Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Linux vs FreeBSD

77 views
Skip to first unread message

Fred

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to

How do Linux and FreeBSD compare?

David Malone

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to

"Fred" <nos...@nospam.com> writes:

>How do Linux and FreeBSD compare?

Very easily as they are both essentially free and run on most
any PC hard ware.

David.

Soren Ragsdale

unread,
Jun 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/12/98
to

Fred <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> How do Linux and FreeBSD compare?

Most of us have found that FreeBSD and Linux are compared by those who
wish to start long and eventually pointless threads.

John S. Dyson

unread,
Jun 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/15/98
to

In article <6lsdph$4...@nntp02.primenet.com>,

I love the analogy:

How do roast puppy or boiled kitten compare?

It is best not to ask partisans, and to ask those friends who
have used both. You will get partisan responses in this
newsgroup.

--
John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
dy...@iquest.net | it makes one look stupid
jdy...@nc.com | and it irritates the pig.

Alexander Viro

unread,
Jun 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/15/98
to

In article <6m2afm$8...@enews1.newsguy.com>,

John S. Dyson <ro...@dyson.iquest.net> wrote:
>In article <6lsdph$4...@nntp02.primenet.com>,
> Soren Ragsdale <so...@usr01.primenet.com> writes:
>> Fred <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> How do Linux and FreeBSD compare?
>>
>> Most of us have found that FreeBSD and Linux are compared by those who
>> wish to start long and eventually pointless threads.
>>
>
>I love the analogy:
>
> How do roast puppy or boiled kitten compare?

Thanks, John ;-).

>It is best not to ask partisans, and to ask those friends who
>have used both.

Hmm... It's safer not to ask such questions at all. Especially
dangerous are those who use both systems.

>You will get partisan responses in this newsgroup.

Erm? As in, 'die, provocator'?

--
My theory is that someone's Emacs crashed on a very early version of Linux
while reading alt.flame and the resulting unholy combination of Elisp and
Minix code somehow managed to bootstrap itself and take on an independent
existence. -- James Raynard in c.u.b.f.m on nature of Albert Cahalan

John Bitar

unread,
Jun 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/15/98
to

I have used both. And they are both very similar. Hell, linux is a clone
unix system,what do you expect. I found the biggest difference is FreeBsd
is for more serious unix people. Linux comes with a lot of tools to help
you set up things like printers to sound cards in minutes. Where in FreeBSD
you really have to understand how things work. There is no manager doing
everything for you.
For example I set-up my printer last night. It took me 2 hours and still
have to read how to set it up to read postscript. In linux I was printing
images in minutes.
Its a really tough question which is better. My gut tells me Linux is a
hack, and unix isn't. That's why I like FreeBSD more...

john

John S. Dyson wrote:

> In article <6lsdph$4...@nntp02.primenet.com>,
> Soren Ragsdale <so...@usr01.primenet.com> writes:
> > Fred <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> How do Linux and FreeBSD compare?
> >
> > Most of us have found that FreeBSD and Linux are compared by those who
> > wish to start long and eventually pointless threads.
> >
>
> I love the analogy:
>
> How do roast puppy or boiled kitten compare?
>

> It is best not to ask partisans, and to ask those friends who

> have used both. You will get partisan responses in this
> newsgroup.
>

Kelvin

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

In article <358597E7...@wave.home.com>, John Bitar <jbi...@wave.home.com> writes:
>I have used both. And they are both very similar. Hell, linux is a clone
>unix system,what do you expect. I found the biggest difference is FreeBsd
>is for more serious unix people. Linux comes with a lot of tools to help
>you set up things like printers to sound cards in minutes. Where in FreeBSD
>you really have to understand how things work. There is no manager doing
>everything for you.
>For example I set-up my printer last night. It took me 2 hours and still
>have to read how to set it up to read postscript. In linux I was printing
>images in minutes.

