Return to BSD News archive
#! rnews 3258 bsd Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.sa.gov.au!state.systems.sa.gov.au!chdemgt From: chdemgt@state.systems.sa.gov.au Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux or FreeBSD Message-ID: <1995Aug24.222509.28085@state.systems.sa.gov.au> Date: 24 Aug 95 22:25:09 +0930 References: <409iah$inf@galaxy.ucr.edu> <40alp5$psg@agate.berkeley.edu> <413bkc$3t2@kadath.zeitgeist.net> Organization: Southern Systems, South Australia Lines: 57 In article <413bkc$3t2@kadath.zeitgeist.net>, "Amancio Hasty, Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> writes: > nickkral@parker.EECS.Berkeley.EDU (Nick Kralevich) wrote: >>In article <409iah$inf@galaxy.ucr.edu>, >>jignesh bhadaliya <jignesh@corsa.ucr.edu> wrote: >>> I know this question must have been asked before. Which is better >>>Linux or FreeBSD? >> >>Linux. >> >>>What's the difference? > > >>Linux is better. :-) > > Nah, is just more fashionable to run linux > > Well, if you are good are catching flies then you do extremely well > with linux;however, if you are cool and like to sit back and update > your system like this: > > sup standard-supfile > cd /usr/src > make world > > Then freebsd is for you ! > About docs? You really need a lot of docs for linux :) But then, there is a lot of Linux. > FreeBSD is BSD-4.4-lite which is well documented... > Someone said FreeBSD handles swapping better. Linux slows to a near- standstill when it starts to swap. That does not happen with FreeBSD, which can handle a larger number of concurrent logins without taking a noticeable performance hit. That is what I have been told and I have no reason to doubt it. The swap slice on FreeBSD is typically much larger than the Linux swap partition. Shadow passwords are standard on FreeBSD but an additional thing that on Linux you have to compile and install in place of the non- shadow programs (e.g. login) in the distribution. At least, that was true of Slackware last time I looked. On the other hand -- FreeBSD make is broken: it chokes on some GNU makefiles, and you even have to edit that of GNU make to compile it; -- FreeBSD sh is broken: it can't handle some install scripts - I think I noticed that when installing INN. But FreeBSD with GNU make, bash and the colour ls is starting to look like a decent system. The inconsistency of options is annoying - I still don't know the BSD for ls -m but it doesn't matter any more. I assume there is an equivalent of find -iname and hope to find out what it is. I should say that my download of FreeBSD crashed and I only have half a system. Possibly I am downloading sources and compiling programs that are already in the FreeBSD distribution. But that brings up another point - the opacity of the FreeBSD distribution - there are split giant files, so that you can't see what's there and have to take the lot. To do a basic Linux installation you have to download the contents of 5 or 6 floppies, and after the first two you can inspect the files there and make a selection. In this respect FreeBSD is off-putting, especially if you have to do it over a 9600 bps link. -- Michael Talbot-Wilson