Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2018 16:57:57 +0000 (UTC) From: Benedict Reuschling <bcr@FreeBSD.org> To: doc-committers@freebsd.org, svn-doc-all@freebsd.org, svn-doc-head@freebsd.org Subject: svn commit: r51864 - head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd Message-ID: <201806171657.w5HGvvkV006914@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Author: bcr Date: Sun Jun 17 16:57:57 2018 New Revision: 51864 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/doc/51864 Log: Style cleanup: - wrap long lines - put two spaces after a sentence stop - put <info> and <title> on lines on their own - in one instance, put the text right next to the <para> tag and not below it I did not change the capitalizations in this file, so the file should not have any visible changes. Modified: head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml Modified: head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml ============================================================================== --- head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml Sun Jun 17 16:54:56 2018 (r51863) +++ head/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/explaining-bsd/article.xml Sun Jun 17 16:57:57 2018 (r51864) @@ -3,9 +3,11 @@ "http://www.FreeBSD.org/XML/share/xml/freebsd50.dtd">; <!-- $FreeBSD$ --> <!-- The FreeBSD Documentation Project --> -<article xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" version="5.0" xml:lang="en"> - <info><title>Explaining BSD</title> - +<article xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" + xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" version="5.0" + xml:lang="en"> + <info> + <title>Explaining BSD</title> <author><personname><firstname>Greg</firstname><surname>Lehey</surname></personname><affiliation> <address><email>grog@FreeBSD.org</email></address> @@ -29,42 +31,43 @@ <releaseinfo>$FreeBSD$</releaseinfo> <abstract> - <para>In the open source world, the word <quote>Linux</quote> is almost - synonymous with <quote>Operating System</quote>, but it is not the only - open source &unix; operating system.</para> + <para>In the open source world, the word <quote>Linux</quote> is + almost synonymous with <quote>Operating System</quote>, but it + is not the only open source &unix; operating system.</para> - <para>So what is the secret? Why is BSD not better known? This white - paper addresses these and other questions.</para> + <para>So what is the secret? Why is BSD not better known? This + white paper addresses these and other questions.</para> - <para>Throughout this paper, differences between BSD and Linux will be - noted <emphasis>like this</emphasis>.</para> + <para>Throughout this paper, differences between BSD and Linux + will be noted <emphasis>like this</emphasis>.</para> </abstract> </info> <sect1 xml:id="what-is-bsd"> <title>What is BSD?</title> - <para>BSD stands for <quote>Berkeley Software Distribution</quote>. It is - the name of distributions of source code from the University of - California, Berkeley, which were originally extensions to AT&T's - Research &unix; operating system. Several open source operating system - projects are based on a release of this source code known as - 4.4BSD-Lite. In addition, they comprise a number of packages from other - Open Source projects, including notably the GNU project. The overall + <para>BSD stands for <quote>Berkeley Software + Distribution</quote>. It is the name of distributions of + source code from the University of California, Berkeley, which + were originally extensions to AT&T's Research &unix; + operating system. Several open source operating system projects + are based on a release of this source code known as 4.4BSD-Lite. + In addition, they comprise a number of packages from other Open + Source projects, including notably the GNU project. The overall operating system comprises:</para> <itemizedlist> <listitem> <para>The BSD kernel, which handles process scheduling, memory - management, symmetric multi-processing (SMP), device drivers, - etc.</para> + management, symmetric multi-processing (SMP), device + drivers, etc.</para> </listitem> <listitem> <para>The C library, the base API for the system.</para> - <para><emphasis>The BSD C library is based on code from Berkeley, not - the GNU project.</emphasis></para> + <para><emphasis>The BSD C library is based on code from + Berkeley, not the GNU project.</emphasis></para> </listitem> <listitem> @@ -76,16 +79,17 @@ </listitem> <listitem> - <para>The X Window system, which handles graphical display.</para> + <para>The X Window system, which handles graphical + display.</para> - <para>The X Window system used in most versions of BSD is maintained - by the - <link xlink:href="http://www.X.org/">X.Org project</link>. - &os; allows the user to choose from a variety of desktop - environments, such as <application>Gnome</application>, - <application>KDE</application>, or <application>Xfce</application>; - and lightweight window managers like - <application>Openbox</application>, + <para>The X Window system used in most versions of BSD is + maintained by the <link xlink:href="http://www.X.org/">X.Org + project</link>. &os; allows the user to choose from a + variety of desktop environments, such as + <application>Gnome</application>, + <application>KDE</application>, or + <application>Xfce</application>; and lightweight window + managers like <application>Openbox</application>, <application>Fluxbox</application>, or <application>Awesome</application>.