Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 18:50:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Dennis <jimd@mistery.mcafee.com> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, branson@longstreet.larc.nasa.gov, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD vs Linux Message-ID: <199605230150.SAA11128@mistery.mcafee.com> In-Reply-To: <199605220126.SAA02769@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at May 21, 96 06:26:42 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > There is no such thing as a fair, unbiased, > > treatment of this area, which is often considered a nearly religous > > issue, and treated with much fanatacism by some). > > Not to mention, the fanatics will just fix whatever you point at > as bad in their product, or add whatever it is you say is good > in their opponents product, and then flame you for being out of > date. Terry, More power to the "fanatics!" If "fanatics" on both sides take the "good" from each other, and genuinely stamp out the "bad" then both sides will win. Obviously the real controversy lies in determining which features are "good" and which are "bad." The real problem with your scenario is the assumption that the features and bugs are introduced solely by design. I'd argue that some of the distinguishing features (and bugs) in each camp are due to the process rather than the design. Consider the FreeBSD development process (which you undoubtedly know far more about than I do): A fairly small number of people communicate fairly closely via e-mail. The project shares a CVS tree. The stated objective is to produce a stable, state of the art derivative of the BSD Unix for the PC platform (pretty well-defined). There is *one* "distribution." Consider the Linux model: A fairly large number of people dabble in development of a large number of different little projects. These people occasionally communicate via a large number of mailing lists and newsgroups (with more action in Netnews than over ML channels). One person (Linus Torvalds) maintains the main source tree -- which just covers the kernel. Many people publish kernel patches (some of which are submitted to Linus). A couple of dozen individuals and groups combine this kernel (with whatever patches they like) and a large variety of ported applications and utilities into "distributions" (a uniquely Linux term). There is no single stated objective. The most commonly cited goal among Linux hackers is to have a "fun" free OS with lots of "cool" features and apps to "play" with on their PC's. It's a very laissez-faire and anarchial group. Some people have suggested that Linus' work is more valuable as a "social experiment in anarchy" than it is as an OS. I agree -- and I don't mean to denigrate the quality of Linux in any way by this. Because of these fundamental differences in attitude, objective and process it doesn't matter how much one group steals from another -- the two will remain distinct and unique. (Now one could argue that some group *within* the Linux community could attempt to adopt the FreeBSD model and apply it. Some group might. That wouldn't affect the overall state of Linux affairs -- it would basically be yet another Linux distribution (yald???)) Overall I'd say the cross fertilization is good. I suspect that you'll see a lot more people who start with Linux and move to FreeBSD than vice-versa. Part of this is because of three shelves of Linux (not Unix -- *Linux* books down at the local "Barnes and Noble" and at the "WaldenBooks" and "Dalton's" and other "mainstream" bookstores -- most of which have a pathetically out of date CD glued to the inside back cover. Part of it is because Linux is discussed widely in newsgroups. Part of it is even becuase Linux has problems and limitations that are unique to it (while most FreeBSD questions don't show up in "other" newsgroups because the behaviour is so similar to other BSD's). A good chunk of it is because, as Linus Torvalds himself said: "Linux has a cool name." But I think that most of it is simply because Linux users are more evangelical than FreeBSD'ers and NetBSD'ers. Most Linux users are coming from DOS/Windows. Anyone that likes Linux (after coming out of the "dark" as it were) is very likely to be talking to other "WinDOSers" (and anyone that doesn't like it will likely throw it away and forget about it -- most of those users probably wouldn't like BSD any better). New FreeBSD users seem to come from two main sources: People who have been using RISC or SPARC workstations, or other non-PC platforms -- and then decide that they want to have something "like" their work environment on the machine at home or at their desk. People who've been using Linux and have gotten frustrated with something (or several somethings) that don't work "together" (that ugly "integration" problem again). (Note: I'm not talking about new FreeBSD installations! One FreeBSD user might convert a dozen installations over in the course of a year and might install a dozen more -- most of the "users" of these systems won't know or care what OS is on the host (most of them will be hitting it only as a webserver, a POP server, etc by "FreeBSD users" I'm referring to enthusiasts rather than entries in a passwd file). Anyway, I'm sure I've said more than enough about this. I may put a comparison page on my pages at starshine.org yet. I'm saving copies of this mail thread for source if I do. Jim Dennis, System Administrator, McAfee Associates
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605230150.SAA11128>