Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA2370 ; Mon, 01 Mar 93 10:56:20 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: <1993Feb28.004846.12072@coe.montana.edu> Sender: usenet@coe.montana.edu (USENET News System) Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, MSU, Bozeman Mt 59717 References: <11135@tivoli.UUCP> <1993Feb26.192438.9988@coe.montana.edu> <1moc6oINN9dr@ftp.UU.NET> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1993 00:48:46 GMT Lines: 49 In article <1moc6oINN9dr@ftp.UU.NET> sef@Kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: >In article <1993Feb26.192438.9988@coe.montana.edu> nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: >>You want stability, get BSD. Stability implies that things don't >>change. Linux is far from this. > >As opposed to 386bsd? The only reason 386bsd isn't changing as much as >Linux is because the principal author is too busy working on radical changes >for the next version -- while Linux only changes a little bit from version to >version, largely to fix bugs or add features people want/need. Linux is full of feeping creaturism (creeping featurism). The kernel is getting larger, and people are asking for things like Diamond propriatary clock code fixes, adding the ability to type ^T to get the status, and other such additions to the kernel. We can only hope that Linus will avoid some of these dumb changes. >Given the >choice between the two methods, I'd prefer Linux'. The difference is that Linux has radical changes between versions, and the users are the beta testers. Bill has made lots of changes, and instead of letting us test them, he waits until they are more stable, and then releases them. (There are good and bad points for user level testing of large changes) > >Since Linux' networking and filesystems are still problematical to me (the >default filesystem is still the original MINIX filesystem, I believe, which >is no fun), I will be going to 386bsd, but I expect that Linux will be the >stabler and more useful OS eventually. > I disagree. However, this arguement is similar to the AMIGA vs. MAC vs. PeeCee wars. 386BSD works for me. It has an interface that I'm accustomed to. SysV is NOT my cup of tea. I've tried it, and I don't like it. It's a matter of personal preference. To each his own, 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