Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.smith.edu!jfieber
From: jfieber@sophia.smith.edu (J Fieber)
Subject: Re: [Q] FreeBsd and Linux comparison wanted
Message-ID: <1993Oct6.222446.15830@sophia.smith.edu>
Organization: Smith College, Northampton, MA, USA
References: <UGAP114.93Oct6112959@alpha.qmw.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1993 22:24:46 GMT
Lines: 29
In article <UGAP114.93Oct6112959@alpha.qmw.ac.uk>,
J.H.Petersen <j.petersen@qmw.ac.uk> wrote:
>Could someone please tell me or point me to information that
>compares Linux and the FreeBsd objectively (NetBsd comparisons
^^^^^^^^^^^
BHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Seriously, given the state context of a laptop, diskspace might
be a critical factor and *at*this*point*in*time*, an
out-of-the-box linux has an edge because of its shared libraries.
Sniffing the wind I sense that shared libraries in an
out-of-the-box distribution of FreeBSD and/or NetBSD is not too
far off. Given that, I would not use disk consumption as the
deciding factor unless all other things were equal. I'm not
really in a position to judge linux as the only time I used it
was for debugging some hardware problems.*
Personally I'm tickled pink with FreeBSD, but then I'm not trying
to cram it into a laptop.
--------
* I couldn't pinpoint the problem with 386bsd because it only
occasionally did wierd things while linux reliably fell flat on
its face which allowed me to spot the problem and correct it.
The problem was flakey memory.
--
=== jfieber@sophia.smith.edu ================================================
======================================= Come up and be a kite! --K. Bush ===