Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!vic.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!psgrain!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!news From: root@fms.indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD ... Date: 10 May 1996 21:07:24 GMT Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington Lines: 105 Message-ID: <4n0b6c$k7b@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> References: <3188C1E2.45AE@onramp.net> <4mnsc5$6qo@sundial.sundial.net> <4mr1pk$cdi@dyson.iquest.net> Reply-To: bdwheele@indiana.edu NNTP-Posting-Host: wombat.fms.indiana.edu X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:19151 comp.os.linux.misc:102956 In article <4mr1pk$cdi@dyson.iquest.net>, root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) writes: >In article <4mnsc5$6qo@sundial.sundial.net>, >Bryan J. Smith, E.I. <b.j.smith@ieee.org> wrote: >> >> This is really the only advantage to FreeBSD -- they are a controlled >>distribution who can sign non-disclosure agreements with companies like >>Adaptec. >> >This is getting wierder and wierder. FreeBSD is a very open consortium >of developers. We have 3-5 developers actively committing to the kernel, >for example. Linux is the closed (controlled) development. > What do you consider closed development? If I were so inclined, I could write kernel code and get it included (providing it wasn't crap or something), either in the official kernel, or as a patch. Could I just hop over and write code for the FreeBSD kernel if I had an Idea I wanted to implement? >> >> My Adaptec AHA-2842VL (an older VLB SCSI-2 Fast Host Adapter) craps >>out on boot since I changed my motherboard/CPU from a HSB i486sx66 to a >>Alaris Nx586P90. >> >Sounds like a broken Linux driver to me!!! It sounds more like a hardware problem, if the card was working before the motherboard switch. >>In essence, Linux has the latest and greatest software and drivers (only a >>few companies won't release information, like Adaptec, without the signing of >>a non-disclosure agreement -- which is impossible in a OS who included the >>source code in its distribution). >> >Actually Linux has slower buffered disk I/O, so it has the best drivers and >support??? B*LLHOCKY!!! Huh? What does this have to do with support? Its unrelated to the original poster's comment. >(BTW, if you try to upgrade your >a.out Linux system to a nice (but wasteful) blocksize for ext2fs -- many of >your binaries won't run.) Of course, FreeBSD with it's efficient 4K/8K/16K >blocksize can handle the binaries just fine. Maybe I just don't know, but what does filesystem blocksize have to do with programs running? Seems like nothing, really. >> >>If you can run Linux, it's the better choice unless your going to run a lot >>of BSD and SCO software. Try downloading the boot disk for FreeBSD and >>Linux. >> >Actually, it is best to say: > If you can run FreeBSD (which most people can), then use it, because >it has much more U**X type flexibility, and runs Linux binaries much of the >time as well or better than Linux. Most people can run Linux as well. I've yet to hear of anyone who has not been able to run linux...with the exception of some of the MCA people. >>FreeBSD boot disk is on a single image file/disk from ftp.freebsd.com >>(it's really ftp.cdrom.com -- Walnut Creek CD-ROM). Try either Slackware 3.0 >>distribution (which is really dated about 6+ months) or RedHat Commerical >>Linux v3.03 distribution (ftp.redhat.com -- the distribution Caldera CND >>uses -- Caldera's mirror of redhat is faster too!), both which come on a boot >>and root disk (some require 2 root disks). You'll need either "rawrite.exe" >>for DOS, or use "dd" under UNIX to create the boot disks. The boot/root >>disks for Linux are in many flavors for many different configurations >>whereas the BSD boot disk is a single disk for all configurations. >> >Of course, Linux isn't up to being the biggest FTP site is it? (Like >FreeBSD's main site, ftp.freebsd.org is??) What does ftp capacity have to do with "where to get xxx"? Seems like you're just trying to troll. >> >>I hope this helped and FEEL COMPLETELY FREE to contact me (via voice or >>email) if you have ANY OTHER QUESTIONS/CONCERNS!!! >> >I am sure that your information is *slightly* wrong (to say the least.) >FreeBSD is an extremely open development, and is targeting the U**X market, >period. FreeBSD does a very fast workstation also. Under load, not much >else competes with it including Linux. Under light duty, both Linux and >FreeBSD have their advantages -- but I notice performance problems most >when loading becomes an issue, don't you??? I'd be curious to hear the problems you have with linux under load that you don't have under FreeBSD. I've been running my Linux box under pretty heavy compiler loads for a while now, and Its not so much as hiccupped. >>>It's obvious to me now that Linux has a wider (if not more public) >>>following. I tried to pick up a copy of FreeBSD in the Dallas, Tx. area >>>today (called, called and drove). No luck! I found Linux everywhere. I >>>know I can order FreeBSD, but that's just the impatient person I am ;> >> > >Unfortunately, many people are stuck in the Linux/Microsoft black-hole, like >a bunch of sheep :-). FreeBSD is simply a better U**X. In your opinion it may be. However after trying FreeBSD, NetBSD, and Linux (both RedHat & Slackware) I think that Linux is a better OS, and that RedHat is a great distribution. Its also easier to find linux, it seems. Brian Wheeler bdwheele@indiana.edu