Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 15:52:24 +0000 From: Alex Drummond <alex@abingdon74.freeserve.co.uk> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD compatibility Message-ID: <200207261552.24254.alex@abingdon74.freeserve.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20020725115236.GA80539@catflap.home.slightlystrange.org> References: <LAW2-F79bkfYNnAt8si0001cc59@hotmail.com> <20020725115236.GA80539@catflap.home.slightlystrange.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It might be easier to recompile them for FreeBSD, instead of running the=20 binaries using Linux emulation. As long as you haven't used any=20 linux-specific system calls, of course. Mostly you shouldn't need to alte= r=20 your code much / at all. Alex On Thursday 25 July 2002 11:52 am, Daniel Bye wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 02:12:28PM +0300, Tiago Marques wrote: > > Dear Sirs, > > I'm a user of Linux, and i do some programming for college, some rela= ted > > with sockets, processes, and all kinds of linux system programming. > > I've been thinking about moving to FreeBSD but i would like to know i= f > > the programs i do in Linux will be compatible with FreeBSD. > > I've already installed OpenBSD in another computer but due to some > > problems here i didn't have the time to test those things yet... > > Also, i'm a regular user, but not very experienced in Linux, i just k= now > > my way around, not much more. Do you think i'll be able to use FreeBS= D > > easily or is it more complicated to mantain and admin ? > > Sorry all this questions > > Provided your Linux programs don't make too heavy use of the Linux proc= fs > (which is significantly different to the BSD implementation), or any of > the extended i386 sys calls, you should be able to run them under FreeB= SD, > using the Linux emulation layer. The best thing to do is install FreeB= SD, > including the Linux emulation bits and pieces, and try it out. > > (There is code in the base system to support linprocfs, but I have neve= r > had call to use it so cannot offer any help or opinions about it) > > The name FreeBSD refers to the OS as a whole, unlike Linux, which is th= e > name of the kernel. Therefore, you can consider FreeBSD in the same te= rms > as RedHat or SuSE - RedHat's OS is _based_on_ a Linux kernel, but the > specific details of the implementation of the rest of the system are do= wn > to the developers who put the thing together. > > Because of this, there is only one FreeBSD "distribution", which you ca= n > rely on being sane from one install to the next - whereas the multitude= of > Linux distros are effectively different OSen, and you will find > considerable variation in the specifics. (However, that's not to say t= hat > one RedHat install will be vastly different to the next...) > > Personally, I like FreeBSD's design. I find it to be clean and systema= tic, > and yes, pretty easy to keep it going smoothly. It also has this list, > which is a truly marvellous source of help and information for those wh= o > can't find what they need elsewhere. Installing new apps is a breeze > using the Ports system (which is so good, that NetBSD and OpenBSD have > adopted it), and the documentation for the base system is, in my opinio= n, > some of the best written and maintained documentation I have ever come > across. > > But this is all just so much personal opinion. Try it, break it, fix i= t, > see what you think! > > Dan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200207261552.24254.alex>