Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:05:36 GMT From: Cliff Sarginson <cliff@raggedclown.net> To: mupi@mknet.org, Keith Woodman <keith@cydonia.net>, Matthew Emmerton <matt@gsicomp.on.ca>, Guillermo Leandro <guille@galileo.or.cr>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD Kernel Message-ID: <E14NGoC-00062f-00@post.mail.nl.demon.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Sunday 28 January 2001 15:43, Keith Woodman wrote: > > I think there is some confusion here. In FreeBSD the kernel and the OS > > version are not seperate as they are in the diluted confusion of Linux > > versions. When you said you are running FreeBSD 4.1 then that is your > > kernel version. As opposed to say a RedHat 7 running a kernel version > > 2.x.x or what ever and Slackware version ?? running kernel version ?? etc > > etc. FreeBSD doesn't seperate the version from the kernel, they are one in > > the same. > > This isn't entirely a fair comparison, becuase you are comparing a > "distribution" version to a "complete system" version. Since the term > "Linux" itself properly refers only to the kernel, and the rest of the stuff > is packaged together at the "distribution" level according to the preferences > of the distributor. Multiple distributions use the same kernel (I thnkk most > of the commercially available distributions are still using a 2.2.? kernel, > though that should change fairly quickly. It is also possible for a user to > put a new version of the kernel into a distribution, and I suppose > theoretically possible (if rather dumb) to have a single distribution version > span multiple kernel. (dumb becuase it could be possible to have a "redHat > version 7 that was released several weeks ago incompatible with today's > redhat 7. So I doubt they would,, but it is possible, since the distribution > version is technically the "other" files it comes with). This is possible in Linux, on my Linux system I have kernel 2.2.16 and 2.2.18 bootable off the same distribution *except* for the kernel modules. My experience of both Linux and BSD is that it is much better to make this seperation on Linux distribution - since some distributions fiddle with the kernel as well. FreeBSD is better seen as a "whole", much like oldies like me when we talk about UNIX don't mean just the O/S but also all the system programs that come with it. In short "Linux" = "Kernel + Distribution Kernel Mods + GNU Software + Distribution extras. There are as many "Linux'es" as there are distributions. FreeBSD= errm FreeBSD ! Cliff > > FreeBSD isn't available in that method, there is only one "distribution" if > you want to put it in those terms. Becuase of that, it is fair to say that > if you are running FreeBSD version 4.2, then that is your kernel version. > And just like with linux, if you upgrade the kernel (say, to -stable) it is > possible to break the system. > > To be fair, it doesn't neccesarily mean that this is the fourth major kernel > revision since FreeBSD was released, since a lot of what changes between > releases is stuff outside the kernel itself (more like a linux distribution, > again) but again, becuase the kernel is tied to the distribution in FreeBSD's > case (and really, I guess in all the other BSD's as well) and there ARE in > fact kernel changes from time to time, there is no reason to *not* say that > the kernel version=distribution version. the uname -a command will return > the same basic result as on a Linux machine: > > compare: > [mupi@kelly ~]$ uname -a > Linux kelly.xxx.com 2.2.5-15 #1 Mon Apr 19 22:21:09 EDT 1999 i586 > (at a local ISP I have an account at) > > to > FreeBSD yyy.yyy.com 4.2-STABLE FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE #3: Sun Dec 31 17:06:43 MST > 2000 mupi@yyy.yyy.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/MUKAPPA4 i386 > > and note that from that you can extract that machine A is running Linux > 2.2.5-15 and I am running FreeBSD 4.2-Stable (albeit a rather old -stable) > (for those newbies curious, the #3 means the third build from this config > file; I did one time see someone who was on #90, or so they claimed...) > > > > mike > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.3 (FreeBSD) > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAjp1kj8ACgkQZ7GovTQbIm6AKgCfaMvSY1f5jFfNcaoqlaPv1PZL > 3S8AoIFmcsRRIE3pWpIAyTQ9Qq5CSUNn > =NSKl > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E14NGoC-00062f-00>