From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 3 13:01:55 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A949E1065672 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 13:01:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx02.qsc.de (mx02.qsc.de [213.148.130.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6636D8FC15 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 13:01:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from r55.edvax.de (port-92-195-8-131.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.8.131]) by mx02.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD8824BAC; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:01:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from r55.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r55.edvax.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id n63D1m44001637; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:01:48 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:01:48 +0200 From: Polytropon To: Modulok Message-Id: <20090703150148.6ba53cb1.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <64c038660907020728q5b78fb9av1b60591716b9d733@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090702072125.6a3e513d.freebsd@edvax.de> <64c038660907020728q5b78fb9av1b60591716b9d733@mail.gmail.com> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Daniel Underwood , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: POLL: Linux preferences from FreeBSD users X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:01:56 -0000 On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 08:28:01 -0600, Modulok wrote: > That and Linux seems to only ever get the abridged version of manual > pages. When you compare manual pages for an equivalent commands > between FreeBSD and most Linux flavors, it really shows. I noticed > this when I went from Debian to FreeBSD. "Finally! Real > documentation!" There ware two things that I found to be solved better in FreeBSD than in various Linusi: 1. Amount of manual pages: FreeBSD does not only document commands, it documents configuration files, kerlen interfaces, library functions and maintenance procedures. The tradition of manual pages furthermore is carried by third party software (ports), e. g. "man opera" - you would not guess that it existed. In the opposite, try to find a manpage of some KDE program (as if anyone would read manpages for KDE things). 2. Quality of documentation: The manpages are excellently written. No "look at our Wiki" or "this page intentionally left free" there. furthermore, the OS's source is very tidy, uses good names for functions, variables and datatypes, and has lots of useful comments. As a developer, documentation is a MUST HAVE for me. Having all the documentation avaliable "off line" right after installation is very good. Sadly, Linux didn't (doesn't?) offer this. In functionality - driver availability, to call it by name - Linux may be much better than FreeBSD. It may even support crap devices as it is done by proprietary "Windows" drivers. But because I (1) do not own such hardware and (2) usually don't use "modern" computers, I do not depend on them. That's the great thing when you live in the stone age - you don't have to care for any "modern" stuff. :-) FreeBSD, in opposite to most Linusi, enables me to run my old hardware FASTER (!) with each release. Sadly, this gain of speed is eaten up by other things I use right away, such as X and its applications. I can't imagine that Linux would make a better shape here. I sometimes try some Live system CD from a Linux distribution to see it this is still the case. Is this the case? Yes, it is the case. Reboot, return to FreeBSD. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...