[Golden Eagle]

GE said: "No it can't, free versions of BSD don't have IBM adding in multiprocessing capability"

Which you couldn't prove is incorrect. Nor is the BSD system you found outside the U.S. All the communists use Linux, the U.N. operating system you support like your life depended on it. Even when Clinton's name gets tagged on there, here you are, shilling for all you got.

[rzeznikj at stout]

Which you couldn't prove is incorrect. Nor is the BSD system you found outside the U.S. All the communists use Linux, the U.N. operating system you support like your life depended on it."

[Which you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Continue, O Master Troll...]

"Even when Clinton's name gets tagged on there, here you are, shilling for all you got."

[Spoken from the undisputed King of Shilling]

[N3WBI3]

Which you couldn't prove is incorrect.: Hate to break it but 300 CPU's prove it scales pretty damn well and they were limited by hardware budget not technology..

Nor is the BSD system you found outside the U.S.: My question was is it the license/technology or how foreigners are using it that determines why BSD is ok and Linux is not. You just answered that it has nothing to do with the license or the technology but only what foreign nations do. Therefore if China, Iran, or anyone else starts to build BSD supercomputers you will object to the BSD license as well.