*BSD News Article 88621


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.erols.net!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.netusa1.net!netusa1.net!pgrieb
From: pgrieb@netusa1.net (Perry Grieb)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux vs BSD
Date: 5 Feb 1997 09:38:12 GMT
Organization: RedHat Linux User
Lines: 33
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <5d9ke4$a4u@news.netusa1.net>
References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <5c155c$p6u@raven.eva.net>  <5c19pg$rf6@lynx.dac.neu.edu> <5c39sk$ddl@troma.rv.tis.com>  <5c8jlm$50u@cynic.portal.ca> <m23evrulla.fsf@desk.crynwr.com>  <5cdqos$e6k@camel1.mindspring.com>  <Pine.SOL.3.91.970201040446.16129A-100000@ux8.cso.uiuc.edu>  <32F378FC.41C67EA6@freebsd.org>  <slrn5ekm26.5ml.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar>  <32F68743.2781E494@freebsd.org>  <slrn5feb63.93l.ralsina@ultra7.unl.edu.ar>  <32F73973.167EB0E7@freebsd.org>  <slrn5fejrn.353.bet@onyx.interactive.ne
t>  <32F788CE.7DA1@indy.celebration.net> <ywtvi87rgwh.fsf@math.ucsb.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: indyk239.netusa1.net
X-newsreader: xrn 8.03-beta-11
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.advocacy:82817 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2366

In article <ywtvi87rgwh.fsf@math.ucsb.edu>, Axel Boldt <boldt@math.ucsb.edu> writes:
|> "John S. Dyson" <dyson@indy.celebration.net> writes:
|> 
|> > If you are comparing a FreeBSD V2.1 kernel with Linux 2.X, you'll
|> > find that Linux is faster in many ways.  FreeBSD V2.1 is of the
|> > Linux 1.2.X vintage, and we sorely need to release a 2.2 kernel
|> > (which outperforms Linux in some important and not so important
|> > ways.)  Run benchmarks of your choice and you'll see.
|> 
|> > Of course, the main reason for upgrading is for performance and
|> > stability,
|> 
|> You just admitted above that the current released version of Linux is
|> faster than the current released version of FreeBSD, so "performance"
|> is a vaporware argument. Higher "stabilitiy" of FreeBSD is often
|> claimed and never proven, (and also hard to disprove), but I would
|> guess that it is very likely a leftover from Linux 1.0.x days. One
|> thing that is easily measurable though is the much wider hardware
|> support of Linux, better documentation and personal user support, and
|> the larger variety of Linux based "fun" experimental projects.
|> 
|> Maybe FreeBSD 2.2 will come out faster if its developers spend more
|> time on the kernel mailing lists and less on advocacy groups.

Children, children!  Go to your rooms and don't come back down!
FreeBSD isn't the "bad guys".  And they have a very fine OS to
boot... just like linux.  You make me want to switch. For the
next two weeks you must say "I will only pick on Microsoft" one
hundred time a day.

Perry

PS: And you're posting to to many news groups!