From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 21 11:49:17 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCBDB16A4CE for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:49:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BBBE43D4C for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:49:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j3LBnHb90008; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 04:49:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Bart Silverstrim" , Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 04:48:54 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: FreeBSD vs Linux X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:49:18 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Bart > Silverstrim > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 4:33 AM > To: mmiranda@americatel.com.sv > Cc: questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux > > > I'm afraid after playing with both FreeBSD and some different distros > of Linux, that "easy way" isn't necessarily Linux either. If anything > it can get to be much more complex if used on the desktop when > it comes > to installing and updating software unless you only stick to that > distro's "way" of installing new software. And if you set it up to do > more complex tasks it still takes every bit as much understanding and > altering of files as FreeBSD does! :-) > One of the sloppy kinds of talk that helps these wars rapidly degenerate is the continual mixing up of the operating system, FreeBSD, with the applications that people want to run on them. FreeBSD is easy as pie to setup. Where the complexity comes in is all of the additional software and it's interactions and configurations. Take for example a simple build of Firefox. Just a web browser, right? Except that guess what - the current ports call for Freetype2 as a dependency of a later version than what is supplied in the release CD's - and freetype is also linked in by X. So, to build it really properly you have to install a completely stripped FreeBSD system with no X, then upgrade your ports dirs to the current set, then build Freetype then build X windows, then build firefox. And that isn't even talking about the number of dependencies that Firefox has! All these programs, even X windows, are just applications. They are NOT FreeBSD. And they are the ones that are complex to install, not FreeBSD. > The only "easy way" to go with installing things on a computer would > have to be Windows (in the Intel world), since it is most often just a > matter of clickclickclickclick done. Ah, but you have to know what to click. And it is quite easy to click the wrong thing and get yourself backed into a corner. > > Really though; with Windows, it's a matter of "I want a web > server...down load "web server"...click click license yeah yeah > click... oooh! Web server! (don't know what it has open in the > background or what scripts are enabled or disabled or...but who > cares...web server!) > > With a Unix system it's "I want a web > server.......hmm...Apache > looks like it should work.......make > install....edit config file...what's this > do?...oh..........neat!...edit config...what's this > directive?.......okay...edit...save...apachectl start...web > server with X, Y, Z enabled, ,listening on port X, logging to Y, with > virtual host Z. WEB SERVER!" > Yeah, this is the procedure if you want a webserver for an internal network at your house that's behind a firewall. But if your planning on setting the server up on the Internet, you have omitted a whole series of steps that you have to follow for both OSs to lock down the server and keep it from being broken into. When those steps are followed, your looking at a good 4-5 hours of labor for either system. Sure, you can get a Windows box up and running faster, but with a public server, getting it running is only the first step in a long series of steps. You really have to understand both systems throughly if you put them online. With FreeBSD, you have to understand it throughly to get it to run, so the only real difference between them is that your FreeBSD system will get running near the end of this 4 hour block, your Windows system will get running at the beginning of this 4 hour block. But you still have to spend 4 hours on each of them. Ted