Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!metro!metro!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uuneo.neosoft.com!web.nmti.com!peter
From: peter@nmti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.unix.bsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux vs BSD
Date: 5 Feb 1997 16:45:47 GMT
Organization: Network/development platform support, NMTI
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <5dadfr$cnu@web.nmti.com>
References: <32DFFEAB.7704@usa.net> <slrn5fejrn.353.bet@onyx.interactive.net> <5d7spf$8n6@web.nmti.com> <5d9p55$t1h@news.ox.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sonic.nmti.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.misc:156925 comp.os.linux.advocacy:82877 comp.os.linux.setup:96068 comp.unix.bsd.misc:2378
In article <5d9p55$t1h@news.ox.ac.uk>,
Malcolm Beattie <mbeattie@sable.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> >FreeBSD is a lot more stable and reliable than Linux.
> Since you back this up with no data, it would be more accurate and
> less inflammatory to prefix that with "Because they think that...".
I think that too, Malcolm. I've used both Linux and FreeBSD ever since
it was 386BSD, and I used Minix before that. I find I have to be very
careful what I do on a Linux box. It's terribly easy to get it all
confused and make it fall over.
I'd rate Linux as being about as stable as the average commercial UNIX.
That's not bad. It's got NT beat hollow. But FreeBSD is something else.
It's just simply the most amazingly solid operating system I've used, ever.
This goes way beyond "it doesn't crash in normal use"... you'd expect that
to be the case, and it's only Microsoft's incredibly flakey boxes that make
long uptimes seem remarkable. Not crashing in normal use is what you expect,
and I will certainly agree that Linux is stable enough for that.
How should I put this:
I'm a bad pet-owner when it comes to operating systems. I abuse them. I
make them run two concurrent X servers (on different VCs) with Netscape
and Xkobo and other horrid programs bashing away all at the same time.
And that's on a fairly 486 with 16M running 3 mailing lists, 3 MUDs, and
a website. I've got gobs of swap, but I'll run it out of that, and come
home to see that it's been running out of swap on and off all day.
And it just runs.
I haven't tried to do the same thing to Linux. I wouldn't dare. I wouldn't
dare do it with Solaris or SCO or Unixware or ISC or any of the others
either. I couldn't imagine doing anything *like* that on NT. I know lots
of folks who *are* doing impressive things on Linux, but they're doing a
lot of coddling compared to me.
I dare say Linux today is stable enough for most people. Compared to the
sort of junk you get from Redmond it's no doubt a miracle system.
FreeBSD is just better.
As for the Red Hat boot disk...
Thank you, I have already picked up the fixed boot disk. Like I said, I
did get it installed.
--
The Reverend Peter da Silva, ULC, COQO, BOFH.
Har du kramat din varg, idag? `-_-'