Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!inferno.mpx.com.au!goliath.apana.org.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.cis.okstate.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!news.inap.net!news1!not-for-mail
From: root@dyson.iquest.net (Charlie Root)
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net
Message-ID: <4k39as$5n4@dyson.iquest.net>
Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin)
Organization: John S. Dyson's Machine
References: <4issad$h1o@nadine.teleport.com> <4jqpn8$euv@agate.berkeley.edu> <4jsq5i$5ko@main.gbdata.com> <4jvm5n$2v8@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 14:05:16 GMT
Lines: 92
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:16998 comp.os.linux.advocacy:44493
In article <4jvm5n$2v8@agate.berkeley.edu>,
Nick Kralevich <nickkral@america.CS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>
>Eventually, FreeBSD _has_ to switch to ELF. That's why the ELF code
>is being added to FreeBSD. I disagree with the notion that switching
>binary formats will be easy for the FreeBSD team. It won't be.
>
Actually, we already have it running... So what is your point? We have
experts that are really good at what they do. BTW, I have been benchmarking
FreeBSD running Linux binaries, and it (FreeBSD) tends to run them better
under load. I have been thinking of working on getting a /kernel (FreeBSD) on
a Linux system to work. It would be a great upgrade for the user base.
>
>Also, from a software development point of view, knowing that FreeBSD
>is going to change binary formats is a disincentive to developing
^^^^ There is NO guarantee
that Linux isn't going to change it's system call arrangement also.
Just because a developer claims that it will not happen, doesn't mean
that it will not. Claims are made when purchasing used cars all of the
time.
>
>commercial software for FreeBSD.
>
Actually, we will always support a.out. No problem. Also, you won't
see the terrible performance hit of running a mixed system on FreeBSD
like people have seen (per the Linux newsgroups) on Linux. Remember
that FreeBSD ALREADY supports the features (real shared libs) that Linux
gained in moving to ELF (so far.)
>
>Of course, I have no way of predicting the future, so I might be
>wrong.
>
You are wrong already. We are pretty much already ready. Right now,
"ELF" is a buzzword. Of course FreeBSD has been working on a robust
VM system, and has been enhancing the already superior networking code,
etc. But binary format is not one of those things that is important
to immediately change (of course FreeBSD-current already does support the
linux ELF format -- so you might be able to use the Linux ELF development
tools -- haven't tried it.) Interesting idea!!! Run FreeBSD as a cross
development environment for Linux targets!!!
>
>As for major sites running and distributing Linux:
>
> ftp.redhat.com OS: Linux 1.3.81 Distribution: RedHat Linux
Slow (admitted to in the redhat documentation.)
>
> ftp.caldera.com OS: Linux 1.2.13 Distribution: Caldera Linux
> RedHat Linux mirror
>
I'll check that one out later.
>
>As for major sites running Linux:
>
> ftp.winsite.com OS: Linux 1.3.45 Major Windows FTP archive
> (previously known as
> ftp.cica.indiana.edu)
Slow. I see no indication of how many concurrent users. I don't see that
any of these is 100BaseT connected to the Internet? Remember, T1 is
NO challenge even for WinNT...
>
>My personal belief is that FreeBSD is behind the times, and that
>Linux is the superior choice, for lots of reasons, none of which I
>will go into here (unless someone really wants me to. After all,
>the title of this thread is "FreeBSD vs Linux").
>
I think that Linux is a slower OS, and I have been running both. Linux
still falls flat under load (but has gotten much better.) That is my
opinion. (I have some benchmarks that measure the system under loading
conditions -- at least I do run both (and NetBSD also.))
>
>Both operating systems, and both development groups, are excellent.
>I just think the future lies with Linux, and not FreeBSD. Of course,
>you are welcome to disagree with my opinion (and I suspect many people
>will).
>
I think that the future lies with good alternative OSes like FreeBSD and
Linux in general. People like Linux mostly because of the momentum,
and move to FreeBSD when they need to get serious work done more efficiently.
One day, Linux WILL get better -- but FreeBSD is already mostly there. Of
course FreeBSD development is NOT stopping, but is moving aggressively forward.
FreeBSD also has an excellent (and in some ways superior to Linux) Linux
emulator.
John