Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 02:48:54 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: ksmm@threespace.com (The Classiest Man Alive) Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD: The Storage Wars Message-ID: <199903260248.TAA01921@usr09.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199903251713.MAA17828@geek.grf.ov.com> from "The Classiest Man Alive" at Mar 25, 99 12:12:35 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Feature for feature, is there a big difference in the storage requirements > of Linux and FreeBSD? That is, would a FreeBSD installation (say 2.2.8) > take any more or less space than a comparably configured Linux installation? > > Thanks in advance for your insight. Both FreeBSD and Linux use ELF format executables, and will have near identical storage requirements; the one exception will be that programs that embed the OS name will take 7 characters for FreeBSD, but only 5 characters for Linux. 8-). Over time, the EXT2FS storage will tend to become more fragmented than FFS storage, due to the way layout is done. If this happens to your Linux machine, you can simply back the system up to tape, wipe the disk, and restore from tape to defragment it and recover the wasted disk space. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903260248.TAA01921>