From owner-freebsd-newbies Thu Mar 25 15:31:42 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Received: from b.mx.crl.com (bmx.crl.com [165.113.1.81]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F327151C9 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:31:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from anarchy@crl.com) Received: from crl.crl.com (crl.com [165.113.1.12]) by b.mx.crl.com (8.8.7/) via SMTP id PAA23138; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:28:13 -0800 (PST) env-from (anarchy@crl.com) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:28:13 -0800 (PST) From: Ben Manes To: The Classiest Man Alive Cc: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD: The Storage Wars In-Reply-To: <199903251713.MAA17828@geek.grf.ov.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Feature for feature, is there a big difference in the storage requirements > of Linux and FreeBSD? That is, would a FreeBSD installation (say 2.2.8) > take any more or less space than a comparably configured Linux installation? Well, Linux is just a kernal, and now the libraries, the rest is OSS from other places (thus different distrubations). BSDs are always the full system, so there's always one package and forced to work correctly. Thus, you could say Linux would be smaller as its just the kernal, while FreeBSD is the kernal and everything else. The one flaw to that is perhaps PicoBSD, which is made by the FreeBSD group, and could be about the same size. Who knows.. It doesn't make much sense desciding on one just because stripped down it takes a few less kilobytes, so its irrelevent to the newbies list (which should cover: Why FreeBSD?, Resources, discoveries, and perhaps on a rare occasion a question). BTW, Sue won't be happy if you continue to cross-post.. so my advise is to stop that. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message