Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 17:50:13 +0200 (MET DST) From: grog@lemis.de (Greg Lehey) To: gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG (Gary Palmer) Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD Questions), chat@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD Chat) Subject: Re: BSD vs Linux Message-ID: <199605231550.RAA15290@allegro.lemis.de> In-Reply-To: <13010.832824744@palmer.demon.co.uk> from "Gary Palmer" at May 23, 96 05:12:24 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gary Palmer writes: > > Alain FAUCONNET wrote in message ID > <199605221138.AA17317@iaka.biomath.jussieu.fr>: >> * Availability of pre-compiled binaries and ports for non-commercial software: >> Linux +10, FreeBSD 0 > > One comment about this. > > Linux is schitzophrenic (or however you spell it). It has a mixture of > Sys V and BSD in it, and that sometimes leads to porting > problems. Perhaps there are so many pre-compiled `.tgz' files for > linux as it's more difficult to port s/w to linux than to a BSD > derrivative? Quite a few of the ports that I've seen done (and are in > the ports collection) don't even need patching, they compile out of > the box, and without needing special ``FreeBSD'' ifdefs in the > Makefiles or source code... To be fair to Linux, I don't think that it's that difficult to port to. A lot of pure System V systems (*with* heritage :-) are worse. May I say names? UnixWare? SCO "UNIX"? I think the real reason why it's easier to port to *BSD (yes, I agree with this part) is that most of the free software out on the net was written on BSD boxes. This, I suppose, reflects that fact that BSD has been around a lot longer than Linux, and also that people have traditionally had more fun with BSD than they have with System V. > It helps to have a heritage... It helps to have a good heritage. Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605231550.RAA15290>