*BSD News Article 20391


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:12533 comp.os.linux:54356 comp.os.386bsd.misc:849
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.misc
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!news.iastate.edu!ponderous.cc.iastate.edu!michaelv
From: michaelv@iastate.edu (Michael L. VanLoon)
Subject: Re: BSD UNIX
Message-ID: <michaelv.747084422@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu>
Sender: news@news.iastate.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
References: <newmanCCL33A.GBo@netcom.com> <GOWEN.93Aug30234233@apex.cs.tufts.edu> 	<1993Aug31.185019.22189@sophia.smith.edu> <MUTS.93Sep2205147@compi.hobby.nl>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1993 19:27:02 GMT
Lines: 74

In <MUTS.93Sep2205147@compi.hobby.nl> muts@compi.hobby.nl (Peter Mutsaers) writes:

>I am puzzled a bit by all the Net/386/Free BSD releases. This is a
>pity. At the moment I use Linux with very good result, but I 'grew up'
>with BSD and disliking SYSV. Therefore I would actually rather see a
>real BSD become the widespread and maybe defeat SYSVR4 in the end.
>However at the moment Linux has, I think, more coordinated development
>and therefore has a better defined standard and faster development. I
>wish the net/386/free BSD community(ies?) could agree more and make
>their Unix more unified and better.

Actually, from what I can gather, the only one not coordinating is
Bill Jolitz himself, since he refuses to let anyone see anything til
he decides to grace the world with his next new great release.  It's
been over a year since his last year.

On the other hand, the NetBSD and FreeBSD development groups
cooperate, and in fact, share code and new developments with each
other.  They're on quite friendly terms and have a "working"
relationship.

I run NetBSD.  I love it and will not move to anything else unless
something truly momentous were to happen elsewhere.  This is my
opinion.

The main differences are: 386BSD, the core of them all.  NetBSD and
FreeBSD are derivatives of the original 386BSD work.  386BSD hasn't
been improved in over a year by its author, but has a "patchkit" that
helps it along.  I would view this as a tedious and masochistic system
to install.

FreeBSD is the patchkit taken to an entirely seperate release.  It's
fairly close to the original 386BSD for those who want to stay there,
but with mucho bug fixes and upgrades.

NetBSD is a completely current work apart from 386BSD.  Although its
original source started with 386BSD, the massive amount of changes to
the kernel and other things qualify this as a totally seperate system.
The NetBSD maintainers have stated a few main goals (from *my*
understanding): a) The most stable, bugfree, production quality
release possible in a free unix, b) As complete as possible compliance
with 4.3BSD and Net/2, c) Incorporate as much of 4.4BSD as possible,
as it evolves, d) Buildable on as many architectures as possible
(386/486 currently in production, Amiga & HP300 in beta, many others
in alpha testing).

All three are true BSD unixes and are based on 4.3BSD for the most
part.  They all also incorporate Berkeley Net Release 2 networking
code to a varrying degree (the stuff in 4.3 and 4.4BSD).

I hope I haven't erred too much in my analysis. :-)

Linux is a completely different beast.  I haven't installed it and I
don't want it, but I know people who run it.  It works for certain
people, and more power to them.  We're all different. :-) Linux is not
based on any particular pre-existing unix, but is a built-from-scratch
OS designed to be posix compliant, and SysV/BSD compliant where
possible.  It's development is a bit more erratic, but productive.
It's kernel structure is not as clean, having had things piled on top
to add functionality many times.  Until recently, its networking was
not at all complete.  They have recently adopted Net/2, but it is
still somewhat buggy.  The advantage of Linux is that it has shared
libraries so uses much less memory and disk space.  Also, its rumored
to co-exist with DOS better, but this may be more opinion than fact.





-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Michael L. VanLoon                           Project Vincent Systems Staff
  michaelv@iastate.edu              Iowa State University Computation Center
------------------------------------------------------------------------------