Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.bsd:7396 comp.os.linux:14595 Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!jvnc.net!nuscc!ntuix!eoahmad From: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad) Subject: Re: 386BSD or LINUX? Message-ID: <1992Nov3.093147.25143@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6] References: <Nov.2.20.33.38.1992.18690@remus.rutgers.edu> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 09:31:47 GMT Lines: 33 Glenn Wasserman (glenw@remus.rutgers.edu) wrote: : As the subject heading says, which is it? Which is the better,more : supported operating system (I know I'm going to get a lot on this : one!) : : I have Linux running on my machine now, and I'm just wondering if this : is the right choice. Is 386BSD more stable? Is there any reason to : switch? Why don't you tell us about Linux? I just can't have the time to monitor both linux and 386bsd. My first impression was on testing the boot disk for linux 0.96 . Linux response time is faster probably because of its multi-threaded file system, but the overall performace is the same. i/o performance for 386bsd running iozone 1 is 400k /s write & read, x11perf -bigtilerect500 is 2.1 using et4000 card. How is linux compared to this? I keep on advising people that linux is faster. On the other hand 386bsd is a fully equipped networking OS. Linux is just coming into the networking area and there is still a lot of work to do. -- Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2263. Internet Email: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg Bitnet Email: eoahmad@ntuvax.bitnet