Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.ysu.edu!news.cps.udayton.edu!news.engr.udayton.edu!blackbird.afit.af.mil!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!newsspool.doit.wisc.edu!koala.uwec.edu!daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu!cakerwood!not-for-mail
From: bl03@uwrf.edu (BENJAMIN A LINDSTROM)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux
Followup-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: 9 Apr 1996 00:20:04 GMT
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <4kcafk$knt@daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu>
References: <4issad$h1o@nadine.teleport.com> <4jqpn8$euv@agate.berkeley.edu> <4jsq5i$5ko@main.gbdata.com> <4jvm5n$2v8@agate.berkeley.edu> <4k39as$5n4@dyson.iquest.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cakerwood.acc.uwrf.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950726BETA PL0]
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17080 comp.os.linux.advocacy:44676
Charlie Root (root@dyson.iquest.net) wrote:
: In article <4jvm5n$2v8@agate.berkeley.edu>,
: Nick Kralevich <nickkral@america.CS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
: >
: >Eventually, FreeBSD _has_ to switch to ELF. That's why the ELF code
: >is being added to FreeBSD. I disagree with the notion that switching
: >binary formats will be easy for the FreeBSD team. It won't be.
: >
: Actually, we already have it running... So what is your point? We have
: experts that are really good at what they do. BTW, I have been benchmarking
: FreeBSD running Linux binaries, and it (FreeBSD) tends to run them better
: under load. I have been thinking of working on getting a /kernel (FreeBSD) on
: a Linux system to work. It would be a great upgrade for the user base.
:
Define what a /kernel is....I know what a /proc/sys/ is and I'm glad we are
implementing it. =)
: >As for major sites running and distributing Linux:
: >
: > ftp.redhat.com OS: Linux 1.3.81 Distribution: RedHat Linux
: Slow (admitted to in the redhat documentation.)
:
Last I checked they were on a 28.8kb line...Unless this has changed it
will be slow. =)
: >My personal belief is that FreeBSD is behind the times, and that
: >Linux is the superior choice, for lots of reasons, none of which I
: >will go into here (unless someone really wants me to. After all,
: >the title of this thread is "FreeBSD vs Linux").
: >
: I think that Linux is a slower OS, and I have been running both. Linux
: still falls flat under load (but has gotten much better.) That is my
: opinion. (I have some benchmarks that measure the system under loading
: conditions -- at least I do run both (and NetBSD also.))
:
Just for reference...What kernel? I know I've seen major increase for
stablity and better load handling moving from 1.2.x to 1.3.x development
kernel.
: >Both operating systems, and both development groups, are excellent.
: >I just think the future lies with Linux, and not FreeBSD. Of course,
: >you are welcome to disagree with my opinion (and I suspect many people
: >will).
: >
: I think that the future lies with good alternative OSes like FreeBSD and
: Linux in general. People like Linux mostly because of the momentum,
: and move to FreeBSD when they need to get serious work done more efficiently.
: One day, Linux WILL get better -- but FreeBSD is already mostly there. Of
: course FreeBSD development is NOT stopping, but is moving aggressively forward.
: FreeBSD also has an excellent (and in some ways superior to Linux) Linux
: emulator.
=) Someday I'll get bored enough to install FreeBSD...But as of yet, I've
been happy with Linux 1.3.{Insert latests here} packaged under Red Hat
3.0.3 + minor personally updates.
The main difference between FreeBSD and Linux I see is the fact that
FreeBSD has a more stable code release from major version to major
version along with a direct set of packages linked closely. Where as
Linux is just the kernel, and fokes like Debian, and Red Hat product
their own packages.
Both have their good and bad points. I run webservers off of Linux &
HP/UX boxes. (I wish I could dump the HP/UX box. =) And, we have been
rather happy.
The Linux box is a 386-33 w/ 16 megs of memory running Mainly web
sevices and mail-server for www.djmix.com, and we are just starting
to see the load rise lately. (around 400 to 500 hits daily [Average],
not bad for an "outdated hardware" platform. =) However, the load has
not broken 1.x 1.x 1.x most the time. (Hovered closely at .9ish. )
They are both viable platforms. NT has it's place..We have NT for our
file server, and developer workstations...But we use UNIX (DG/UX,
Interactive (A.K.A InterCraptive), HP/UX, and a lone 386dx-33 doing
domain and backup nameservice my real job. (Note: djmix.com is not
my real job.=)
http://www.djmix.com/~mouring/