From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 22 09:41:09 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FA1A106564A for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:41:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ericfurman@fastmail.net) Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 205AA8FC15 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:41:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ericfurman@fastmail.net) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B67C379E46; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:29:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from web5.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.214]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:29:37 -0400 Received: by web5.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id 031B531A10; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:29:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <1245662976.25920.1321530053@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: L7tGggC+mERpXUkJVaXC5uJLwPyW3OIP0GcEIhv4nGLC 1245662976 From: "Eric Furman" To: "Holger Kipp" , "Daniel Bolgheroni" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface References: <735E59909DEB44AF92825EA7C65CF430@ionicoffice.ionic.co.uk> <20090619095832.GA58127@intserv.int1.b.intern> <4A3F46F2.7020904@alogis.com> In-Reply-To: <4A3F46F2.7020904@alogis.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:29:36 -0400 Cc: Michal , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, OpenBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: Open Vs Free BSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:41:09 -0000 BWAAAHAHAHAHAH, what a bunch of retards Please stop sending this crap to OBSD lists. On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:55:14 +0200, "Holger Kipp" said: > Daniel Bolgheroni schrieb: > > On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Holger Kipp wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 09:47:35AM +0100, Michal wrote: > >> > >> For the masses: > >> > >> - NetBSD: Run on any hardware (including toasters) > >> - OpenBSD: Be as secure as possible > >> - FreeBSD: provide best system for x86-platforms > >> > > > > It's a mistake to make this association. > > > I don't think so: > > *NetBSD say on their website:* > NetBSD is a free, fast, secure, and _highly_portable_ Unix-like Open > Source operating system. It is available for a > _wide_range_of_platforms_, from large-scale servers and powerful desktop > systems to handheld and embedded devices. Its clean design and advanced > features make it excellent for use in both production and research > environments, and the source code is freely available under a > business-friendly license. > > *OpenBSD say on their website:* > The OpenBSD project produces a *FREE*, multi-platform 4.4BSD-based > UNIX-like operating system. Our efforts emphasize portability, > standardization, correctness, proactive security > and integrated cryptography > . > > *FreeBSD say on their website:* > FreeBSD is an advanced operating system for _x86_compatible (including > Pentium. and Athlon^(TM)), _amd64_compatible_ (including Opteron^(TM), > Athlon^(TM)64, and EM64T), ARM, IA-64, PowerPC, PC-98 and UltraSPARC. > architectures. > [..] > With over 20,000 ported libraries and applications > , FreeBSD supports > applications for desktop, server, appliance, and embedded environments. > > > Actually I like it this way, because every BSD variant has a different > focus and is trying different ways to solve problems or fullfill user > requirements. Whatever turns out to be best will be incorporated into > the other *BSDs whenever the need arises. Each of the mentioned BSDs has > its advantages and disadvantages, so what? Choose the system you seem > best suited for your needs. Afaik some developers are also working on > several BSD-flavours. > > OpenBSD people chose "security" as an argument to describe what the OS > > is. It's true and I believe it can attract more users, but on the other > > side, people seem to think OpenBSD is ONLY used when you need security, > > like a firewall, router, etc. > > > OpenBSD was a fork of NetBSD but is having more of a focus on security. > This is a good thing. We might not have OpenSSH, PF etc. without it. > Afaik OpenBSD however is using a simple Giant Lock for MP which FreeBSD > got rid of some time ago (wasn't an easy task) which now results in very > good scalability of FreeBSD on MP systems. I have not checked how NetBSD > is handling MP and have also not conducted any performance tests in this > area, though. > > OpenBSD is a GENERIC OS which can be used to do _almost_ every task a > > computer system is able to. > > > This is true for all unix-like (and many other) operating systems. I > don't see the point here. > > The OP did not intend to start a flame war, and I don't either. I like > OpenBSD (because of the security features and supported platforms). I > like NetBSD (because of the supported platforms - especially RiscPCs - > and the clean implementation). I like FreeBSD because of the many > available ports (which in the past was a reason to choose FreeBSD over > NetBSD or OpenBSD on x86-hardware) and for other reasons. There is no > general "a is better than b" here. It all depends on the requirements > and what you're familiar with. > > I prefer FreeBSD because I have ipf, ipfw and pf to chose from, it has > good MP support, ZFS and never let me down since 2.2.8. > I also use OpenBSD and NetBSD occasionally and support their projects by > buying their CDs and T-Shirts ever now and then. > > Best regards, > Holger >