Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:2187 comp.os.linux.misc:12266
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!swrinde!sgiblab!idiom.berkeley.ca.us!apollo.west.oic.com!apollo.west.oic.com!not-for-mail
From: dillon@apollo.west.oic.com (Matthew Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Impressions: FreeBSD vs Linux
Date: 1 Apr 1994 09:47:15 -0800
Organization: Obvious Implementations Corp
Lines: 62
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <2nhmn3$sjs@apollo.west.oic.com>
References: <2n9f90$9em@great-miami.iac.net> <R8m2Jc1w165w@oasys.pc.my> <2nem8q$ddj@acme.gatech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: apollo.west.oic.com
In article <2nem8q$ddj@acme.gatech.edu> gt8134b@prism.gatech.edu (Robert Sanders) writes:
:othman@oasys.pc.my (Othman Ahmad) writes:
:
:>Linux is full of these experimental features and they keep on piling them
:>quickly without much thought. Soo Linux will be overwhelmed. It now has many
:
:Imminent death of Linux predicted.
:
:>versions of file systems but still none with the capablility of FFS because
:>Linus hate it.
Personally, having worked on BSD systems for years, I prefer Linux.
BSD has always felt, well, stuffy. From a comparative standpoint,
at least for PC-based UNIXs, Linux is the most compatible and one is
likely to see drivers for new cards developed on it before anything
else. Also from a comparative standpoint, BSD-specific code tends to
be rather archaic... a lot of it is still K&R C (rather than ANSI C),
and a lot of it tends to makes BSD-specific assumptions for system
calls that are incompatible with ANSI C.
No, thank you.
From a stability standpoint, the only reboots I do nowadays occur when
I install a new kernel.
Considering that Linux was alive and well long before it could have
been said to be reasonably complete, now that it IS reasonably complete
it is highly unlikely that it will undergo an imminent demise.
That said, there ARE a few exceptions when it comes to BSD code... I'm
running sendmail 8.6.8 and it compiled without a hitch under Linux.
The primary difference between BSD and Linux, apart from Linux's
SYSVish syscall and tty interface, is in the support programs. BSD
has a very predictable set of programs, whereas Linux has a melange.
For example, there are at least four different getty programs for
Linux, two major system layout configurations (SysVish or BSDish),
two or three different password-related utility sets (though that's
finally been normalized with the incorporation of shadow passwords
in the official shared C lib), etc.
There are also a whole lot of kernel enhancement patches, which I believe
was a sticking point for many arguing for BSD. It really isn't... most
people do NOT bother with the enhancement patches until after they have
been officially incorporated into the kernel by Linus, at which point
they become the standard. On the otherhand, if you need a particular
feature instantly, there is a path you can follow to get it. This
path does not exist under a BSD system.
You have to be a bit more knowledgeable to setup a Linux system than a BSD
system. I believe the result is well worth it.
-Matt
--
Matthew Dillon dillon@apollo.west.oic.com
1005 Apollo Way
Incline Village, NV. 89451 ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
USA Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000
[always include a portion of the original email in any response!]