Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 18:47:17 -0600 From: Tillman Hodgson <tillman@seekingfire.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Commercial Distribution? Message-ID: <20040110004717.GL451@seekingfire.com> In-Reply-To: <3FFF3801.6000107@mindcore.net> References: <3FFB7F8F.3010101@mindcore.net> <20040107134537.GA415@dhumketu.homeunix.net> <3FFF3801.6000107@mindcore.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 06:23:45PM -0500, Scott W wrote: > That still doesn't remove (IMHO of course) the validity of my statement > about calling FreeBSD and OS but Linux not based on licensing- FreeBSD > wouldn't exist in it's current incarnation without the use of GPL and > GNU software. Nor would Linux. I agree that basing what an operating system is on it's license doesn't make sense in this context. It does make sense to determine whether or not something is an operating system by looking at what it /is/, however. FreeBSD is an operating system. RedHat Linux (or Mandrake Linux or whatever distribution you happen to like) is an operating system. "Linux", without qualifiers, is a kernel and not an operating system. Analogy: It can be debated that MS-DOS is an operating system. COMMAND.COM, however, is not. > Note that isn't a slam by far in any ways- I certainly use both on my > own servers, and would likely choose *BSD over Linux for client's web > and mail/external accessible sites So would I, since (excepting the possibility of in-kernel HTTP servers and in-kernel data files) you'd need more than just Linux to operate a web server. If FreeBSD was not available I'd consider an operating system like RedHat Enterprise Linux as a web server. -T -- "A computer is like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy." - Joseph Campbell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040110004717.GL451>