Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1!not-for-mail From: root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net Message-ID: <49ub7c$mh@dyson.iquest.net> Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin) Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine References: <489kuu$rbo@pelican.cs.ucla.edu> <49pb5g$di8@agate.berkeley.edu> <49s93l$a6@dyson.iquest.net> <49t2qm$dl7@taco.cc.ncsu.edu> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 08:24:12 GMT Lines: 67 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.advocacy:29099 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:9763 comp.unix.advocacy:11700 comp.unix.misc:19807 In article <49t2qm$dl7@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, Patrick Yaner <p_yaner@eos.ncsu.edu> wrote: >root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) wrote: > >> >>If the big Linux suppliers would make their daily source trees available, then >>is the Linux kernel available for daily update??? Linus owns >>Linux and through his generosity, you can use it -- isn't that nice of him?. > >Yeah, right. Don't go running you're mouth like that when you don't know >all the facts (like I did not too long ago when making fun of Bill Gates >in some or another news group). Now, I'm a Linux rookie, and I've never > You are being very personal in this statement -- grow up!!! > >used FreeBSD, or even seen it in action, and I've read little about it. > So do you know what you are talking about??? :-). > >But the development of Linux is about as open as I've ever heard of in my >life. I was supprised, in fact, that it remained as organized as it >does. Linus is far from "owning" Linux. He started the whole thing, >yeah, but it would still be a hiddeously buggy hobby of a bored grad >student if it wasn't for all the other people developing bits and pieces >of the Linux kernel. > I just checked the source files -- there are other copyrights in it. However, Linux is tainted from the standpoint of use. Also, many of the files do not even have copyright notices in them :-(. What a mess!!! It does appear that most of the files have Linus' copyright messages in them however. There is a copyright message in the root directory of the kernel -- but how does that modify the simple copyright messages in all of the other source files???... Looks very loosy goosy to me... My statement about Linus owning the kernel is an incorrect extension of the FACT that he calls the shots on what is in it... He does have essentially full control of the kernel, while FreeBSD is a cooperative effort. > >From what I can tell of all these messages posted here, it seems Linux is >an OS for those who want to get their hands dirty in the maintenance and >performance of their computer, and FreeBSD (likely -- but again I have >absolutely no idea of what the facts are -- started with similar >intentions) has been around longer, and is thus a bit more stable in >terms of development, distribution, and availability. > Actually lots has been happening to the FreeBSD kernel -- take a look at the original 4.4Lite/Net-2 performance, and then.... Look at FreeBSD!!! The stability issue is the reason that FreeBSD is significantly better in commercial applications -- and the information is finally getting out... >By the way, does FreeBSD have its equivalent of the Linux Documentation >Project? I'm just asking. The Linux Doc Project has been my saving >grace installing and setting up Linux. > Yep... I guess that you just did not know -- look at the FreeBSD mailing lists -- where the action really is... FreeBSD is very similar to most other versions of Unix-like OSes -- and that is were Linux really needs new docs, it is a bit eccentric at times. I have run both OSes and run tests -- Linux really does not even look like SVR3/4 any more than FreeBSD does -- it is just different. John dyson@freebsd.org