Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!aci.cvut.cz!rhino.cis.vutbr.cz!varda!salvet
From: salvet@varda.ics.muni.cs (Zdenek Salvet)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps
Subject: Re: Great Expectation
Date: 19 Jan 1994 19:00:22 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Brno, Czech Republic
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <2hk006$1it@rhino.cis.vutbr.cz>
References: <CJEson.M2w@eng_ser1.ie.cuhk.hk> <JKH.94Jan11175600@whisker.lotus.ie> <2hjkqa$d5@rhino.cis.vutbr.cz>
NNTP-Posting-Host: varda.ics.muni.cz
kas@varda.ics.muni.cs (Jan Kasprzak) writes:
>>March time frame). It should also be noted that 4MB is unrealistic
>>for just about ANY flavor of UNIX, excepting perhaps those designed to
>>be _small_ from the ground up, like MINIX or Coherent. FreeBSD is
>>not Coherent, and probably never will be. If you're looking for
>>something really stripped down, you're probably looking in the wrong
>>place. Buy Coherent, it's only $99!
>> Jordan
> Oh! DON'T BUY ANYTHING! `If you are looking for something
>really stripped down' , you probably should try Linux. It's
>smaller, but still full UN*X. (With virtual memory, X, ...).
>I use Linux on 386/40DX, 4M RAM, 73 M Linux partition. With XFree86
>(on 4M X is not fast :-), but in character mode it flies.
> I _don't_ want to start discussion "Is *BSD better than Linux?".
>Please, flames about Linux/*BSD send to /dev/null. I used both, but
>have no final opinion about it.
Small memory isn't reason for switch to Linux.
NetBSD & FreeBSD already have shared libraries, compiler is the same as in
Linux. I don't know, how long is minimal *BSD kernel,but 434 kilobytes
of fully configured (with NFS,packet filters,speaker device,X.25,...) kernel
promise very reasonable size of minimal kernel even for 4MB machine.
Zdenek Salvet
salvet@varda.ics.muni.cz