From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Jan 6 5: 0:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from aragorn.neomedia.it (aragorn.neomedia.it [195.103.207.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2018E15641 for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2000 05:00:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bartequi@nojunk.com) Received: from bartequi.ottodomain.org (ppp24-pa4.neomedia.it [195.103.207.216]) by aragorn.neomedia.it (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA03831; Thu, 6 Jan 2000 13:59:17 +0100 (CET) From: Salvo Bartolotta Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 13:00:39 GMT Message-ID: <20000106.13003900@bartequi.ottodomain.org> Subject: Re: Not enough information To: Alwyn Schoeman Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20000106.1392900@bartequi.ottodomain.org> <20000106113309.B8865@littlecruncher.prizm.dhs.org> X-Mailer: Supercalifragilis X-Priority: 3 (Normal) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 1/6/00, 10:33:23 AM, Alwyn Schoeman wrote regarding Re: Not enough information: > On Thu, Jan 06, 2000 at 01:39:29AM +0000, Salvo Bartolotta wrote: > > 1) kernel compilation: freebsd vs. linux > > 2) kernel, userland and ports organization in FreeBSD as opposed to > > the fragmented, incoherent organization in Linux; > > 3) FreeBSD stability; > > 4) (flame bait ;-) FreeBSD is a high-quality OS, designed by some of= > > the brightest Computer Scientists in the world. BTW, you should read= a > > little Unix history. Ex nihilo nihil fit :-) > > > > N.B. strictly speaking, Linux is NOT Unix. > Personaly: > 1) Linux kernel configuration is better than freebsd, especially if you > don't come from BSD background. Why should an ethernet card have different > names? ep0, ed0??? Dear Alwyn Schoeman, I come from a RedHat Linux background, among other things. Lately, I have been using FreeBSD 3.3 very intensely, (maybe) to an addictive degree. N.B. The fact that I prefer FreeBSD does NOT mean in the least that I have kicked off my other Oses. Intera alia, I run BeOS and R.H. Linux. And I will run even more than my current five Oses on my 'puter (e.g. FreeVMS, if and when it gets out of its larval stage). Contraria sunt complementa: NO absolute (M$-like) mindset :-) I find it easier writing down a text file, ie commenting out or adding a few options. On the whole, I find the FreeBSD textual configuration clear and rational. Kernels compile, install and integrate seamlessly. Tighter integration with the system also means fewer complaints in the log messages :-) I use neither 3Com 3C503 (ed) nor 3Com 3C509 (ep), so I cannot tell you the "philological" (in L.D.Landau's sense) reasons for this choice. > 2) I'm impressed with the way ports work, being used to RPM's I quickly noticed > some shortcomings. If RPM is used correctly, ports are no match. > Recently FreeBSD's not so great filesystem got corrupted. Guess what got damaged? Package information, so now I can't get any information on installed packages.UPgrading ports, I mean installed ports? Probably the only point its got going > for it against RPM is that its easier to stay up to date. > Kernel and userland I would about rate the same. R.P.M. =3D RedHat *Package* Manager. Please consider the problem of porting. The steps involved and the implications. Some books have been published on this awkward subject. However, you are right. Ports are no match. In fact, they do *NOT* install or upgrade a precompiled package. They fetch, configure and build *source code* on your *specific* system. If you use the "script" command, you can have a look at how ports work. Mind you, no mechanism is perfect. On the other hand, tot capita, tot sententiae. Personally, I would (very paranoidly) like a sort of "CVS", ie a ports repository allowing you to manage different versions of the same port(s) (!!!) Evidently, I like the Ports Collection to an abnormal degree :-) The FFS is designed with *different* goals from, say, ext2. If you have followed the discussions in this mailing list, you will have gotten a clearer idea. There have also been people asking for a journaling file system. If you don't like the way FFS works, you have the choice: e.g. "softupdates". There's a thread still going on this subject :-) In Linux, AFAIK & AFAIR, you have NO choice. The Three Axioms of HardDiskDynamics: I No hard disk is incorruptible II No filesystem is incorruptible III Backup is MANDATORY :-))) > 3) Both are so stable you can't tell the difference. Linux is a very good Unix-like "SysV" OS. Otherwise, I would NOT have installed it on my system ;-) However, under very, very heavy loads, FreeBSD seems to behave better. This is probably due to the VM management or other techical niceties of this kind. It is recognized even in the Linux camp ("FreeBSD is slightly better at networking", as I recall). Incidentally, TCP/IP has been developed at Berkeley ... > 4) Ditto for both. Maybe. Historia magistra vitae. AFAIK, Berkeley has been playing a very important role in the development of Oses and networking. > 5) Security. Both FreeBSD and Linux installs with tight security lately, check > out the latest Mandrake (beta), if you're not careful you end up with a dumb and deaf box. Tight security in above is meant as with minimal services, etc. > Is a 2 wheel vehicle with a door and round steering tool, a bicycle or= a car? > Just my R 0.02, which would relate too $0, or 0 euro. > > I have installed FreeBSD 3.3, written a bunch of config files (inetd, hosts.allow etc.) and installed a handful of security packages for the fun of it (on my desktop !!). Again, tot capita, tot sententiae. A desktop user may find very tight security desirable in this vandalic world. The reverse is true in server environments. Indeed, in these environments, this is a very delicate issue. I have not tried the latest Mandrake yet. It sounds curious they do NOT provide a "workstation" or "server" option. It would at least simplify things. Best regards Salvo N.B. myjokingdomain =3D=3D=3D> neomedia.it to e-mail to me. ******************************* * * * Windows: brain-dead limits * * BeOS: limited apps * * Linux: unlimited (mindset) * * FreeBSD: no limits * * * ******************************* To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message