Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA2310 ; Mon, 01 Mar 93 10:53:22 EST Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!nate From: nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) Subject: Re: BSD or Linux? Message-ID: <1993Feb26.192438.9988@coe.montana.edu> Sender: usenet@coe.montana.edu (USENET News System) Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, MSU, Bozeman Mt 59717 References: <11135@tivoli.UUCP> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1993 19:24:38 GMT Lines: 36 [ I know I'm going to regret this, but......] >One final point, Linux seems aimed at being a production-quality OS, >where the written intent of 386BSD is to be a testbed for OS research. >While I think OS research is a fine thing, I just want a reasonably >stable Unix environment to hack application code. You want stability, get BSD. Stability implies that things don't change. Linux is far from this. Also, Linux is no-where near the production quality that 386BSD is because of the lack of documentation. (One aspect of production quality). 386BSD suffers from lack of specific documentation, but by God there is a TON of documentation on BSD out there. Also, Linux has problems under heavy loads just like 386BSD (though I prefer a lock up, rather than blindly writing multiple copies of the same file to disk). Just because it's primary goal is not commercial, doesn't mean it's it not production-quality. If I understand Linus correctly, the goals of Linux are not to make it commercial, but for people to play on. Kinda sounds like the same thing as 386BSD, but 'RESEARCH' sounds much better when you are asking for $$. :-) I will be the first to admit that there are bugs (BIG ONES) in 386BSD, but as a whole most of the system has been pretty well tested, and the more I get into 386BSD, the more things I find that work. It's all there, networking, development, X, documentation, and the interface is familiar to many people. Nate -- osynw@terra.oscs.montana.edu | Still trying to find a good reason for nate@cs.montana.edu | these 'computer' things. Personally, work #: (406) 994-4836 | I don't think they'll catch on - home #: (406) 586-0579 | Don Hammerstrom