Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux.advocacy:9195 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:2204 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!sextans.EECS.Berkeley.EDU!nickkral From: nickkral@sextans.EECS.Berkeley.EDU (Nick Kralevich) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD Date: 19 Jun 1995 05:31:27 GMT Organization: Electrical Engineering Computer Science Department, University of California at Berkeley Lines: 107 Message-ID: <3s323f$87p@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3qfhhv$7uc@titania.pps.pgh.pa.us> <3rf85f$bv0@agate.berkeley.edu> <3rkgc0$8o7@beethoven.orc.soton.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: sextans.eecs.berkeley.edu Cc: I've added comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc to the followups, because I'm curious for responses from that camp. In article <3rkgc0$8o7@beethoven.orc.soton.ac.uk>, Liang Shing Ng <lsn92@beethoven.orc.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >1. Berkeley is somewhere in CALIFORNIA, AMERICA. Linus is a Swedish guy >in Finland. The NET3 network code was done in Swansea, United Kingdom. I >feel better to write a program for Linux, which is more international >than Berkeley. I thought I have to be some Berkeley guy if my >contribution is to be taken seriously. Well, the fact that I'm from Berkeley isn't that important. A lot of people get after me for not going with true Berkeley BSD. Oh well. :) And some of the work that Berkeley has done has greatly helped the Linux project. For example, I was going through the source for the NetKit-B-0.05. All that stuff is copyright by "The UC Regents". Well, that's all Berkeley stuff! And Linux uses it for the basis of major distributions like slackware. But that doesn't mean that I have to agree that FreeBSD, or any BSD, is the best. In fact, why was I going though the source code for NetKit-B-0.05? Because I was trying to find out why the "rwhod" program wasn't working on my roommates FreeBSD machine. Actually, if anyone from the FreeBSD camp could help me, I would appreciate it. After we got "rwhod" running on both computers, the FreeBSD computer was receiving rwhod information from the Linux computer, the Linux computer was receiving information from the FreeBSD computer, the Linux computer was receiving information from the Linux computer, but the FreeBSD computer wasn't receiving information from itself! Linux --> Linux = YES Linux --> FreeBSD = YES FreeBSD --> Linux = YES FreeBSD --> FreeBSD = NO Ok, so it's having problems talking to itself. Uggg... Well, by reading through the source code for rwhod, I found that rwhod only sends messages to devices which have the "IFF_BROADCAST" or "IFF_POINTOPOINT" flag on. Well, on my Linux machine, the loopback device automatically has the IFF_BROADCAST flag on, so rwhod was able to send messages to itself. On the FreeBSD machine, the IFF_BROADCAST flag was not turned on. Therefore, the "rwhod" program was refusing to send itself rwho information. Easy, I told myself! I'll just use ifconfig to turn on the IFF_BROADCAST flag. So I type: ifconfig lo0 broadcast localhost The command completes successfully, but when I look at "ifconfig -a" THERE WAS NO BLOODY CHANGE! The broadcast flag was still turned off! When I typed the same thing on my Linux machine, I was able to toggle the loopback IFF_BROADCAST flag easily. So here's my question for the FreeBSD camp: How do you toggle the "IFF_BROADCAST" or "IFF_POINTOPOINT" flag for the loopback device? Or alternately, how did you get "rwhod" working for an isolated host (no ethernet card, our link is via a hard wired SLIP connection)? Another problem for the FreeBSD people. My friend was connected to campus with his SLIP connection. I looked at his ifconfig info by typing "ifconfig -a". For his "sl1" connection, the one to campus, the "UP" flag was not turned on, but he was still able to communicate with the campus. Well, that doesn't make any sense! If the interface is not UP, then it is DOWN, and no data should be traveling across the link. But data was obviously traveling across the link. Anyone with a SLIP connection can try to type "ifconfig sl[01] down" and see if they hold their connection. Under FreeBSD, you can, at least with the "sl1" connection. Under Linux, this is isn't allowed, and the connection is lost if you try to send any further data over the link. In my opinion, the Linux behavior is the correct behavior. That's one of the reasons my experiences with FreeBSD have been frustrating. The FreeBSD system is counter intuitive, it hard to configure, it doesn't do what I want it to do, and it doesn't work like it's suppose to. My Linux system has been a joy to setup, compared to my playing with FreeBSD. Things work right the first time under Linux. All I did in Linux is type "rwhod" and magic, everything happened exactly as expected. I didn't have to spend 4-6 hours playing around with the source to find out what was wrong. I didn't mind spending the time, because I find screwing with sources fun. Oh, for those of you who are reading this in comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc, I apologize for bringing the rantings of a crazed *.advocacy group into the misc newsgroup. But I'm hoping some one will help me with my FreeBSD problems. Ok, so I don't technically like FreeBSD, but don't think about it that way. Think about helping my roommate, who is very happy with FreeBSD (even though he spends huge amounts of hours configuring the system). Take care, -- Nick Kralevich nickkral@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu -- LINUX, the FREE | University of California at | Nick Kralevich Operating System of the | Berkeley. Department of | nickkral@cory.eecs. future available via anon | Electrical Engineering and | berkeley.edu FTP. Ask me about it. | Computer Science. | finger for PGP