</para> </listitem> @@ -100,71 +104,77 @@ <title>What, a real &unix;?</title> <para>The BSD operating systems are not clones, but open source - derivatives of AT&T's Research &unix; operating system, which is also - the ancestor of the modern &unix; System V. This may surprise you. How - could that happen when AT&T has never released its code as open - source?</para> + derivatives of AT&T's Research &unix; operating system, + which is also the ancestor of the modern &unix; System V. This + may surprise you. How could that happen when AT&T has never + released its code as open source?</para> - <para>It is true that AT&T &unix; is not open source, and in a copyright - sense BSD is very definitely <emphasis>not</emphasis> &unix;, but on the - other hand, AT&T has imported sources from other projects, - noticeably the Computer Sciences Research Group (CSRG) of the University of - California in Berkeley, CA. Starting in 1976, the CSRG started - releasing tapes of their software, calling them <emphasis>Berkeley - Software Distribution</emphasis> or <emphasis>BSD</emphasis>.</para> + <para>It is true that AT&T &unix; is not open source, and in a + copyright sense BSD is very definitely <emphasis>not</emphasis> + &unix;, but on the other hand, AT&T has imported sources + from other projects, noticeably the Computer Sciences Research + Group (CSRG) of the University of California in Berkeley, CA. + Starting in 1976, the CSRG started releasing tapes of their + software, calling them <emphasis>Berkeley Software + Distribution</emphasis> or <emphasis>BSD</emphasis>.</para> - <para>Initial BSD releases consisted mainly of user programs, but that - changed dramatically when the CSRG landed a contract with the Defense - Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to upgrade the communications - protocols on their network, ARPANET. The new protocols were known as - the <emphasis>Internet Protocols</emphasis>, later - <emphasis>TCP/IP</emphasis> after the most important protocols. The - first widely distributed implementation was part of 4.2BSD, in - 1982.</para> + <para>Initial BSD releases consisted mainly of user programs, but + that changed dramatically when the CSRG landed a contract with + the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to upgrade + the communications protocols on their network, ARPANET. The new + protocols were known as the <emphasis>Internet + Protocols</emphasis>, later <emphasis>TCP/IP</emphasis> after + the most important protocols. The first widely distributed + implementation was part of 4.2BSD, in 1982.</para> - <para>In the course of the 1980s, a number of new workstation companies - sprang up. Many preferred to license &unix; rather than developing - operating systems for themselves. In particular, Sun Microsystems - licensed &unix; and implemented a version of 4.2BSD, which they called - &sunos;. When AT&T themselves were allowed to sell &unix; commercially, - they started with a somewhat bare-bones implementation called System - III, to be quickly followed by System V. The System V code base did not - include networking, so all implementations included additional software - from the BSD, including the TCP/IP software, but also utilities such as - the <emphasis>csh</emphasis> shell and the <emphasis>vi</emphasis> - editor. Collectively, these enhancements were known as the - <emphasis>Berkeley Extensions</emphasis>.</para> + <para>In the course of the 1980s, a number of new workstation + companies sprang up. Many preferred to license &unix; rather + than developing operating systems for themselves. In + particular, Sun Microsystems licensed &unix; and implemented a + version of 4.2BSD, which they called &sunos;. When AT&T + themselves were allowed to sell &unix; commercially, they + started with a somewhat bare-bones implementation called System + III, to be quickly followed by System V. The System V code base + did not include networking, so all implementations included + additional software from the BSD, including the TCP/IP software, + but also utilities such as the <emphasis>csh</emphasis> shell + and the <emphasis>vi</emphasis> editor. Collectively, these + enhancements were known as the <emphasis>Berkeley + Extensions</emphasis>.</para> - <para>The BSD tapes contained AT&T source code and thus required a - &unix; source license. By 1990, the CSRG's funding was running out, and - it faced closure. Some members of the group decided to release the BSD - code, which was Open Source, without the AT&T proprietary code. - This finally happened with the <emphasis>Networking Tape 2</emphasis>, - usually known as <emphasis>Net/2</emphasis>. Net/2 was not a complete - operating system: about 20% of the kernel code was missing. One of the - CSRG members, William F. Jolitz, wrote the remaining code and released - it in early 1992 as <emphasis>386BSD</emphasis>. At the same time, - another group of ex-CSRG members formed a commercial company called - <link xlink:href="http://www.bsdi.com/">Berkeley Software Design Inc.