Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:10:37 -0600
From:      Frank Pawlak <fpawlak@execpc.com>
To:        Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux
Message-ID:  <19981106181037.A4027@quark.execpc.com>
In-Reply-To: <19981107095107.C499@freebie.lemis.com>; from Greg Lehey on Sat, Nov 07, 1998 at 09:51:07AM %2B1030
References:  <4.1.19981102162944.00cc6ec0@mail.netconstruct.com> <19981106165913.B13675@cityip.co.za> <19981107095107.C499@freebie.lemis.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 07, 1998 at 09:51:07AM +1030, Greg Lehey wrote:
> > My own summary of the entire debate:

---------------- snip -------------------------------
> >
> > * Linux is a PC OS that happens to be Unix-like.
> > * FreeBSD is Berkeley Unix that happens to run on a PC.
> >
> > The more I learn, the more applicable it seems (though I know some disagree
> > with me).
> 
> Yes, I'm one of them.
> 
> To the casual observer, there is *no difference* between Linux and
> FreeBSD.  If you look closer, the differences you'll see are mainly
> historical.  If you look in the source code, you'll see the real
> differences: FreeBSD is more mature code, and it expends more effort
> making the system run well in an environment with a large number of
> processes.  I think it unlikely, for example, that you could create a
> system like wcarchive (ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/archive-info/wcarchive.txt)
> using Linux.
> 
> What does this mean for the average desktop user?  Nothing.
> 
> Greg
> --

Greg,

Your answer provides some very useful information, but raises a question
that I have been pondering for some time.  As I understand it, Oracle
has stated that they will support Linux where it is running their
database product, and possibly will release their own distro of Linux.
Given the server process short comings and the relative immaturity of
the Linux code compared to FreeBSD, why would they want to port to and
support an inferior OS, when for the some resource expenditure they could
do the same on BSD?

The ready answer is go ask Oracle. They have been involved with BSD OS's
and to my knowledge they are still using NetBSD on the NC, so they are
familiar with the code.  The Linux installed base provides another easy
answer, but if they are doing support and possible release of a Linux
distro, the installed base is not so much of an issue.  Would it not make
solid economic sense tp port to, support, and release their own version
of a BSD OS?

I am using Oracle here strictly as an example because they have been
grabbing a lot of headlines lately with their Linux support program.  It
just seems to me that it would make better sense if an organization is
going to do the whole nine yards it would make more sense to go with the
stronger platform to begin with. Or is it the case that database
operations are not that process intensive and this whole thing is a
non-issue? BTW, I am not trying to open up the old we are loosing and
Linux is winning thing.  Thanks

Frank


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981106181037.A4027>