Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!classic.iinet.com.au!news.uoknor.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.provo.novell.com!park.uvsc.edu!usenet
From: Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: NetBSD vs. FreeBSD
Date: 18 May 1995 23:59:37 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah
Lines: 116
Message-ID: <3pgn19$lri@park.uvsc.edu>
References: <3np0bj$mli@news.nde.state.ne.us> <3pgcq4$j5a@onramp.arc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com
lamaster@viking.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) writes:
] Here are some criterion:
] |>
] |> General setup-ability and "ease of use" in terms of sysadmin
]
] For example, is there an easy to install CD-ROM version
] available for a modest fee? How about co-existence with
] DOS (an ugly necessity for many people)?
Both FreeBSD and NetBSD are available on CDROM.
Both FreeBSD and NetBSD are relatively easy to install. FreeBSD's
install is more "DOSified" at an expense in user intervention
and flexibility without detailed knowledge.
] How about general emotional closeness to 4.3 BSD/4.4 BSD?
I think both are equal, unless you are referring to the potential
customer's closeness in their choice of a *BSD at all.
] Which OS is more historically BSD-ish?
Depends. Are we talking the "historical tendency to port to lots
of hardware" (NetBSD, CSRG), or the "historical tendency to hack
one port to death" (i386 for FreeBSD, VAX for CSRG). If you include
"worked on by people who were historically CSRG members", you'd
have to include BSDi.
] How about the best (fastest, most robust, most bug-free)
] device drivers?
Both OS's freely use each others device drivers. In a lot of cases,
the code is given to both at the same time.
] Which OS has better SCSI controller and
] Ethernet controller device drivers?
Currently, FreeBSD has better NCR SCSI support and includes Adaptec
AIC7770 drivers.
Currently, NetBSD has VM86() code, which is a building block for
INT 13/INT 21 based disk I/O, which will allow use of all PC disk
hardware that works with DOS (with a concurrency tradeoff).
NetBSD is expeceted to pick up the NCR changes (which are minor
hacks) from the author -- same as FreeBSD.
NetBSD is expected to pick up the AIC7770 drivers, since the SCSI
sequencer code is no longer available only under GPL.
FreeBSD is expected to pick up the VM86() code.
BSDi is expected to pick up all three, or variations thereof.
] The fastest, most robust, most bug-free IP protocol stack?
Both use the same code, except:
NetBSD has an experimental version of IPv6.
FreeBSD has an IPX/SPX stack based on XNS available as patches;
arguably, this is nowhere near as cool as IPv6.
FreeBSD has routing code for support of interface aliases and
multicast.
Both are expected to pick up the majority of each others work
in these areas.
] |> General connectivity, PC (samba), Mac (Cap)
] |> Heavy on the Internet stuff/ httpd, ftpd, shell / pine,pop,security
] |> Multi-OS capacity, Dosemu (what about the NetBSD one, limited windows
] |> like LInux??) Mac (via Executor?) this is obviously less of a concern,
] |> or I would just be staying with Linux and not even looking around.
]
] Mac stuff - for me, that is a "don't care" ...
Samba buils and runs on both platforms.
CAP requires a tiny BPF patch to be applied, but it's already in
both current's.
FreeBSD has prepacked many network utilities.
NetBSD has a head start on DOSEMU support because of the VM86()
code.
The DOSEMU supportisn't as complete as say DOS/Merge (it's the
Linux code, ported).
The FreeBSD packages will install on NetBSD with minor package
utility changes that are expected to be in NetBSD current if
they aren't already.
Executor runs only under DOS. It won't work quite right under
DOSEMU, even under Linux (at least my copy doesn't).
As to whether the previous poster should just stay with Linux or
look around: You didn't ask for a comprehensive comparison of
NetBSD and FreeBSD (not that I'd be willing to be nitpicked to
death semantically and over minor errors by both sides to provide
one for you), let alone ask for the inclusion of Linux information
(which would again open me to the nitpickers -- no thank you).
I personally suggest you change if you have something that can't
work that you need, or don't change if nothing is broken and you
aren't simply techno-lusting after particular features in one OS
or another.
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.