Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:2096 comp.os.linux.misc:11328 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!pegasus.cc.ucf.edu!skn From: skn@engr.ucf.edu (Steve Nunez) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Impressions: FreeBSD vs Linux Date: 23 Mar 1994 15:28:12 GMT Organization: engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando Lines: 17 Message-ID: <2mpn6c$1ep@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu> References: <1994Mar18.084355.19503@atlas.com> <CMzw69.92K@tower.nullnet.fi> <Cn1yJz.LHI@hippo.ru.ac.za> NNTP-Posting-Host: pestilence.engr.ucf.edu In article <Cn1yJz.LHI@hippo.ru.ac.za>, Geoff Rehmet <csgr@cs.ru.ac.za> wrote: >In my opinion, one of the big advantages of FreeBSD (and NetBSD) is the >availability of a complete (controlled) source tree for the operating >system. (A tree that can be found in one place, and which can be >installed easily.) All that needs to be done to install new stuff is >a "make world". (As far as I can gather there is no complete >maintained source tree for Linux.) Isn't the tamu distribution supposed to be like this? A single source tree with a "make world"?? dave, are you listening? - Steve Nunez