Date: Sun, 19 Mar 1995 10:53:16 -0500 (EST) From: Jeff <jeffh@Cybernetics.NET> To: John Beukema <jbeukema@hk.super.net> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Comparison of un*x's Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950319104439.29686B-100000@server0> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950319101347.3002D-100000@is1.hk.super.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 19 Mar 1995, John Beukema wrote:
> Solaris (Seemingly the first choice of several members)
I have read several magazine reviews about Solaris x86 because I, too,
was considering switching from FreeBSD. All I can say is NO, NO, and
NO. Solaris x86 was ported almost directly from the sun, with no
consideration for the fact that it was no longer running on a sun. It
may run on x86 hardware, but it likes to think it's still on a sun.
> FreeBSD
Honestly this would be your best choice, I believe. You can get almost
any network utility to compile on FreeBSD. A testament to the stability
of FreeBSD can be seen at freebsd.cdrom.com, which is a 90mhz pentium and
supports 500 concurrent users.
> SunOS (Does it even run on i386?)
Nope.
> BSDI
This is not bad.
> SCO
ACK! SCO likes to take all standard unix utilities and prepend them with
the word 'sco'. I'm surprised they don't have 'scols', 'scomkdir', etc.
:) Not to mention it's slow.
> NetBSD
I have never run this, can't comment.
> Any other suggestions. (Linux has been eliminated due to too frequent
> patches.)
That's silly, IMO. No one forces you to apply any of the patches. You
could get a stable version and run that forever, never applying any
patches. The only time patches apply is when you always want to be
current. Linux has performed well as a WWW, news, and e-mail server for
my internet provider. (The only reason they use linux over FreeBSD is
because the software for their Annex terminal server flakes out on
FreeBSD for some reason.)
> It is likely I cannot prevail on FreeBSD at this time. What would the
> *second choice* be, particularily in terms of compatibility with FreeBSD?
> I could then use FreeBSD on one machine on the network and compare.
BSDI. The BSDI people tend to set after having a solid, static OS. The
FreeBSD team sets their goals a bit higher by also adding new features
often. SMP (multi-processor) support is being added now, along with a
host of other goodies that the BSDI people have not done yet. (At least
I don't think they have.)
If you can't run FreeBSD, however, BSDI would be your best second choice.
> I appreciate the assistance.
Sure. Hope it helps.
> jbeukema
Jeff
-- Jeff Hoffman -- jeffh@cybernetics.net -------------------------------------
"A man facing the light looks not into sorrow, but to to the future...always."
WWW: http://www.cybernetics.net/users/jeffh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PGP Public Key available on request.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SUN.3.91.950319104439.29686B-100000>