Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:30761 comp.os.386bsd.questions:943 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!convex!convex!darwin.sura.net!emory!ogicse!mintaka.lcs.mit.edu!ai-lab!hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu!not-for-mail From: mycroft@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Charles Hannum) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: 386bsd, linux: which runs more out of the box? Message-ID: <1ome2o$1lu6@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu> Date: 22 Mar 93 21:26:16 GMT Article-I.D.: hal.1ome2o$1lu6 References: <C4BowL.DK3@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> Organization: dis Lines: 20 NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.ai.mit.edu In article <C4BowL.DK3@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> wgsteven@mobius08.math.uwaterloo.ca (Warren Stevens) writes: > > I'm thinking of installing Linux and/or 386bsd, and i have some > pretty bizzare tastes in software i will want to run -- definately > not your run-of-the-mill type stuff. Which system will give me the > least hassle when i try and compile the source code? I've had almost no trouble using over 100 free packages under 386BSD. Most of them compile with no changes at all; a few require minor editing; a very few require slightly more work. Overall, it's very easy to port programs written for BSD or POSIX systems to 386BSD. -- \ / Charles Hannum, mycroft@ai.mit.edu /\ \ PGP public key available on request. MIME, AMS, NextMail accepted. Scheme White heterosexual atheist male (WHAM) pride!