*BSD News Article 50845


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.uwa.edu.au!classic.iinet.com.au!news.uoregon.edu!news.orst.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!purdue!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!not-for-mail
From: bilgerar@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Aaron Bilger)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.questions
Subject: Possible (re)convert from Linux - specific questions
Date: 8 Sep 1995 14:01:30 -0500
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <42q3ua$f1t@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mentor.cc.purdue.edu


Greetings.  I used to use FreeBSD back in version 1.5.  Once it went into
a non-working state, I felt the need to upgrade anyway, and got the (Walnut
Creek, I believe) 2.0 CDROM.  After it failed to install, I installed
Linux and have been using it since.  However, I have been following both 
OSes, and two particular items make me consider switching back.  1) I
now have NCR PCI SCSI2, and almost everything I read indicates that it
is better supported and faster under BSD, 2) the improved memory
management/cache features now claimed by BSD.  

If these are indeed advantages, I still have several specific questions
that I have not seen addressed in the groups or literature recently.
(note: I am not interested in a general comparison/argument about
Linux vs. FreeBSD; I know many features of both and have a respect
for each at least in certain applications.  I would just appreciate
answers on these questions)

1)  What is the status of Mitsumi proprietary CDROM support?  This is
why the 2.0 BSD would not install; it read extremely slowly, and got
random errors.  It took many tries to get small packages to install,
and was hopeless to install, say X.  Support for this CDROM would have
to be at least reliable and hopefully faster to consider BSD.

2)  How about the status of FAT write capability?  When I started using
BSD 1.5, it had FAT read and write capability.  Soon, messages came out
mentioning corruption using the write capability, and stating that
only read should be used on FAT.  By 2.0, this was claimed to be fixed.
Of course, soon after 2.0 came out, again issues arose about corruption
on writing to FAT, so write support was removed.  I have not seen this
made an issue either way since.  Is FAT file-system supported reliably
for both reads and writes now?

3)  Is there any support, even experimental or read-only, for HPFS
or NTFS?

4)  Is there any support, even experimental, for striping file-systems
across multiple physical drives?



Thanks for any answers and clarifications on these questions.  If things
are generally positive on these points, I'll probably switch back to
FreeBSD at 2.1.


Farewell-


Aaron