i say the
progress indicators (even in the install )are pretty neat )
but it failed during compiling so i emerged the linux version
in linux-compat and that one did work.

i found this to be very confusing but heej
it could have very well be my own doing.
it took me a while to ... well do anything ( damn csh )
and the fact you can't su out of the box and the fact
that vmware sometimes interferes with numlock settings
didn't make it any easier