Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA2335 ; Mon, 01 Mar 93 10:54:37 EST Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uunet!not-for-mail From: sef@Kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: BSD or Linux? Date: 27 Feb 1993 10:34:00 -0800 Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Lines: 15 Sender: sef@ftp.UU.NET Message-ID: <1moc6oINN9dr@ftp.UU.NET> References: <11135@tivoli.UUCP> <1993Feb26.192438.9988@coe.montana.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net In article <1993Feb26.192438.9988@coe.montana.edu> nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: >You want stability, get BSD. Stability implies that things don't >change. Linux is far from this. As opposed to 386bsd? The only reason 386bsd isn't changing as much as Linux is because the principal author is too busy working on radical changes for the next version -- while Linux only changes a little bit from version to version, largely to fix bugs or add features people want/need. Given the choice between the two methods, I'd prefer Linux'. Since Linux' networking and filesystems are still problematical to me (the default filesystem is still the original MINIX filesystem, I believe, which is no fun), I will be going to 386bsd, but I expect that Linux will be the stabler and more useful OS eventually.