If you'd used the 'apsfilter' port, in /usr/ports/print/apsfilter , it
would have been as easy as printing in minutes... well okay.. since all the
stuff required by apsfilter (ghostscript etc) takes awhile to download
(unless you have the cdrom's) it could take longer than a few minutes...
But Apsfilter has a easy to use menu system, and prints a graphical test
page etc.
=)

>Its a really tough question which is better. My gut tells me Linux is a
>hack, and unix isn't. That's why I like FreeBSD more...
>
>john
>
>John S. Dyson wrote:
>
>> In article <6lsdph$4...@nntp02.primenet.com>,
>> Soren Ragsdale <so...@usr01.primenet.com> writes:
>> > Fred <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> >> How do Linux and FreeBSD compare?
>> >
>> > Most of us have found that FreeBSD and Linux are compared by those who
>> > wish to start long and eventually pointless threads.
>> >
>>
>> I love the analogy:
>>
>> How do roast puppy or boiled kitten compare?
>>
>> It is best not to ask partisans, and to ask those friends who
>> have used both. You will get partisan responses in this
>> newsgroup.
>>
>> --
>> John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
>> dy...@iquest.net | it makes one look stupid
>> jdy...@nc.com | and it irritates the pig.
>
>
>

--
| T R E N T Kelvin Farmer
OXXXX|=======================-- kfa...@trentu.ca
| University ICQ: 13421512

Albert D. Cahalan

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

Ondra Koutek <and...@sh.cvut.cz> writes:

> without ports collection, solving problems with porting apps from one
> distribution to another. I used Slackware before,
^^^^^^^^^ your problem (obsolete)

> because I wanted to complie all apps myself, to optimize them for
> my system. (or to learn something new) On FreeBSD I love ports,
> because I can patch myself application and still the system adds
> this application as an package. There is no such a thing in Linux,
> (if you don't want to make your own package).

Both Red Hat and Debian support source packages. You can unpack
one as source, examine/change it, apply the included patches,
compile it, and install it will full file and dependency tracking.

Albert D. Cahalan

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

Dom Mitchell <d...@myrddin.demon.co.uk> writes:
> she...@visi.com (Steve Sheldon) writes:

>> Oh, I dumped Linux for FreeBSD because there are too many
>> idiots running Linux these days. :)
>
> It's funny how many have found that a factor in moving...

It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than
Linux because FreeBSD is less polished. That people would seek
an OS or anything else with snob appeal ("I'm better than people
who can't understand this...") exposes one of the many gross
aspects of human nature.


Mats Lofkvist

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan) writes:
> FreeBSD has more snob appeal than Linux because FreeBSD is less polished.

Linux sure is more polished on the outside, but when you start looking
under the surface, FreeBSD starts to shine.

Kind of like comparing a lowrider painted with red candy on top of silver
metallic with some blue flake thrown in to a well tuned street racer
dressed in black :-)

_
Mats Lofkvist
m...@algonet.se

Steve Sheldon

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan) writes:

Actually my impression of FreeBSD 2.2.6 and the installation process was
that it was far more polished than the RedHat Linux 4.1 I'd used for the
year previous.

I had considered purchasing RedHat 5.0 but everything I heard about it
indicated that the distribution was buggy and unstable. So I thought I
would give FreeBSD a try.

I don't have the time these days to be a Unix snob. I used to work with
DECstations quite a bit about 6 years back and have some stuff I still like
to use Unix for, but for the most part I'm a Windows NT person.


Oh, and I guess my definition of "idiot" has more to do with the Linux
people who seem to pop up everywhere starting advocacy threads. Everywhere
I turn it's "Install Linux it is K-K00l!". It grows tiresome.

I grew out of that phase after owning an Amiga from '87-'91. :(


Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:51:23 GMT, Steve Sheldon <she...@visi.com> wrote:
> Actually my impression of FreeBSD 2.2.6 and the installation process was
>that it was far more polished than the RedHat Linux 4.1 I'd used for the
>year previous.
>
> I had considered purchasing RedHat 5.0 but everything I heard about it
>indicated that the distribution was buggy and unstable. So I thought I
>would give FreeBSD a try.

Having just installed RedHat 5.0 about two months ago, and FreeBSD
since Saturday, I must say that getting FreeBSD ppp up and running
has cost me three more days than getting RedHat running (which took
about an hour).

I am not a computer newbie, but find it preferable to leave details
about computer management to others because I need to get other
things done.

rajat

Bill Paul

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

Daring to challenge the will of the almighty Leviam00se, Juergen Nickelsen
(n...@tellique.de) had the courage to say:

: Chris wrote:

: > Also, why is a linux kernel with roughly the same drivers in it
: > only about 300K, where as the BSD equivilant is 1+ Meg? Any sort
: > of wierd optimization going on here?

: Yes; it is called compression. Linux seems to compress the kernel by
: default (why?),

Unless they've changed something recently, the reason they do this on
the i386 platform is that the Linux boot loader loads the kernel image
into 'conventional' memory, which is only about 640K in size. Loading
the kernel image requires calling the BIOS in order to read blocks from
disks, and the BIOS is real mode code; you can't switch the CPU to
protected mode and still call the BIOS (unless you engage in some
extreme hackery). The FreeBSD boot block runs partly in protected mode
and partly in real mode: it switches to real mode to make BIOS calls
and then switches back to protected mode to copy the data blocks read
from the disk into a region above the first 1MB of RAM where it's
possible to have easily more than 640K of contiguous space.

