Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:45:33 -0400 From: "SPEAKEASY <bvagnoni>" <bvagnoni@speakeasy.net> To: "Andrew Hesford" <ajh3@chmod.ath.cx>, "Thomas (Matt) Barton" <matt@fear.net> Cc: <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: How Is The FeeBSD OS Like and Different Than Say Redhat or Suse LINUX Message-ID: <BHEOJOMCFODELNKHPGJEKEEECEAA.bvagnoni@speakeasy.net> In-Reply-To: <20010423143547.A3982@cec.wustl.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dear Everyone; What about compatiability with the Linux world will I be able to run stuff compiled for Linux on freebsd without to much trouble? What about hardware compatibility just from reading the package it seems that freebsd seems to support more hardware, is this true? Sincerely Brian -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Hesford [mailto:ajh3@chmod.ath.cx] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 3:36 PM To: Thomas (Matt) Barton Cc: Andrew Hesford; SPEAKEASY <bvagnoni>; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How Is The FeeBSD OS Like and Different Than Say Redhat or Suse LINUX On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 11:10:52AM -0400, Thomas (Matt) Barton wrote: > One of these days I'm going to try Slackware, only because I've been told > that it is supposed to take after BSD, but with the Linux kernel. Don't waste your time. Let's put it this way: it's more like BSD than any other linux distribution, but it's more like a linux distribution than BSD. You still have certain linux oddities that I don't like, for instance, a dynamically linked /bin and /sbin. I think the only things really close to BSD are the boot scripts. > Debian is just okay, for me. I used it for a brief period of time, but I > didn't like it. It just felt sloppy. It also uses the dreaded SysV init > and I hate that like nothing else. Yes, I will give you that: it feels sloppy. However, if you want binary package management in the linux world, Debian is the way to go. APT is by far the most intelligent binary package manager that I have ever seen for linux. > To be honest, I can't say that I've encountered any problems when > upgrading any of my ports, but then nothing I use has had any major > revisions since I installed FreeBSD three months ago. How would you upgrade something like GTK? It seems to me that if you don't want to break dependencies, you must deinstall everything that depends on GTK, upgrade GTK, and reinstall everything else. I think when school gets out for summer in a few weeks, I'm going to start a compile-fest to upgrade all my software. > Another great thing about the ports collection is that everything gets > installed in /usr/local. I don't have to worry about /etc getting > cluttered, as well as /bin, /usr/sbin, etc. There are a few exceptions, > of course, such as qmail which goes to /var/qmail, but that is about it. I agree with this... /usr/local is for "site-specific" software, but most linux distributions with binary packages seem to thing that "site-specific" is the same as "locally-compiled". If you ask me, /usr and / are for stuff that gives you a basic system, 99% likely to be identical on any machine you go to. /usr/local is for everything else (e.g., GNOME and KDE, other non-necessary apps). Debian and RedHat dump all package contents in /usr... this violates even the Linux hierarchy standard! -- Andrew Hesford ajh3@chmod.ath.cx 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?BHEOJOMCFODELNKHPGJEKEEECEAA.bvagnoni>