</link> - and released a beta version of an operating system called - <link xlink:href="http://www.bsdi.com/">BSD/386</link>, which was based on - the same sources. The name of the operating system was later changed - to BSD/OS.</para> + <para>The BSD tapes contained AT&T source code and thus + required a &unix; source license. By 1990, the CSRG's funding + was running out, and it faced closure. Some members of the + group decided to release the BSD code, which was Open Source, + without the AT&T proprietary code. This finally happened + with the <emphasis>Networking Tape 2</emphasis>, usually known + as <emphasis>Net/2</emphasis>. Net/2 was not a complete + operating system: about 20% of the kernel code was missing. One + of the CSRG members, William F. Jolitz, wrote the remaining code + and released it in early 1992 as <emphasis>386BSD</emphasis>. + At the same time, another group of ex-CSRG members formed a + commercial company called <link + xlink:href="http://www.bsdi.com/">Berkeley Software Design + Inc.</link> and released a beta version of an operating system + called <link xlink:href="http://www.bsdi.com/">BSD/386</link>, + which was based on the same sources. The name of the operating + system was later changed to BSD/OS.</para> - <para>386BSD never became a stable operating system. Instead, two other - projects split off from it in 1993: - <link xlink:href="http://www.NetBSD.org/">NetBSD</link>; and - <link xlink:href="&url.base;/index.html">FreeBSD</link>. The two projects - originally diverged due to differences in patience waiting for - improvements to 386BSD: the NetBSD people started early in the year, - and the first version of FreeBSD was not ready until the end of the - year. In the meantime, the code base had diverged sufficiently to - make it difficult to merge. In addition, the projects had different - aims, as we will see below. In 1996, - <link xlink:href="http://www.OpenBSD.org/">OpenBSD</link>; split off from - NetBSD, and in 2003, - <link xlink:href="http://www.dragonflybsd.org/">DragonFlyBSD</link>; split - off from FreeBSD.</para> + <para>386BSD never became a stable operating system. Instead, two + other projects split off from it in 1993: <link + xlink:href="http://www.NetBSD.org/">NetBSD</link>; and <link + xlink:href="&url.base;/index.html">FreeBSD</link>. The two + projects originally diverged due to differences in patience + waiting for improvements to 386BSD: the NetBSD people started + early in the year, and the first version of FreeBSD was not + ready until the end of the year. In the meantime, the code base + had diverged sufficiently to make it difficult to merge. In + addition, the projects had different aims, as we will see below. + In 1996, <link + xlink:href="http://www.OpenBSD.org/">OpenBSD</link>; split off + from NetBSD, and in 2003, <link + xlink:href="http://www.dragonflybsd.org/">DragonFlyBSD</link>; + split off from FreeBSD.</para> </sect1> <sect1 xml:id="why-is-bsd-not-better-known"> @@ -174,39 +184,41 @@ <orderedlist> <listitem> - <para>The BSD developers are often more interested in polishing their - code than marketing it.</para> + <para>The BSD developers are often more interested in + polishing their code than marketing it.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>Much of Linux's popularity is due to factors external to the - Linux projects, such as the press, and to companies formed to - provide Linux services. Until recently, the open source BSDs had no - such proponents.</para> + <para>Much of Linux's popularity is due to factors external to + the Linux projects, such as the press, and to companies + formed to provide Linux services. Until recently, the open + source BSDs had no such proponents.</para> </listitem> <listitem> <para>BSD developers tend to be more experienced than Linux - developers, and have less interest in making the system easy to use. - Newcomers tend to feel more comfortable with Linux.</para> + developers, and have less interest in making the system easy + to use. Newcomers tend to feel more comfortable with + Linux.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>In 1992, AT&T sued - <link xlink:href="http://www.bsdi.com/">BSDI</link>, - the vendor of BSD/386, alleging that the product contained - AT&T-copyrighted code. The case was settled out of court in - 1994, but the spectre of the litigation continues to haunt people. - In March 2000 an article published on the web claimed - that the court case had been <quote>recently settled</quote>.</para> + <para>In 1992, AT&T sued <link + xlink:href="http://www.bsdi.com/">BSDI</link>, the vendor + of BSD/386, alleging that the product contained + AT&T-copyrighted code. The case was settled out of + court in 1994, but the spectre of the litigation continues + to haunt people. In March 2000 an article published on the + web claimed that the court case had been <quote>recently + settled</quote>.</para> - <para>One detail that the lawsuit did clarify is the naming: in the - 1980s, BSD was known as <quote>BSD &unix;</quote>. With the - elimination of the last vestige of AT&T code from BSD, it - also lost the right to the name &unix;. Thus you will see - references in book titles to <quote>the 4.3BSD &unix; operating - system</quote> and <quote>the 4.4BSD operating - system</quote>.