The Linux approach is a little different: the kernel image has two
parts: a small uncompression module at the beginning followed by a
large clump of compressed data which comprises the actual kernel code.
Once the image is loaded into conventional memory, control is passed
to the uncompression code which is free to switch into protected mode,
uncompress the kernel image into any region of memory it wants, then
jump into the kernel start routine.

: but the uncompressed kernel is usually still in
: /usr/src/linux. This is how it looks on my system:

: -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1063004 Jun 15 14:19 vmlinux
: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 440992 Jun 15 14:19 vmlinuz

: The latter one is compressed.

The reason both images are usually kept around is so that you can
read the symbol table. Certain programs like to grope around in /dev/kmem
for certain kernel data structures; in order to do this, you have to
know at what addresses the data structures are located, and to learn
that you need the symbol table. You can use nlist() on the kernel image
to read specific symbols. Unfortunately, nlist() doesn't work on
compressed images so you need the original uncompressed image to make
nlist() happy.

Bear in mind that for other platforms that aren't as brain-damaged as
the i386, you don't need to go to all this trouble: usually you can
load the kernel image into any part of RAM that you like. You could
still compress the kernel image if you wanted, but it wouldn't be required
like on the i386.

-Bill

--
=============================================================================
-Bill Paul (212) 854-6020 | System Manager, Master of Unix-Fu
Work: wp...@ctr.columbia.edu | Center for Telecommunications Research
Home: wp...@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu | Columbia University, New York City
=============================================================================
"Mulder, toads just fell from the sky!" "I guess their parachutes didn't open."
=============================================================================

Matt Dillon

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

:In article <slrn6ofoip...@localhost.my.domain>,
:Rajat Datta <ra...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
:>On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:51:23 GMT, Steve Sheldon <she...@visi.com> wrote:
:..
:>>would give FreeBSD a try.

:>
:>Having just installed RedHat 5.0 about two months ago, and FreeBSD
:>since Saturday, I must say that getting FreeBSD ppp up and running
:>has cost me three more days than getting RedHat running (which took
:>about an hour).
:>
:>I am not a computer newbie, but find it preferable to leave details
:>about computer management to others because I need to get other
:>things done.
:>
:>rajat

I would agree. The RedHat installer in 5.0 and especially now in 5.1
is getting *nice*. It's easy to use and consumer oriented. FreeBSD's
is not as good. On the otherhand, most people use FreeBSD in
server-centric environments and don't fall into the general consumer
category, so it isn't a big deal to me. It might be a bigger deal
to the FreeBSD group which wants to get wider acceptence of FreeBSD.

Linux has the obvious momentum and my personal viewpoint is that it's
too important a goal for the various free UNIX groups to divide themselves
over. In business conversations, I always mention both operating systems,
and always praise RedHat's installer. I emphasize Linux in any
conversation that heads towards the consumer and small business side of
things, and I emphasize FreeBSD in any conversation that heads towards
the server side of things.

Personally, though, I like to think of FreeBSD and Linux as going for
the same goals. Chomp. We are all one happy family in my view! Slurp.
Hey, move that roast Penguin over to this side of table! Mmm.. yummies.

-Matt

--
Matthew Dillon Engineering, BEST Internet Communications, Inc.
<dil...@best.net>, include original article w/ any response.
do not under any circumstances send email to joe...@bigspender.idiom.com
and, for gods sake, don't email buck...@popserver.idiom.com

Merlin

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

Rajat Datta <ra...@goteborg.netcom.com> wrote:

> Having just installed RedHat 5.0 about two months ago, and FreeBSD
> since Saturday, I must say that getting FreeBSD ppp up and running
> has cost me three more days than getting RedHat running (which took
> about an hour).

Odd.. It took me about an hour to get PPP with -alias working. I
had the box working as a gateway to the net via a dynamic IP dialup
within two hours (including configuring the four office computers.)

Did you read the installation notes on the FreeBSD site?

-ck

Peter Mutsaers

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

>> On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:55:33 GMT, John Bitar <jbi...@wave.home.com>
>> said:

JB> doing everything for you. For example I set-up my printer
JB> last night. It took me 2 hours and still have to read how to
JB> set it up to read postscript. In linux I was printing images
JB> in minutes. Its a really tough question which is better. My
JB> gut tells me Linux is a hack, and unix isn't. That's why I
JB> like FreeBSD more...


