Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:30841 comp.os.386bsd.questions:961 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!convex!convex!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!nmrdc1!dsc3pzp From: dsc3pzp@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Philip Perucci) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions Subject: Re: 386bsd, linux: which runs more out of the box? Message-ID: <C4CtH5.J3w@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> Date: 23 Mar 93 18:17:26 GMT References: <C4BowL.DK3@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> Organization: Naval Medical Research & Development Command Lines: 24 In article <C4BowL.DK3@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> wgsteven@mobius08.math.uwaterloo.ca (Warren Stevens) writes: >Well, here's a twist on the old "which one's better" question: > >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? Which one will i spend >the least amount of time porting software? > >Most of the software is developed for Suns, usually. Things that are >readily ftp'able from public sites, just stuff that you might not see >every day. Well, I am new to 386BSD, but since 386BSD is a rugged BSD system and since Sun OS is BSD based (unlike Solaris) I would assume 386BSD is worth trying. If you want an easy to install system and don't want to port much, go SLS. I use SLS at work for X and tcp/ip and LOVE it. Still getting 386BSD up at home... -- ============================================================================== phil perucci | "Any opinions expressed are my views, dsc3pzp@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil | not the position of any organization" ==============================================================================