</para> + <para>One detail that the lawsuit did clarify is the naming: + in the 1980s, BSD was known as <quote>BSD &unix;</quote>. + With the elimination of the last vestige of AT&T code + from BSD, it also lost the right to the name &unix;. Thus + you will see references in book titles to <quote>the 4.3BSD + &unix; operating system</quote> and <quote>the 4.4BSD + operating system</quote>.</para> </listitem> </orderedlist> </sect1> @@ -214,113 +226,123 @@ <sect1 xml:id="comparing-bsd-and-linux"> <title>Comparing BSD and Linux</title> - <para>So what is really the difference between, say, Debian Linux and - FreeBSD? For the average user, the difference is surprisingly small: - Both are &unix; like operating systems. Both are developed by - non-commercial projects (this does not apply to many other Linux - distributions, of course). In the following section, we will look at BSD - and compare it to Linux. The description applies most closely to - FreeBSD, which accounts for an estimated 80% of the BSD installations, - but the differences from NetBSD, OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD are small. - </para> + <para>So what is really the difference between, say, Debian Linux + and FreeBSD? For the average user, the difference is + surprisingly small: Both are &unix; like operating systems. + Both are developed by non-commercial projects (this does not + apply to many other Linux distributions, of course). In the + following section, we will look at BSD and compare it to Linux. + The description applies most closely to FreeBSD, which accounts + for an estimated 80% of the BSD installations, but the + differences from NetBSD, OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD are + small.</para> <sect2> <title>Who owns BSD?</title> <para>No one person or corporation owns BSD. It is created and distributed by a community of highly technical and committed - contributors all over the world. Some of the components of BSD are - Open Source projects in their own right and managed by different - project maintainers.</para> + contributors all over the world. Some of the components of + BSD are Open Source projects in their own right and managed by + different project maintainers.</para> </sect2> <sect2> <title>How is BSD developed and updated?</title> - <para>The BSD kernels are developed and updated following the Open - Source development model. Each project maintains a publicly - accessible <emphasis>source tree</emphasis> - which contains all source files for the - project, including documentation and other incidental files. - Users can obtain a complete copy of any version.</para> + <para>The BSD kernels are developed and updated following the + Open Source development model. Each project maintains a + publicly accessible <emphasis>source tree</emphasis> which + contains all source files for the project, including + documentation and other incidental files. Users can obtain a + complete copy of any version.</para> - <para>A large number of developers worldwide contribute to improvements - to BSD. They are divided into three kinds:</para> + <para>A large number of developers worldwide contribute to + improvements to BSD. They are divided into three + kinds:</para> <itemizedlist> <listitem> - <para><firstterm>Contributors</firstterm> write code or documentation. - They are not permitted to commit (add code) directly to the source - tree. In order for their code to be included in the system, it - must be reviewed and checked in by a registered developer, known - as a <emphasis>committer</emphasis>.</para> + <para><firstterm>Contributors</firstterm> write code or + documentation. They are not permitted to commit (add + code) directly to the source tree. In order for their + code to be included in the system, it must be reviewed and + checked in by a registered developer, known as a + <emphasis>committer</emphasis>.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para><firstterm>Committers</firstterm> are developers with write - access to the source tree. In order to become a committer, an - individual must show ability in the area in which they are - active.</para> + <para><firstterm>Committers</firstterm> are developers with + write access to the source tree. In order to become a + committer, an individual must show ability in the area in + which they are active.</para> - <para> - It is at the individual committer's discretion whether they should - obtain authority before committing changes to the source tree. In - general, an experienced committer may make changes which are - obviously correct without obtaining consensus. For example, a - documentation project committer may correct typographical or - grammatical errors without review. On the other hand, developers - making far-reaching or complicated changes are expected to submit - their changes for review before committing them. In extreme - cases, a core team member with a function such as Principal - Architect may order that changes be removed from the tree, a - process known as <firstterm>backing out</firstterm>. All committers - receive mail describing each individual commit, so it is not - possible to commit secretly.