Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 02:56:28 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de (Christian Weisgerber) Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD Message-ID: <199902180256.TAA09211@usr06.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <7af7uh$dnb$1@mips.rhein-neckar.de> from "Christian Weisgerber" at Feb 17, 99 09:14:09 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > in an empty partition (and it get two , damn it because it
> > doens't know that partitions can be sub-divided in slice for swap i.e.).
>
> Linux uses the standard PC partition model. FreeBSD treats standard
> partitions as slices and creates its own partitions within. Different
> approach, and the FreeBSD one is certainly harder to understand. (How do
> {Net,Open}BSD/i386 handle this?)
The same way. The same way Ultrix, Solaris, SVR3 on an NCR tower,
SVR4, and, basically, every UNIX and clone except Linux, Minix,
and Coherent (from Marc Williams Company) handle it.
Some replace the name "disklabel" with "VTOC" (Volume Table Of Contents),
but basically it's the same way that most UNIX has been doing it
forever. Anyone with a UNIX background would recognize it instantly.
> You can set up cvsup for Linux, too.
>
> Are you referring to the concept of cvsuping the source and making the
> world? Yes, some people like this. Others would be horrified and much
> prefer to pull pre-compiled packages from the net. Different
> preferences.
If Linus (God forbid) was standing next to the non-publig server
and was hit by a chunk of "blue ice" falling off a 747, Linux would
have a hell of a hard time recovering to the point that foreward
progress was actually possible, since the set of people who could
regrate the distributions, with the correct modification histories,
including the rationale for decisions that they may want to later
reverse, is vanishingly small.
FWIW, the same can be said of the Apache group and NetBSD. Probably
OpenBSD as well.
There's a big redundancy advantage in full copies of your source
management archive being outside the radious of one tactical nuke.
For example, if MS were ever really hurting over "Open Source", even
with 10 "MS Nuke 2000"'s they couldn't get rid of FreeBSD (though,
amusingly, they *could* wipe out Novell with one 8-)).
Terry Lambert
terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199902180256.TAA09211>