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!uunet!in1.uu.net!160.45.4.4!fu-berlin.de!irz401!orion.sax.de!uriah.heep!news From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Freebsd or Slackware Linux ? Date: 11 Feb 1997 02:28:50 GMT Organization: Private BSD site, Dresden Lines: 20 Message-ID: <5dolh2$lfs@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <32fd0363.41392688@news> <32FF86B6.2781E494@zxcv-pc.jumpnet.com> Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.heep.sax.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:35470 Curt Finch <curt@zxcv-pc.jumpnet.com> wrote: > even so, freebsd is better. it's a real unix. linux is kind of > a hacked together thing from what i hear. Na, that's a little harsh. Sure, the `diversity' in Linux is broader, so you find not only much more contributions, but also much more hacked-together contributions. But the core of the kernel is certainly not of bad quality either. (There's more chaos in the various distributions, i think.) The usual advice to this question is just: unless you've already got a bias into one direction, try them both, and look yourself. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)