Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Oct 1997 10:29:23 +0930
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        Annelise Anderson <andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu>
Cc:        Robert Rusk <rrusk@thorung.eeng.dcu.ie>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Linux vs freeBSD
Message-ID:  <19971010102923.54565@lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971009093104.25461A-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu>; from Annelise Anderson on Thu, Oct 09, 1997 at 09:55:00AM -0700
References:  <19971009200545.24922@lemis.com> <Pine.BSF.3.96.971009093104.25461A-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 09, 1997 at 09:55:00AM -0700, Annelise Anderson wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Greg Lehey wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 09, 1997 at 11:04:24AM -0700, Robert Rusk wrote:
>>> I'm just wondering what advantages freeBSD has over Linux.
>>> If you could enlighten me on this matter I would be most grateful
>>
>> That's a hot potato.  A lot of people get fanatical about the
>> question.  Still, I've just had to write this up for the new edition
>> of "The Complete FreeBSD", so here goes.  I welcome any comments or
>> corrections.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> What about Linux?
>>
>> Linux  is  a  clone  of  UNIX written by Linus Torvalds, a student in Helsinki,
>> Finland.  At the time, the BSD sources were not freely available, and so  Linus
>> wrote his own version of UNIX.
>>
>> Linux  is a superb example of how a few dedicated, clever people can produce an
>> operating system that is better than well-known commercial systems developed by
>> a  large number of trained software engineers.  It is better even than a number
>> of commercial UNIX systems.
>>
>> Obviously, I don't think Linux is as good as FreeBSD, or I wouldn't be  writing
>> this  book,  but the differences between FreeBSD and Linux are more a matter of
>> philosophy rather than of concept.  Here are a few contrasts:
>
> I think you could mention that FreeBSD is a classic (?) 4.4BSD type unix--
> thus one of the two types with which a potential sysadmin might want to be
> acquainted;

That's correct.  I do that elsewhere.  

> Linux is a mix (so is most everything)--

But remember that FreeBSD has now evolved a lot from the original
4.4BSD, and has taken on some System V features (shared memory, poll()
system call).  I didn't think that the remainder was important enough
to mention.

> It sounds as if FreeBSD runs Linux programs *because* not many commercial
> programs are available--but the point to make is that FreeBSD has Linux
> emulation and runs most programs available for Linux, whether commercial
> or not.....

Yes, I've modified this.

> Drivers:  Drivers are available for most standard hardware, right?

OK.  How about: 

  As a result of the smaller user base, FreeBSD is less likely to have
  drivers for brand-new boards than Linux.

> Is the FreeBSD network code still better than Linux?

You saw one answer.  This is the kind of comparison I don't want to
get involved in.  Firstly, it's very difficult to quantify, secondly
it tends to start flame wars, and thirdly the information would soon
be out of date.

> Software installation:  Some people have found that installing software
> on Linux is far more of a hassle than it is on FreeBSD, because of the
> variety of versions of software that may be included on any particular
> distribution of Linux.  This may be one of FreeBSD's greatest and growing
> strengths--that the version of the software on which port A is dependent
> is there....basically installing software from ports or packages is
> really pretty easy with FreeBSD.

That's a good one.  How about:

As a result of the centralized  develop-   The ease of installation  of  Linux  de-
ment  style,  FreeBSD is straightforward   pends  on  the ``distribution''.  If you
and easy to install.                       switch from one distribution of Linux to
                                           another,  you'll have to learn a new set
                                           of installation tools.


> "There is only one release of FreeBSD"--needs clarification.  The problem
> here is that the word "release" is used in different ways.  There's 2.1,
> there's 2.2, there's -current (3.0), there are snaps that are undistri-
> buted releases.... (and some snaps are "released" for distribution by
> WCcdrom--e.g., a version of -current a few months ago)....

Right.  I should have said "distribution".

> Also the kind a variety of support--the nature of the community--
> involved in Linux vs. FreeBSD is different....

I suppose that's true, but it's difficult to quantify from my
perspective.  Do you have any suggestions?

> FreeBSD as well as Linux is "bleeding edge" in -current....you don't
> want to give the impression there's no advancement going on.  But the
> "current" release of FreeBSD (2.2-R and its descendants, 2.2-Stable,
> right now) aim to be reliable environments for production etc.etc.etc....
> Note that Yahoo! uses FreeBSD (2.1 as of a few months ago), 

Yes, they're not the only ones.

> but there's one big search engine (AltaVista?) that uses Linux.

I thought AltaVista was DEC's showcase for Digital UNIX.  Are you
sure?

> FreeBSD's "stable" branch at any gives time also has various changes
> made to it, e.g., bug fixes, improvements etc. that keep it up to date
> and reliable without introducing, necessarily, new features that might
> or might not work.....while the developmental work continues on the
> "current" branch.....I'm not sure if one installed, say, RedHat, that
> there would be a series of improvements available.....

Neither am I.  But that could be as much lack of knowledge as
anything.  Once we get into discussing the FreeBSD flavours, a thing
that still causes a lot of confusion, we need to understand the Linux
scene as well in order to give a balanced viewpoint.  I don't think I
can do that.

I *do* describe the different flavours of FreeBSD elsewhere, in the
chapter on staying current.

Greg
  



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971010102923.54565>