Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!ludens.elte.hu!goliat.eik.bme.hu!newsadmin Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: SUMMARY: FreeBSD vs. Linux Message-ID: <2caoei$btj@goliat.eik.bme.hu> From: pink@fsz.bme.hu (Szabolcs Szigeti (PinkPanther)) Date: 16 Nov 1993 14:34:58 GMT Reply-To: pink@fsz.bme.hu References: <CGEv12.4u4@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> Distribution: world Organization: Department of Process Control, Technical University of Budapest, HUNGARY NNTP-Posting-Host: bagira.fsz.bme.hu Lines: 59 In article 4u4@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu, pitts@mimosa.astro.indiana.edu (Jim Pitts) writes: >In article <16C841041BS85.U001295@hnykun11.urc.kun.nl>, >R. Schalk <U001295@HNYKUN11.URC.KUN.NL> wrote: >>In article <CGC6nH.J08@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> >>pitts@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu (Jim Pitts) writes: >> >><a lot deleted> >> >>>In the end they >>>generally wind up wanting to do things that I do in FreeBSD that they >>>can't do in Linux. >> >>Please tell me what you can do in FreeBSD and not in Linux??????? >> > >As usual I try to make a simple point and screw it up, generating a flood >of posts in the process. Sorry. > >My point was that many people install Linux because it is less demanding on >system resources. Since many people -start- on a DOS machine, they don't >have disk space/memory for a real nice FreeBSD/NetBSD system. Linux has >the advantage of being small, compact, and powerful. > >I have seen Linux machines squished into tiny tiny partitions on wimpy hard >disks (-with- X)! > What do you mean by less demanding on resources? I've got NetBSD on a 386 with 4M and an 80M HD. It has emacs, povray, f2c, pvm, games etc. and still have ~22M free space.(BTW it's not intended as a flame bait to post the possible smallest configuration one has, it's just FYI). It now has real (read: symbols are looked up and resolved at runtime no jumptables, so you can upgrade the libs without recompiling) dymanically linked shared libs. This runs very fine. I know people who use Linux on similar configurations, and that also runs very fine. So the point is: someone with enough space should install both systems, get users who are new to them, ask their opinions, run the same progs, benchmarks, long time tests (panic/week:-)) etc. and post the results ! Any other comparison should move to alt.religion.linux.vs.bsd. This would hopefully end the weekly posting of "Linux/*BSD sucks, but *BSD/Linux is the best" type articles. >There. I leave it at that. That was all I was trying to say. > > Jim --- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= |For your free signature, send $5.90 to | Szabolcs Szigeti | | the following address: | Internet: pink@fsz.bme.hu | =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=