Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 12:34:37 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Hechinger <wonko@users.tmok.com> To: dannyh@idx.com.au (Danny) Cc: cweimann@wallnet.com, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why is FreeBSD better than Linux? Message-ID: <199912081734.MAA10773@entropy.tmok.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19991208082541.006c6978@idx.com.au> from Danny at "Dec 8, 1999 8:25:43 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Danny drunkenly mumbled... > > I clearly aggree with you pkg_add whatever.tgz is so much better than rpm > -ivh whatever.rpm. Because pkg_add gets all the dependency. > > /stand/sysinstall is so much better to use than linuxconf (which does sod all) > > The list goes on. i'm going to clip chris' original post mostly to cut down on size. > >Start with why you won't touch Linux with a ten foot pole but you > >are willing to touch FreeBSD. well, danny's list is a good start. but let's look at what you said chris. how would you have done that in FreeBSD? easily. not a lot of problems, but let's look at my favorite difference. let's say you want to update your Linux system to a newer version of the OS (kernel+userland). under Linux such an undertaking is quite a bother due to the fact that it is almost 100% interactive, and i have never been able to make in non-interactive. (remember i haven't touched Linux is several years now, but i don't really think it has changed in this respect anyway) now do the same thing with FreeBSD. thanks to cvsup and a largely independant configuration system you can load all the system update commands into a script and have it run by cron once a week/month/whatever. as long as there aren't any real changes to the systems setup you don't ever have to change the config. most current version of the OS (kernel+userland) zero effort. with Linux you have to do 'make config' and then load your configuration into the config program so it can build a real config file for building the kernel. it's just plain messy. > ><long tale of woe regarding Linux> > > > >Now I rebooted and was greeted with "Out of memory System halted" > >There doesn't seem to be any way of selecting your old kernel > >from the boot prompt so I decided to download the "rescue" disk actually there is, but you have to think ahead and put it into lilo to be able to boot from it. but if you forget...... > >I finally looked at the source for the driver and found that it > >can't be passed options unless it is compiled as a module separate > >from the kernel. So here we go again rebuilding a the kernel. Success > >finally. It only took me a day and a half! just recently i installed Linux on a system for a friend. what is it with Linux and certain drivers that just don't work right if they aren't built as modules? > >Thank god it was a desktop and not a server. In FreeBSD and BSDi > >I have rebuilt the kernel dozens of times and have only had a problem > >once but was able to pick my old kernel from the boot prompt. less trouble. FreeBSD is less trouble than Linux. most important issue that i have found in my search. > >My main complaint about Linux is documentation. There is loads of > >documentation for Linux and none of it seems very useful. It either [snip] > >to find anything. I stumbled onto the redhat-install mailing list > >by accident but I still haven't found an archive. let's face it, NOBODY has great documentation. i've run across some extremely out of date man pages in both NetBSD and FreeBSD distros. but the BSD people seem to be making a harder effort to update their man pages. (the BSD 4.4 man pages you can occasioanlly find not-withstanding, hee hee) > >If I have a problem with FreeBSD the answer is either in the handbook > >or in the mailing list archives. I have never needed to look at source > >except out of curiosity. i don't look at source because: FreeBSD: i don't need to. Linux: it's UGLY. > >Keeping a FreeBSD system up to date is a piece of cake with cvsup. > >I am quite frankly am still not quite sure what the appropriate way > >of keeping a Linux system up to date is short of buying another CD. so let's go back to what i was saying before. but this time let's drop userland and just concern ourselves with the kernel. you can automate the updating of a FreeBSD system, but not a Linux system. it's too interactive. to update userland it's done exactly the same way as the kernel on FreeBSD, but on Linux you have to download all the RPM packages, or whatever, it's completely inter- active, and yes, i think a CD is the only way to do it. cvsup will download only that which has changed ala diff-ish like abilities. (don't really know how cvsup figures this out), Linux, you have to download the ENTIRE distro, you can't just get the newest files. cvsup rocks. > >Keeping packages/ports up to date is FAR easier with for me with > >FreeBSD. Dependancies are handled for me. I had less trouble same as above. Linux handles dependencies, only very poorly. (about as well as Solaris does, you get a message, "you need package XXXX to use this package." but that's it. it's up to you to go get it. > >I don't care what anybody says the BSD kernel config file is a thing > >of beauty compared Linux's process. i agree. > >All in all Linux seems to me like a hodge podge of software that isn't > >quite done yet and FreeBSD seems like a professionally put together > >complete package. i agree here too. > >I'd much rather maintain any BSD. as would i. > ></long tale of woe regarding Linux> there are a lot of these aren't there. :) all this is great, but this is pretty much the stuff i already know. what about technical differences? anybody out there know enough Linux to say things that aren't oppinion, but rather hard-cold facts? thanks for all the help, -wonko 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?199912081734.MAA10773>