*BSD News Article 28397


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.misc:10875 comp.unix.bsd:13586
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bruce.cs.monash.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!ugle.unit.no!flode.nvg.unit.no!flipper.pvv.unit.no!pvv.unit.no!arnej
From: arnej@pvv.unit.no (Arne H. Juul)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: BSD vs. Linux
Date: 9 Mar 94 13:48:03
Organization: ProgramVareVerkstedet, Norwegian Institute of Technology
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <ARNEJ.94Mar9134803@supernova.pvv.unit.no>
References: <1994Mar8.141900.2906@wubios.wustl.edu> <1994Mar9.094748.4022@swan.pyr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: supernova.pvv.unit.no
In-reply-to: iiitac@swan.pyr's message of Wed, 9 Mar 1994 09:47:48 GMT


In article <1994Mar9.094748.4022@swan.pyr> iiitac@swan.pyr (Alan Cox) writes:

 > Most of the core utilities are the same - being the GNU utilities. Generally
 > speaking it looks like this
 >
 > 		   BSD			Linux
 > Shells	bash,tcsh,ksh		bash,tcsh,ksh
 > X windows	Xfree86			Xfree86
 > Utilities	GNU			GNU
 > Compiler	GCC			GCC
 >
 > etc...


This is (partly) wrong. Linux relies much more on the GNU utilities
and libraries than does BSD.  This may be taken as a point in favour
of either OS depending on personal preferences. Also, some of the
utilities either are not GNU or are more-or-less modified.

The following table is probably more accurate, but bear in mind
that there really isn't any single 'BSD' and even less a single 'Linux'.

            BSD                Linux
Shell       ash, csh           bash, tcsh
C library   BSD                Homebrew GNU libc ???
vi          nvi                elvis
Compiler    GCC (modified)     GCC
Linker      GNU ld (w/mods)    GNU ld (w/even more mods)
X           Xfree86            Xfree86
Utilities   BSD                GNU

 > Apart from avoiding the BSD only oddities in programs and sticking to ANSI
 > and POSIX (no bcopy etc) I treat them both as the same thing for applications
 > work. I run Linux for the DOS emulator, the networking code and the fact it
 > 'feels' faster to me. The soon to be released intel IBCS (commercial unix
 > binary standard) support also matters here.
 >
 > Alan
 > iiitac@pyr.swan.ac.uk

Running Linux for its networking code seems somewhat odd to me.

  -  Arne H. Juul