Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news.idt.net!news.cerf.net!pagesat.net!zappa.northnet.org!usenet From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs BSD Date: 24 Jan 1997 10:41:37 -0500 Organization: Crynwr Software Lines: 47 Sender: nelson@desk.crynwr.com Message-ID: <m23evrulla.fsf@desk.crynwr.com> References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5c155c$p6u@raven.eva.net> <5c19pg$rf6@lynx.dac.neu.edu> <5c39sk$ddl@troma.rv.tis.com> <5c8jlm$50u@cynic.portal.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: crynwr.northweb.com X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.2.25/XEmacs 19.14 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:154185 comp.os.linux.networking:66142 comp.os.linux.setup:93872 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:5732 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2026 cjs@cynic.portal.ca (Curt Sampson) writes: > 1. Design and source code quality. The quality of the design and > source code in the BSD kernels is far, far above that of Linux. Not clear about that. For example, BSD uses mbufs, while Linux uses sk_buffs. With an sk_buff, you have a linear buffer, which can be copied in one loops. With mbufs, you need to copy chunk to chunk to chunk. The setup time is not insignificant. Also, the BSD development has fragmented. You've got OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and BSDI. So you can't talk about "BSD", you have to talk about "the BSDs". > This is important only to kernel hackers or would-be kernel hackers, > a very, very small percentage of users. Right. > 2. Binary-focus vs. source-focus. Linux is focused on people who > prefer to avoid compilers if at all possible. I don't know anyone > who regularly builds a full Linux userland from source. (I'm not > even sure a buildable full userland source tree exists.) The > installation tools for binary packages tend to be better than those > under BSD systems. The BSD developers have much better configuration > and source code control, and much better build systems. Right. It's a different focus. Linux is aimed at people who want to use it, whereas FreeBSD is aimed at people who want to work on it. The latter is a much smaller group of people. > 3. Advocacy. The Linux folks are a lot more rabid. :-) It's called "good marketing". I spoke to one Freebsd fan[atic] who dissed Linux's internal design. He was totally down on Linux. But he had no clue about the need to market software (a frequent failing on the part of technical people). Linux's marketing is heads and shoulders above FreeBSD's. If you want a free Unix to be widely used, then there is no question but that you should support and promote Linux, because FreeBSD simply isn't on anybody's radar except for the few hackers who use it. -- -russ <nelson@crynwr.com> http://www.crynwr.com/~nelson Crynwr Software sells network driver support | PGP ok 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Tired of slow sendmail? Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | Ask me about qmail tutorial