Linux/UNIX bashing from Microsoft?

Richard Smith richard
Sun Oct 31 12:06:22 GMT 1999

"L. Cranswick" wrote:
> A question from me about this:
>   Why is FreeBSD so moribund(sp?) when it comes to
> promoting what is a very good server OS system and
> what in some areas looks like a superior client
> system over Linux?  FreeBSD does not seem to get
> much of a mention from MS or the general public
> interested in high quality PC OS's yet it seems to be
> the choice of people running massively hit servers.

So it's successful in promoting itself to people running massively hit
servers then ;-)

> I don't remember seeing any announcements about
> FreeBSD 3.3 coming out on any of the newsgroups
> I would expect them to (even if just informal
> announcements) such as the unix-webservers newsgroup
> etc?  Or is it as a friendly implied, a person must
> prove themself to be on a higher psychic plane first
> by naturally knowing to go to FreeBSD?  

I found FreeBSD quite by chance a few years ago. I wanted to use an old
'486 box for a router, and was looking for information on this thing
called "linux". I fell into the FreeBSD home page and was quickly hooked

> Are there any ideas why FreeBSD is not susceptable
> to this type of thing where as nearly all the other
> operating system tried are?


Your memory leak is based on malloc(3) isn't it? Try using calloc(3) and
I think you will get a different result. You will notice from top(1)
that the size of you program increases to far in excess of available VM,
but swap is untouched. It seems to me that only dirty pages get
allocated swap. Your test is entirely benign, with FreeBSD that is.


More information about the Ukfreebsd mailing list