Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:55:14 -0700 From: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: malaizhichun@tom.com, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why does FreeBSD not use the Linux kernel? Message-ID: <CAHu1Y70aEvfupOGJysK_kqdeOBJ13JPLkKxKOVCHPfcWtGfVmQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20200617141857.b208232a.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <3a48ab1ab198c330400be3e942f921f2cd3c3e11.camel@tom.com> <20200617141857.b208232a.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:19 AM Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 11:33:25 +0800, kindu smith wrote: > > Why does FreeBSD not use the Linux kernel? The structure of FreeBSD is > > very good, such as the startup and directory structure, and the user > > island program. The only shortcoming is poor hardware support. This is > > mainly due to the lack of drivers provided by the kernel. > > While there are certain basic drivers in the kernel, the > majority of drivers is provided by loadable kernel modules, > either developed by the FreeBSD team itself, or available > from the ports collection. They use interfaces provided by > the kernel. > > The chief difference from my perspective is that it is possible in FreeBSD to create a monolithic kernel and prohibit the loading of kernel modules, foiling one step in the chain of a rootkit. It's especially convenient for embedded devices, security appliances, etc. Some features cannot work as loadable kernel modules, such as kernel NAT in ipfw supplied by LIBALIAS. --=20 "Well," Brahm=C4=81 said, "even after ten thousand explanations, a fool is = no wiser, but an intelligent person requires only two thousand five hundred." - The Mah=C4=81bh=C4=81rata
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAHu1Y70aEvfupOGJysK_kqdeOBJ13JPLkKxKOVCHPfcWtGfVmQ>