Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA2406 ; Mon, 01 Mar 93 10:57:47 EST Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!news.u.washington.edu!serval!hlu From: hlu@eecs.wsu.edu (H.J. Lu) Subject: Re: BSD or Linux? Message-ID: <1993Feb28.201507.25646@serval.net.wsu.edu> Sender: news@serval.net.wsu.edu (USENET News System) Organization: School of EECS, Washington State University References: <11135@tivoli.UUCP> <1993Feb26.192438.9988@coe.montana.edu> <1moc6oINN9dr@ftp.UU.NET> <1993Feb28.004846.12072@coe.montana.edu> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 93 20:15:07 GMT Lines: 54 In article <1993Feb28.004846.12072@coe.montana.edu>, nate@cs.montana.edu (Nate Williams) writes: |> The difference is that Linux has radical changes between versions, and the |> users are the beta testers. Bill has made lots of changes, and instead |> of letting us test them, he waits until they are more stable, and then |> releases them. (There are good and bad points for user level testing of |> large changes) |> As you may know, not all PC hardwares are the same. The bootable roodisks I made for Linux work fine on the machines I have. But they may lock up on someone else's machine. Unless you test your changes on all kinds of PCs before you release them to users, which is almost impossible, you will have someone saying to you those changes don't work on his/her machine. |> > |> >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. |> > |> If you are looking for a stable TCP/IP environment, I think 386bsd is a better choice. |> I disagree. |> |> However, this arguement is similar to the AMIGA vs. MAC vs. PeeCee |> wars. |> |> 386BSD works for me. It has an interface that I'm accustomed to. SysV Linux is not SYSV. POSIX.1 is closer to SYSV than BSD. It also uses some BSD ideas. We have tried very hard to provide an API compatible with both POSIX and BSD. Since Linux is POSIX.1 compliant, some BSD functions are not present. For most of codes, you can compile them as BSD under Linux, execpt for some sigvec and tty stuff. BTW, I am pushing for phasing out minix fs. |> is NOT my cup of tea. I've tried it, and I don't like it. It's a matter |> of personal preference. |> |> To each his own, |> |> Nate May I suggest install both of Linux and 386bsd? Linux can run with as little as 20 MB partition. H.J.