From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 13 22:11:28 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A56316A4CE for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:11:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hosea.tallye.com (joel.tallye.com [216.99.199.78]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A4843D48 for ; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:11:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lorenl@alzatex.com) Received: from hosea.tallye.com (hosea.tallye.com [127.0.0.1]) by hosea.tallye.com (8.12.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j2DMBHUQ007779 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:11:18 -0800 Received: (from sttng359@localhost) by hosea.tallye.com (8.12.8/8.12.10/Submit) id j2DMBE4h007777; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:11:14 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: hosea.tallye.com: sttng359 set sender to lorenl@alzatex.com using -f Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:11:14 -0800 From: "Loren M. Lang" To: Bart Silverstrim Message-ID: <20050313221114.GQ18080@alzatex.com> References: <20050312123840.19848c79.alfredoj69@gmail.com> <423346F4.7060007@makeworld.com> <885a1a993c8a666d9d4a5d6ec94031e1@chrononomicon.com> <20050313213436.GL18080@alzatex.com> <12395e66e47f4a9cbbac323fb833a9b3@chrononomicon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kPJUzav3owWaKxsz" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <12395e66e47f4a9cbbac323fb833a9b3@chrononomicon.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-GPG-Key: ftp://ftp.tallye.com/pub/lorenl_pubkey.asc X-GPG-Fingerprint: B3B9 D669 69C9 09EC 1BCD 835A FAF3 7A46 E4A3 280C cc: "Loren M. Lang" cc: Aperez cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why not? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:11:28 -0000 --kPJUzav3owWaKxsz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 04:53:36PM -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote: >=20 > On Mar 13, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Loren M. Lang wrote: >=20 > >On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 01:24:42PM -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote: > >> > >>On Mar 12, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Chris wrote: > >> > >>>Aperez wrote: > >>>>Hello everybdody > >>>> > >>>>I read an interview of Linus Torvald made by Linux Magazine. In that > >>>>interview Linus mentioned the following: > >>>> > >>>>"On the other hand, no, Linux does not have that stupid notion of > >>>>having totally separate kernel development for different issues. If > >>>>you want a secure BSD, you get OpenBSD; if you want a usable BSD,=20 > >>>>you > >>>>get FreeBSD; and if you want BSD on other architectures, you get > >>>>NetBSD. That___s just idiotic, to have different teams worry about > >>>>different things." > >>> > >>>Here's irony posed as a question: > >>> > >>>... and how many distros of Linux are there? > >> > >>I think the difference is that Linus is working on the Linux kernel. > >>The distros, numerous as they are, all run the same kernel. Those > >>separate distros package the other applications and userland apps and > >>default configs. The kernel itself isn't under separate forks,=20 > >>whereas > >>from what I understand the kernels for FBSD/NetBSD/OBSD are very > >>similar, share a lot of crossed-over code, but are not identical and > >>have separate "management" teams behind them. > > > >While each distros kernel is probably less different than a NetBSD vs. > >FreeBSD kernel, there still each different and a lot more of them. I > >had to download and install a very specific kernel from redhat to use=20 > >on > >my debian system so I could use my wireless card. > > > >Also, some features can very wildly like IPSEC, some distros patch in > >FreeSWAN's stack, others the KAME stack. >=20 > Some vendors may be directly patching certain features, for the most=20 > part you shouldn't have to download a specific kernel for a feature to=20 > work in Linux unless you wanted it pre-packaged. You should be able to= =20 > update it by downloading the latest features, running the config to=20 > enable/disable what features you want compiled into the kernel (or as=20 > modules), then compile it. Well, the vendor for my wireless card provided a binary-only driver with a small open-source wrapper. The wrapper was just a piece of garbage though and compiling it for a different kernel didn't work. The driver was designed for redhat's 2.4.18-3 kernel. That kernel had a couple of issues and redhat issued an update, 2.4.18-10. The wireless card driver wouldn't even work on the -10 kernel, it would crash my system everytime, I had to use the -3 kernel to use it at all. This is one of the problems/features of the linux kernel, it doesn't work with binary device drivers like the *BSD kernel do. >=20 > When everything else breaks because the kernel version changed and=20 > something specific is linked to something that depends on something=20 > from the previous kernel's config, then you get to delve into some real= =20 > fun. But still, there is one source kernel, and unless the vendors did= =20 > something proprietary (which I don't believe they're supposed to be=20 > allowed to do), you can compile your own kernel with your own set of=20 > enabled and disabled features from the Linux kernel source tree whether= =20 > you're running Red Hat or Debian; it may break if that particular=20 > distro is depending on certain features as you have it configured and=20 > you fubar the new kernel's config, but it is still a matter of tweaking= =20 > that configuration to get it working again. >=20 > I can't download the sources for NetBSD's kernel, compile it on my=20 > FreeBSD box, and have it work no matter how much tweaking I do to the=20 > configuration...if I'm wrong, please someone correct me. >=20 > I *think* (and I'm not following the story closely) what Linus was=20 > saying is that it's stupid to have so many people working in parallel=20 > on such similar cousins...NetBSD, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD. They share=20 > code, they share info, but optimize for certain goals and have a lot of= =20 > redundancy. Linux's kernel is Linux's kernel, modified by individuals=20 > but still one big bulky source tree to work from. Is one way less=20 > intelligent than others? I don't know. I never studied it :-) All I=20 > know is that in general, for most end users, it doesn't matter...if=20 > they stick with a particular distro and their sources and packages,=20 > then things tend to work. Linux has fragmented so much that it's=20 > difficult to get a package aimed at distro A and have it work on distro= =20 > B despite them both being Linux. For the BSD's, it's pretty much=20 > always worked as if it's in the port tree, you have the package in=20 > question work. Otherwise, work from sources. And instructions to get=20 > a package working on *BSD pretty much always work whereas for Linux you= =20 > may run Debian but find instructions for what you're trying to do=20 > written for an audience running Red Hat, so you need to translate=20 > things as you go along. --=20 I sense much NT in you. NT leads to Bluescreen. Bluescreen leads to downtime. Downtime leads to suffering. NT is the path to the darkside. Powerful Unix is. Public Key: ftp://ftp.tallye.com/pub/lorenl_pubkey.asc Fingerprint: CEE1 AAE2 F66C 59B5 34CA C415 6D35 E847 0118 A3D2 =20 --kPJUzav3owWaKxsz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCNLqCbTXoRwEYo9IRAmZSAJ9RqJJizEjxOauBkurVk1p1BCWQYACfcGPS 97stclNWj0JGBVIFslZHZFE= =qmwA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kPJUzav3owWaKxsz--