</para> + <para>It is at the individual committer's discretion whether + they should obtain authority before committing changes to + the source tree. In general, an experienced committer may + make changes which are obviously correct without obtaining + consensus. For example, a documentation project committer + may correct typographical or grammatical errors without + review. On the other hand, developers making far-reaching + or complicated changes are expected to submit their + changes for review before committing them. In extreme + cases, a core team member with a function such as + Principal Architect may order that changes be removed from + the tree, a process known as <firstterm>backing + out</firstterm>. All committers receive mail describing + each individual commit, so it is not possible to commit + secretly.</para> </listitem> <listitem> <para>The <firstterm>Core team</firstterm>. FreeBSD and - NetBSD each have a core team which manages the project. The - core teams developed in the course of the projects, and their role - is not always well-defined. It is not necessary to be a developer - in order to be a core team member, though it is normal. The rules - for the core team vary from one project to the other, but in - general they have more say in the direction of the project than + NetBSD each have a core team which manages the project. + The core teams developed in the course of the projects, + and their role is not always well-defined. It is not + necessary to be a developer in order to be a core team + member, though it is normal. The rules for the core team + vary from one project to the other, but in general they + have more say in the direction of the project than non-core team members have.</para> </listitem> </itemizedlist> - <para>This arrangement differs from Linux in a number of ways:</para> + <para>This arrangement differs from Linux in a number of + ways:</para> <orderedlist> <listitem> <para>No one person controls the content of the system. In - practice, this difference is overrated, since the Principal Architect - can require that code be backed out, and even in the Linux project - several people are permitted to make changes.</para> + practice, this difference is overrated, since the + Principal Architect can require that code be backed out, + and even in the Linux project several people are permitted + to make changes.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>On the other hand, there <emphasis>is</emphasis> a central - repository, a single place where you can find the entire operating - system sources, including all older versions.</para> + <para>On the other hand, there <emphasis>is</emphasis> a + central repository, a single place where you can find the + entire operating system sources, including all older + versions.</para> </listitem> <listitem> <para>BSD projects maintain the entire <quote>Operating - System</quote>, not only the kernel. This distinction is only - marginally useful: neither BSD nor Linux is useful without - applications. The applications used under BSD are frequently the - same as the applications used under Linux.</para> + System</quote>, not only the kernel. This distinction + is only marginally useful: neither BSD nor Linux is useful + without applications. The applications used under BSD are + frequently the same as the applications used under + Linux.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>As a result of the formalized maintenance of a single SVN - source tree, BSD development is clear, and it is possible to - access any version of the system by release number or by date. - SVN also allows incremental updates to the system: for example, - the FreeBSD repository is updated about 100 times a day. Most of - these changes are small.</para> + <para>As a result of the formalized maintenance of a single + SVN source tree, BSD development is clear, and it is + possible to access any version of the system by release + number or by date. SVN also allows incremental updates to + the system: for example, the FreeBSD repository is updated + about 100 times a day. Most of these changes are + small.</para> </listitem> </orderedlist> </sect2> @@ -328,105 +350,115 @@ <sect2> <title>BSD releases</title> - <para>FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD provide the system in three different - <quote>releases</quote>. As with Linux, releases are assigned a - number such as 1.4.1 or 3.5. In addition, the version number has a - suffix indicating its purpose:</para> + <para>FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD provide the system in three + different <quote>releases</quote>. As with Linux, releases + are assigned a number such as 1.4.1 or 3.5. In addition, the + version number has a suffix indicating its purpose:</para> <orderedlist> <listitem> <para>The development version of the system is called - <firstterm>CURRENT</firstterm>. FreeBSD assigns a number to - CURRENT, for example FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT. NetBSD uses a slightly - different naming scheme and appends a single-letter suffix which - indicates changes in the internal interfaces, for example NetBSD - 1.4.3G. OpenBSD does not assign a number (<quote>OpenBSD-current</quote>). - All new development on the system goes into this branch.</para> + <firstterm>CURRENT</firstterm>. FreeBSD assigns a number + to CURRENT, for example FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT. NetBSD uses + a slightly different naming scheme and appends a + single-letter suffix which indicates changes in the + internal interfaces, for example NetBSD 1.4.3G. OpenBSD + does not assign a number (<quote>OpenBSD-current</quote>). + All new development on the system goes into this + branch.