I feel the same, but indeed, Linux has better support for various
hardware and is easier to set up. I especially like the packaging of
the whole system, including the base system. Without too many
resources dedicated (such as for /usr/src and /usr/obj) I can track
and gradually upgrade a Redhat system.

Also, I tried to install FreeBSD on my laptop first, but:
- the pcmcia modem/ethernet card wasn't supported
- when exiting from Xfree, the textmode was garbled

I was very impressed to see when I installed Redhat, that the 3com
modem/ethernet card was recognized automatically when I inserted it:
there was an extra eth0 interface (even dynamically loaded as a
module) and a serial port. This is even easier to set up as under
Win95.

I would have preferred FreeBSD (for its more orderly directory layout,
the BSD init, more robustT) but things like drivers forced me to use
Linux.

It is just a pity that so many people are writing software and drivers
for Linux instead of for FreeBSD. With new developments coming up
(such as USB and other new hardware standards) I feel this is going to
be more and more a problem for FreeBSD.

Richard June

unread,
Jun 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/17/98
to

Matt Dillon wrote:
>
> :In article <slrn6ofoip...@localhost.my.domain>,
> :Rajat Datta <ra...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> :>On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:51:23 GMT, Steve Sheldon <she...@visi.com> wrote:
> :..
> :>>would give FreeBSD a try.
> :>
> :>Having just installed RedHat 5.0 about two months ago, and FreeBSD

> :>since Saturday, I must say that getting FreeBSD ppp up and running
> :>has cost me three more days than getting RedHat running (which took
> :>about an hour).
> :>
> :>I am not a computer newbie, but find it preferable to leave details
> :>about computer management to others because I need to get other
> :>things done.
> :>
> :>rajat
>
> I would agree. The RedHat installer in 5.0 and especially now in 5.1
> is getting *nice*. It's easy to use and consumer oriented. FreeBSD's
> is not as good. On the otherhand, most people use FreeBSD in
> server-centric environments and don't fall into the general consumer
> category, so it isn't a big deal to me. It might be a bigger deal
> to the FreeBSD group which wants to get wider acceptence of FreeBSD.
I actually only moved to FreeBSD because I couldn't get RedHat5.0 to
install properly on my machine, works fine on a similarly configured
machine of a friend, but not mine. I have also found FreeBSD to be a bit
more straight-foward about setting things up than Linux. I Re-built my
FreeBSD kernel in about 20 min. still haven't done it successfully w/
Linux.

> Linux has the obvious momentum and my personal viewpoint is that it's
> too important a goal for the various free UNIX groups to divide themselves
> over. In business conversations, I always mention both operating systems,
> and always praise RedHat's installer. I emphasize Linux in any
> conversation that heads towards the consumer and small business side of
> things, and I emphasize FreeBSD in any conversation that heads towards
> the server side of things.

It does seem like that is the way development is going doesn't it?
RedHat Linux is moving more towards the people that can't function w/out
a GUI, and FreeBSD is getting to be a better server.

--
"I love it when the point and click commandos attempt to portray
themselves as real computer experts. Using a mouse only makes you a
computer user, not a computer expert"
Someone in comp.unix.advocacy

Zenin

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

[posted & mailed]

Albert D. Cahalan <acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu> wrote:
: Both Red Hat and Debian support source packages. You can unpack


: one as source, examine/change it, apply the included patches,
: compile it, and install it will full file and dependency tracking.

If the package finds a dependency that it needs, can Red Hat
and/or Debian download the dependency (from one of possibly
many mirror sites know by the package already so the user need
not look everywhere for it), build, test, and install it all
automatically without needing (but still allowing if requested)
user intervention? Will it do this for all sub dependences
recursively?

Real world example. If a person wants to install Image Magick,
what is the process under Red Hat or Debian?

Remember that Image Magick has separate lib dependences for jpeg,
mpeg, tiff34, png, jbig, and tff, and executable dependences of
fig2dev, pictoppm, and gs. Is the user required to hunt down the
locations of the packages for all these dependences AND
build/install them manually, or will the Red Hat and/or Depian
systems handle this all automatically? FreeBSD ports will do
this all in two commands:

cd /usr/ports/graphics/ImageMagick
make install

And note, nowhere in those two commands am I required to know
where to find any of the given packages, even ImageMagick.

