Date: 22 Apr 2003 10:38:45 -0400 From: Jason Stewart <jstewart@rtl.org> To: beemern@ksu.edu Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux/freebsd kernel differences Message-ID: <1051022325.906.9.camel@mis3> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33L.0304220911360.17156-100000@unix2.cc.ksu.edu> References: <Pine.GSO.4.33L.0304220911360.17156-100000@unix2.cc.ksu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 10:15, beemern@ksu.edu wrote: > "there is no difference between linux and freebsd kernels, except that > linux has much better driver support.. WHY use obscure freebsd?" Because FreeBSD has a mature codebase, while the codebase for Linux is relatively young. There is anecdotal evidence that FreeBSD performs better under heavy loads and the VM subsystem is more mature and robust. The person who stated that there is "no difference between the Linux and FreeBSD kernels" has not done their due dilligence in researching both OS'es. It sounds more like a comment coming from the fear of having to learn a new "obscure" OS instead of making a decision based upon the facts. While it is true that Linux supports more devices, FreeBSD tries to make the devices that are supported as stable as possible. FreeBSD coders do not like to write drivers for crappy hardware. If you are running a NFS server, then you probably do not forsee yourself adding a bunch of esoteric hardware to your machine, and chances are that all of your harware is already supported by FreeBSD. I come from a Linux background and can honestly say that FreeBSD has been easier to administer once I figured out the fs hierarchy. Just my $0.02. Good luck with your decision. Jason Stewart
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1051022325.906.9.camel>