Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 18:33:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Dennis <jimd@mistery.mcafee.com> To: Mike.Smith@turner.com Cc: questions@freebsd.org, big-linux@netspace.org Subject: Re: Which OS? Linux or FreeBSD Message-ID: <199604170133.SAA18387@mistery.mcafee.com> In-Reply-To: <173aeab0@turner.com> from "Mike.Smith@turner.com" at Apr 16, 96 10:18:01 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I want to buy a unix like OS and am > considering either FreeBSD or Linux. Are there any comparisons out > there? I have heard great things about both OS's and am having a hard > time making a decision. Any strong opinions on either OS? > Michael, I have used both (and Solaris and SunOS among others). My opinions on this are simple. If you want to put up a secure internet (ftp, www, mail, DNS, and/or NFS) server: use FreeBSD. FreeBSD's TCP/IP code is more stable and robust, and the filesystem and disk drivers are seem to offer better performance. If your primary purpose is for a desktop workstation for general purpose, interactive use: use Linux. Linux is more "bleeding edge" and offers excellent performance for locally run applications (probably better memory management -- but less portable). In addition there is very broad support for diverse hardware and lots of people banging on it (thus lots of people to ask when you get stuck). A lot of "cool" stuff is written for Linux or ported to it (like Wolfram Research's "Mathematica") and the Caldera Netware/IPX client support package. As FreeBSD adds the ability to run Linux binaries this will be less of an issue (though some of the "cool" stuff is in the form of kernel patches or requires "cutting edge" features from the kernels). However all of the basic tools are available for FreeBSD and everything follows standards much closer. Also the FreeBSD distribution (there is only one) is better integrated than most Linux distributions (of which there are a plethora). If cross-platform support and stability are important (i.e. you want to run this on a Mac or a SPARC) try NetBSD. If you want to run a free OS on an Alpha or a MIPS and stability is of secondard importance -- you might try the Linux ports to either of those. Ultimately it depends on what you want to do with this particular box. Any of the free *ix clones is fine for learning Unix (FreeBSD probably has the edge there since it is "more standard" in it's default disk layout, boot cycle, disk partitioning/labelling terminology, and kernel building procedures). Two things in the UI that I prefer about FreeBSD: Scroll Lock actually gives me a scrollback buffer (what!?! a function bound to a key that's labelled intuitively -- ahh! must be a subversive plot!) (now if there was some way to dump the contents of the scroll buffer into an editor with just a couple of kestrokes) The -config option when booting the kernel through BootEasy allows me to selectively enable and disable parts of the kernel -- so I can get the system up -- even with bad hardware conflicts -- and have a really good idea which kernel drivers I really need to build in. Things I prefer about the Linux UI: Very flexible virtual console support (loadkeys, select/gpm, etc). The extended filesystem attributes in the ext2fs filesystem. (Particularly the 'i' "immutable" bit and the "append-only" flags) make config (and make menuconfig) to walk through kernel configuration (vs. remember with directory those kernel files are stored in anyway). Linux always comes with bash -- on FreeBSD I have to go fetch it and build it. FreeBSD's concept of "ports" and a tree of make files and diffs that get a free package from its "home ftp site," applies any FreeBSD patches and does the build. I like the concept -- I'm not sure the execution is there for me (and I can guarantee that the docs aren't -- maybe its just me -- but I don't get it). Jim Dennis, System Administrator, McAfee Associates
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604170133.SAA18387>