Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 11:42:13 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: hsu@cs.hut.fi (Heikki Suonsivu) Cc: jmacd@freefall.cdrom.com, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: What people are doing with FBSD Message-ID: <9507191742.AA28329@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199507190514.IAA14160@shadows.cs.hut.fi> from "Heikki Suonsivu" at Jul 19, 95 08:14:40 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> classes as well as for a SLIP or PPP connection. The number > I know using freebsd is about 5 I think, linux is probably closer > to 100. I can't explain that one. > > I can. Linux people have got distributions; two hours and you got > everything on disk, including TeX, emacs, doom and everything. I don't think this one is actually any more correct than pointing at a two hour figure for BSD. > There is no need to select between at least three different variants > of BSD. The kernel is the only thing that is standard between Linux distributions; in fact, there are 3-4 times as many different Linux distributions as BSD distributions. > Add unbeatable stability records when used in end-user workstations BSD in general and FreeBSD in particular rival this, no problem. If you can get installed, then you're pretty much rock solid from then on. The issue for BSD here (and I'll readily admit it's a problem) is getting installed. I was personally *shocked* at the complexity of the install of FreeBSD, though for a large number of installations the fact that FreeBSD has solved the front-loading problem (ie: I answer all the questions up front, and then I can go away) is a *BIG* plus in BSD's favor. The next job is to crank the tech level down on the install, which is mostly a finger-pointing at the disk management crap, which is more information than most people want to know. Something on the order of "I see you have 800MB of disk available; how much is mine to use?" and "You have 32MB of memory; the minimum amount of swap you probably want because you chose to install X is 48MB; is this OK?" and finally "You have XXX MB left; I recommend AAA MB for the system and add-ons and the rest (BBB MB) for your files, etc. Is this OK with you?". > and lots of masses using Linux. Largely propaganda. Not that there shouldn't be a "BSD Journal" or other propaganda mechanism for BSD (and to present a united front for BSD, even if a merge is impossible (or undesirable, in the case of BSDI). This isn't a popularity contest, where popularity increases popularity. If it is, I suggest you include the SunOS, Gould, Ultrix, and OSF/1 numbers in the BSD camp headcount. 8-). > There are other more subtle reasons, but those are far enough. I'd like to hear the subtle ones 8^). I think the only one of merit that I've seen above is stability, and that's only tangential to installation. > We currently use about 15 PC's running FreeBSD as routers and servers, but > the user workstations and personnel's home machines are Linux. The main > reasons for using FreeBSD here is Linux networking code (sigh) and > non-existant source management, and probably some history. FreeBSD gets > hurt badly by unstability, not much change to "sell" FreeBSD to anyone as > long as the longest uptimes are weeks. Clearly, the BSD folks are more than willing to try to resolve *ANY* stability issue you might have; the biggest problem is that they remain unreported, and you can't fix a bug you aren't told about. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9507191742.AA28329>