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>At regular intervals, between two and four times a year, the - projects bring out a <firstterm>RELEASE</firstterm> version of the - system, which is available on CD-ROM and for free download from - FTP sites, for example OpenBSD 2.6-RELEASE or NetBSD 1.4-RELEASE. - The RELEASE version is intended for end users and is the normal - version of the system. NetBSD also provides <emphasis>patch - releases</emphasis> with a third digit, for example NetBSD - 1.4.2.</para> + <para>At regular intervals, between two and four times a + year, the projects bring out a + <firstterm>RELEASE</firstterm> version of the system, + which is available on CD-ROM and for free download from + FTP sites, for example OpenBSD 2.6-RELEASE or NetBSD + 1.4-RELEASE. The RELEASE version is intended for end + users and is the normal version of the system. NetBSD + also provides <emphasis>patch releases</emphasis> with a + third digit, for example NetBSD 1.4.2.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>As bugs are found in a RELEASE version, they are fixed, and - the fixes are added to the SVN tree. In FreeBSD, the resultant - version is called the <firstterm>STABLE</firstterm> version, while in NetBSD and OpenBSD - it continues to be called the RELEASE version. Smaller new - features can also be added to this branch after a period of test - in the CURRENT branch. Security and other important bug fixes - are also applied to all supported RELEASE versions.</para> + <para>As bugs are found in a RELEASE version, they are + fixed, and the fixes are added to the SVN tree. In + FreeBSD, the resultant version is called the + <firstterm>STABLE</firstterm> version, while in NetBSD and + OpenBSD it continues to be called the RELEASE version. + Smaller new features can also be added to this branch + after a period of test in the CURRENT branch. Security + and other important bug fixes are also applied to all + supported RELEASE versions.</para> </listitem> </orderedlist> - <para><emphasis>By contrast, Linux maintains two separate code trees: - the stable version and the development version. Stable versions - have an even minor version number, such as 2.0, 2.2 or 2.4. - Development versions have an odd minor version number, such as 2.1, - 2.3 or 2.5. In each case, the number is followed by a further - number designating the exact release. In addition, each vendor adds - their own userland programs and utilities, so the name of the - distribution is also important. Each distribution vendor also - assigns version numbers to the distribution, so a complete - description might be something like <quote>TurboLinux 6.0 with kernel - 2.2.14</quote></emphasis></para> + <para><emphasis>By contrast, Linux maintains two separate code + trees: the stable version and the development version. + Stable versions have an even minor version number, such as + 2.0, 2.2 or 2.4. Development versions have an odd minor + version number, such as 2.1, 2.3 or 2.5. In each case, the + number is followed by a further number designating the exact + release. In addition, each vendor adds their own userland + programs and utilities, so the name of the distribution is + also important. Each distribution vendor also assigns + version numbers to the distribution, so a complete + description might be something like <quote>TurboLinux 6.0 + with kernel 2.2.14</quote></emphasis></para> </sect2> <sect2> <title>What versions of BSD are available?</title> - <para>In contrast to the numerous Linux distributions, there are only - four major open source BSDs. Each BSD project maintains its own source - tree and its own kernel. In practice, though, there appear to be - fewer divergences between the userland code of the projects than there - is in Linux.</para> + <para>In contrast to the numerous Linux distributions, there are + only four major open source BSDs. Each BSD project maintains + its own source tree and its own kernel. In practice, though, + there appear to be fewer divergences between the userland code + of the projects than there is in Linux.</para> - <para>It is difficult to categorize the goals of each project: the - differences are very subjective. Basically,</para> + <para>It is difficult to categorize the goals of each project: + the differences are very subjective. Basically,</para> <itemizedlist> <listitem> - <para>&os; aims for high performance and ease of use by - end users, and is a favourite of web content providers. It runs - on a <link xlink:href="&url.base;/platforms/">number of platforms</link> - and has significantly more users than the other projects.</para> + <para>&os; aims for high performance and ease of use by end + users, and is a favourite of web content providers. It + runs on a <link xlink:href="&url.base;/platforms/">number + of platforms</link> and has significantly more users + than the other projects.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>NetBSD aims for maximum portability: <quote>of course it runs - NetBSD</quote>. It runs on machines from palmtops to large - servers, and has even been used on NASA space missions. It is a - particularly good choice for running on old non-&intel; - hardware.