Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 13:57:12 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Stephen Fuqua <sfuqua@pulsar.cs.wku.edu> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD for Operating Systems Course Message-ID: <19971012135712.16377@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <199710120351.WAA09609@pulsar.cs.wku.edu>; from Stephen Fuqua on Sat, Oct 11, 1997 at 10:51:10PM -0500 References: <199710120351.WAA09609@pulsar.cs.wku.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 11, 1997 at 10:51:10PM -0500, Stephen Fuqua wrote: > I'm writing a short paper as part of my MS comparing BSD with Linux and > Minix for use in an undergraduate operating systems course. The idea > would be to compare these systems in terms of using them for a class some > C programming and some simple kernel programming exercises like adding a > pseudo device or a "do-nothing" system call, and some code reading. > > At this point I see one big difference between Minix and the other two > systems, Minix's source code is tiny compared to BSD or Linux. The author > has intentionally kept it simple. Minix also differs in that it is a > microkernel. While minix is less intimidating in terms of size, finding > ones way around the Linux and BSD source is pretty easy too. Other than > size, I've run some different complexity measures on the code in all three > systems, and it doesn't look like I'm going to find any significant > differences in the amount of comments, length of functions, cyclomatic > complexity, etc between the three, despite what one might expect based on > their backgrounds. Indeed. I'm a little surprised about this. Maybe a little more investigation would be worthwhile. > All three are easy to install on supported hardware for people who > read directions; Linux(Redhat) and BSD(Freebsd) are have colorful, > easy to follow menu based install programs. While people have > ported some of software to Minix -- both Linux and BSD come with > huge selections of easily installed, ported software. This is a point that somebody recently raised about my comparison of the two. The FreeBSD Ports Collection is definitely a great advantage. I'm told that Linux doesn't offer this degree of ease in porting. Since I need to consider whether I put this in my book, I'd be interested in discussing the matter. > There is no great difference in performance between BSD and Linux. > Minix is the only choice for people stuck with 286's, both BSD and > Linux run on a huge variety of pc hardware for 386's on up. While > it is difficult to find hard numbers -- it appears that clear Linux > has the largest user base, BSD is second, and Minix last. I think you can use the >> operator here in each comparison. > Minix comes with an excellent textbook. Linux has a wealth of > documentation for beginners, but this documentation is uneven in > quality. BSD has the best in depth, advanced documentation, the > system manuals from O'Reilly, the _Source Code Secrets_ series, and > the _Design and Implementation_ book. Well observed. A lot of people complain that there is only one English-language book on FreeBSD, but this isn't correct. > Both BSD and Linux are full fledged varieties of Unix, One could discuss your use of the word "variety". We FreeBSD people are proud of the distinction between "clone" and "disowned child". > capable of holding their own against commercial versions of Unix. > Users who have experience with System V may feel slightly more at > home with Linux, while FreeBSD *is* BSD unix. It's been a while since I used Linux. A lot of people say this (that System V people would be more at home with Linux), but with a couple of minor exceptions (ps command, run states) I'm not sure that there's much difference. In fact, Linux is probably a lot closer to FreeBSD than it is to System V. > Have I missed anything, or been unfair anywhere? I can't see that you've been unfair here. I'm sure you've missed something :-) Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971012135712.16377>