Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!serval.net.wsu.edu!news.clark.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!hjb From: hjb@netcom.com (Hwa-Jin Bae) Subject: Re: To Merge or Not to Merge *BSD. What does it really mean? Message-ID: <hjbD2BJz4.74x@netcom.com> Organization: Peaceful Star, Oakland, CA References: <3f15dh$bp@knobel.GUN.de> <3f253c$es0@agate.berkeley.edu> <3f41piINNq16@python.cis.ohio-state.edu> <3f49s8$k60@dagny.galt.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 00:57:03 GMT Lines: 48 In article <3f49s8$k60@dagny.galt.com>, Alex Wetmore <alex@nine.org> wrote: >mark anthony kolesar (kolesar@cis.ohio-state.edu) wrote: >: Here at Ohio State University, I rarely hear anything about BSD, but you >: constantly hear about Linux. It is a shame that there is so much duplication >: of effort in the BSD camp. I can understand the ego issue, but around here >: at least, Linux increasingly appears to be the defacto Un*x standard. > >I think that this is more of a function of Linux's adoption by the press as >the free unix (for some reason most press-folks seem to think *BSD is harder >to install or less functional or just not where it is at). Its also a >function of Linux being better positioned as a system to install when you've >never touched unix before, the installation and administration in some of >the packaged installs can protect you from a lot of unix stuff and what not. >I don't think that merging the two BSDs is going to get them more press >or make it easier for users to install... > >You could say it is ashame that Linux and BSD aren't merged, but frankly >I don't think I want a lot of the people who write code for Linux writing >code for *BSD. > well, i'm running both FreeBSD, and NetBSD, as well as Linux. each has good and bad points and i consider them due to my own wierd personal taste ;-) -- hell, i use emacs and vi and ed and jove and teco, what-have-you, i even like FORTH and its block editors! while also having had misfortune of converting a large *Lisp code to C* on connection machine. i think that people who write code for some of the Linux device drivers (argh!) deserve what you say. i differ on the Linux kernel proper code itself. it is a good code, IMHO. it gets some getting used to, if you're used to BSD kernel code but that doesn't mean it's bad. there's lots of good stuff in it, and Linus is a good programmer, read his kernel code! some people complain about TCP/IP code in Linux, and i can sort of understand why. but try writing a full featured (read, BSD compatible) TCP/IP from scratch -- i have, when i was at UniSoft (boy... that was a long time ago). let me tell ya, it's no picnic. granted, there is only one original (read, BSD), but Linux is cool too. it's pretty laughable to hear people complain about naive DOS people running Linux because they don't know UNIX. i've been doing UNIX kernel work for a living practically all my adult life for commercial releases of UNIX'es (13 years), plus kernel and networking work for realtime OS implementations for a number of years, and i think Linux is amazing! BSD is cool -- it's like an old friend, and the more people work on it the better. it doesn't really matter there are two factions for free version of the BSD on x86 machines. if you really want to merge them, what's stopping you? go start your own core-group de jour.