</para> + <para>NetBSD aims for maximum portability: <quote>of course + it runs NetBSD</quote>. It runs on machines from + palmtops to large servers, and has even been used on NASA + space missions. It is a particularly good choice for + running on old non-&intel; hardware.</para> </listitem> <listitem> <para>OpenBSD aims for security and code purity: it uses a - combination of the open source concept and rigorous code reviews - to create a system which is demonstrably correct, making it the - choice of security-conscious organizations such as banks, stock - exchanges and US Government departments. Like NetBSD, it runs on - a number of platforms.</para> + combination of the open source concept and rigorous code + reviews to create a system which is demonstrably correct, + making it the choice of security-conscious organizations + such as banks, stock exchanges and US Government + departments. Like NetBSD, it runs on a number of + platforms.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>DragonFlyBSD aims for high performance and scalability under - everything from a single-node UP system to a massively clustered system. - DragonFlyBSD has several long-range technical goals, but focus lies on - providing a SMP-capable infrastructure that is easy to understand, + <para>DragonFlyBSD aims for high performance and scalability + under everything from a single-node UP system to a + massively clustered system. DragonFlyBSD has several + long-range technical goals, but focus lies on providing a + SMP-capable infrastructure that is easy to understand, maintain and develop for.</para> </listitem> </itemizedlist> - <para>There are also two additional BSD &unix; operating systems which are not - open source, BSD/OS and Apple's &macos; X:</para> + <para>There are also two additional BSD &unix; operating systems + which are not open source, BSD/OS and Apple's &macos; + X:</para> <itemizedlist> <listitem> @@ -435,23 +467,24 @@ available at relatively low cost. It resembled FreeBSD in many ways. Two years after the acquisition of BSDi by Wind River Systems, BSD/OS failed to survive as an - independent product. Support and source code may still - be available from Wind River, but all new development is + independent product. Support and source code may still be + available from Wind River, but all new development is focused on the VxWorks embedded operating system.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para><link xlink:href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/">&macos; - X</link> is the latest version of the operating system for - &apple;'s - &mac; line. The BSD core of this operating - system, <link xlink:href="http://developer.apple.com/darwin/">Darwin</link>, - is available as a fully functional open source operating - system for x86 and PPC computers. The Aqua/Quartz - graphics system and many other proprietary aspects of - &macos; X remain closed-source, however. Several Darwin - developers are also FreeBSD committers, and - vice-versa.</para> + <para><link + xlink:href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/">&macos; + X</link> is the latest version of the operating system + for &apple;'s &mac; line. The BSD core of this operating + system, <link + xlink:href="http://developer.apple.com/darwin/">Darwin</link>, + is available as a fully functional open source operating + system for x86 and PPC computers. The Aqua/Quartz + graphics system and many other proprietary aspects of + &macos; X remain closed-source, however. Several Darwin + developers are also FreeBSD committers, and + vice-versa.</para> </listitem> </itemizedlist> </sect2> @@ -460,58 +493,63 @@ <title>How does the BSD license differ from the GNU Public license?</title> - <para>Linux is available under the - <link xlink:href="http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/gpl.html">GNU General Public - License</link> (GPL), which is designed to eliminate closed - source software. In particular, any derivative work of a product - released under the GPL must also be supplied with source code if - requested. By contrast, the - <link xlink:href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.html">BSD - license</link> is less restrictive: binary-only distributions are - allowed. This is particularly attractive for embedded - applications.</para> + <para>Linux is available under the <link + xlink:href="http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/gpl.html">GNU + General Public License</link> (GPL), which is designed to + eliminate closed source software. In particular, any + derivative work of a product released under the GPL must also + be supplied with source code if requested. By contrast, the + <link + xlink:href="http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.html">BSD + license</link> is less restrictive: binary-only + distributions are allowed. This is particularly attractive + for embedded applications.</para> </sect2> <sect2> <title>What else should I know?</title> - <para>Since fewer applications are available for BSD than Linux, the BSD - developers created a Linux compatibility package, which allows Linux - programs to run under BSD. The package includes both kernel - modifications, in order to correctly perform Linux system calls, and - Linux compatibility files such as the C library. There is no - noticeable difference in execution speed between a Linux application - running on a Linux machine and a Linux application running on a BSD - machine of the same speed.