| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
OpenBSDOpenBSDPosted Dec 14, 2004 20:34 UTC (Tue) by error27 (subscriber, #8346)In reply to: OpenBSD by freethinker Parent article: Coverity's kernel code quality study
Someone did a comparison and BSD was far worse.
But most of the bugs were in one small area of the code that wasn't used much... Compatability for something.
(Log in to post comments)
OpenBSD Posted Dec 14, 2004 22:07 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] There's a problem with comparisons, though. Coverity started off as the "Stanford Checker", and those guys have been working with the Linux kernel for years, feeding back bugs as they find them. Not as much work has been done on the BSDs.
*BSD, so what? Posted Dec 15, 2004 0:15 UTC (Wed) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] May I reiterate that it's BSDs' problem an not anyone else's, deterring people off development and not providing incentive to cooperate?
I bet someone of that crowd whined in Ladislav's inbox to make his banner on distrowatch.com include "BSD" which is totally irrelevant there IMHO.
And I've personally taken enough whining instead of people doing something real to promote their favours to have this approach to that crowd, sorry.
Niche software doesn't deserve broad attention. Especially when providing nothing new to this world.
*BSD, so what? Posted Dec 15, 2004 13:17 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] Niche software doesn't deserve broad attention.What a parochial point of view. You realise the same `reasoning' could be applied by Windows people to Linux and the MacOS? Everything deserves attention, if just to find good ideas in it and reuse them elsewhere.
|
|
||||||||||||