</para> + <para>Since fewer applications are available for BSD than Linux, + the BSD developers created a Linux compatibility package, + which allows Linux programs to run under BSD. The package + includes both kernel modifications, in order to correctly + perform Linux system calls, and Linux compatibility files such + as the C library. There is no noticeable difference in + execution speed between a Linux application running on a Linux + machine and a Linux application running on a BSD machine of + the same speed.</para> - <para>The <quote>all from one supplier</quote> nature of BSD means that - upgrades are much easier to handle than is frequently the case with - Linux. BSD handles library version upgrades by providing - compatibility modules for earlier library versions, so it is possible - to run binaries which are several years old with no problems.</para> + <para>The <quote>all from one supplier</quote> nature of BSD + means that upgrades are much easier to handle than is + frequently the case with Linux. BSD handles library version + upgrades by providing compatibility modules for earlier + library versions, so it is possible to run binaries which are + several years old with no problems.</para> </sect2> <sect2> <title>Which should I use, BSD or Linux?</title> - <para>What does this all mean in practice? Who should use BSD, who - should use Linux?</para> + <para>What does this all mean in practice? Who should use BSD, + who should use Linux?</para> - <para>This is a very difficult question to answer. Here are some - guidelines:</para> + <para>This is a very difficult question to answer. Here are + some guidelines:</para> <itemizedlist> <listitem> - <para><quote>If it ain't broke, don't fix it</quote>: If you already - use an open source operating system, and you are happy with it, - there is probably no good reason to change.</para> + <para><quote>If it ain't broke, don't fix it</quote>: If you + already use an open source operating system, and you are + happy with it, there is probably no good reason to + change.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably higher - performance than Linux. But this is not across the board. In many - cases, there is little or no difference in performance. In some - cases, Linux may perform better than FreeBSD.</para> + <para>BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably + higher performance than Linux. But this is not across the + board. In many cases, there is little or no difference in + performance. In some cases, Linux may perform better than + FreeBSD.</para> </listitem> <listitem> @@ -521,38 +559,43 @@ </listitem> <listitem> - <para>BSD projects have a better reputation for the quality and - completeness of their documentation. The various documentation - projects aim to provide actively updated documentation, in many - languages, and covering all aspects of the system.</para> + <para>BSD projects have a better reputation for the quality + and completeness of their documentation. The various + documentation projects aim to provide actively updated + documentation, in many languages, and covering all aspects + of the system.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>The BSD license may be more attractive than the GPL.</para> - </listitem> + <para>The BSD license may be more attractive than the + GPL.</para> </listitem> <listitem> - <para>BSD can execute most Linux binaries, while Linux can not execute BSD - binaries. Many BSD implementations can also execute binaries - from other &unix; like systems. As a result, BSD may present an - easier migration route from other systems than - Linux would.</para> + <para>BSD can execute most Linux binaries, while Linux can + not execute BSD binaries. Many BSD implementations can + also execute binaries from other &unix; like systems. As + a result, BSD may present an easier migration route from + other systems than Linux would.</para> </listitem> </itemizedlist> </sect2> <sect2> - <title>Who provides support, service, and training for BSD?</title> + <title>Who provides support, service, and training for + BSD?</title> - <para>BSDi / <link xlink:href="http://www.freebsdmall.com">FreeBSD - Mall, Inc.</link> have been providing support contracts for + <para>BSDi / <link + xlink:href="http://www.freebsdmall.com">FreeBSD Mall, + Inc.</link> have been providing support contracts for FreeBSD for nearly a decade.</para> - <para>In addition, each of the projects has a list of consultants for - hire: - <link xlink:href="&url.base;/commercial/consult_bycat.html">FreeBSD</link>, - <link xlink:href="http://www.netbsd.org/gallery/consultants.html">NetBSD</link>, - and <link xlink:href="http://www.openbsd.org/support.html">OpenBSD</link>.</para>; + <para>In addition, each of the projects has a list of + consultants for hire: <link + xlink:href="&url.base;/commercial/consult_bycat.html">FreeBSD</link>, + <link + xlink:href="http://www.netbsd.org/gallery/consultants.html">NetBSD</link>, + and <link + xlink:href="http://www.openbsd.org/support.html">OpenBSD</link>.</para>; </sect2> </sect1> </article>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201806171657.w5HGvvkV006914>