Lets not even get into the auto patching, configuring, etc features
or auto updates of the ports list via cvsup in a cron tab...

--
-Zenin
ze...@archive.rhps.org

Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

On 17 Jun 1998 19:43:43 GMT, Merlin <ckn...@shell3.ba.best.com> wrote:

>Rajat Datta <ra...@goteborg.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> Having just installed RedHat 5.0 about two months ago, and FreeBSD
>> since Saturday, I must say that getting FreeBSD ppp up and running
>> has cost me three more days than getting RedHat running (which took
>> about an hour).
>
>Odd.. It took me about an hour to get PPP with -alias working. I
>had the box working as a gateway to the net via a dynamic IP dialup
>within two hours (including configuring the four office computers.)
>
>Did you read the installation notes on the FreeBSD site?
>

Oh yes! And the Complete FreeBSD book (which I bought). And
searched Dejanews (which gave me some posts from Mark Hodges
which helped a lot).

But, I'm just noticing that ppp continues to hang on me after
some unpredictable period of time. I have no clue what to do
now. The only symptom I see is that the logfile logs a 'sent'
LCP EchoReq with a particular id with no matching 'rcvd' entry.
The 'sent' entry keeps repeating.

I guess now I get to learn about LCP EchoReq. This is more
about ppp than I ever wanted to learn.

rajat

Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

On 17 Jun 1998 11:10:38 -0700, Matt Dillon <dil...@best.net> wrote:
> I would agree. The RedHat installer in 5.0 and especially now in 5.1
> is getting *nice*. It's easy to use and consumer oriented. FreeBSD's
> is not as good. On the otherhand, most people use FreeBSD in
> server-centric environments and don't fall into the general consumer
> category, so it isn't a big deal to me. It might be a bigger deal
> to the FreeBSD group which wants to get wider acceptence of FreeBSD.

I don't have a problem with this. But, when I find people claiming how
FreeBSD is easier to set up than Linux, I'm surprised. There's nothing
wrong with choosing to stay with a certain level of complexity and so
demand a certain level of expertise. In fact, I think some of the
Linux advocates are going to find out how incredibly irritating it
can be to deal with the kind of users Microsoft deals with if Linux
really catches on (not because those users are at fault, but they
deserve a certain bit of catering to since they aren't supposed to
become computer-experts).

rajat

Zenin

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

Albert D. Cahalan <acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu> wrote:
>snip<
: It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than

: Linux because FreeBSD is less polished.

...Less? Linux is arguably "less polished" then Windows 95.
At least on most Windoze boxes you're somewhat likely to
have the same base system as another box claiming to be
"Windows"...

: That people would seek


: an OS or anything else with snob appeal ("I'm better than people
: who can't understand this...") exposes one of the many gross
: aspects of human nature.

Funny, I switched to FreeBSD because the system was more coherent
and therefor *more* understandable then the *Linux systems.

--
-Zenin
ze...@archive.rhps.org

Chris

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

Don't know about redhat, but in debian ( which I still keep around
on a secondary drive ), you go into dselect, find ImageMagick, and tag
it for install. If you don't have the required dependencies, it
will ask if you want to download them, then boom, you are done.

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> spewed
: Real world example. If a person wants to install Image Magick,


: what is the process under Red Hat or Debian?

: Remember that Image Magick has separate lib dependences for jpeg,
: mpeg, tiff34, png, jbig, and tff, and executable dependences of
: fig2dev, pictoppm, and gs. Is the user required to hunt down the
: locations of the packages for all these dependences AND
: build/install them manually, or will the Red Hat and/or Depian
: systems handle this all automatically? FreeBSD ports will do
: this all in two commands:

: cd /usr/ports/graphics/ImageMagick
: make install

: And note, nowhere in those two commands am I required to know
: where to find any of the given packages, even ImageMagick.

: Lets not even get into the auto patching, configuring, etc features
: or auto updates of the ports list via cvsup in a cron tab...

:--
:-Zenin
: ze...@archive.rhps.org


Chris

--

With two thousand years of examples behind us we have no excuse, when
fighting, for not fighting well.
T.E. Lawrence

Matt Dillon

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

:In article <35887242...@advsoftech.com>,
:Richard June <ri...@advsoftech.com> wrote:

:>Matt Dillon wrote:
:>>
:>> :In article <slrn6ofoip...@localhost.my.domain>,
:..
:>> category, so it isn't a big deal to me. It might be a bigger deal

:>> to the FreeBSD group which wants to get wider acceptence of FreeBSD.
:>I actually only moved to FreeBSD because I couldn't get RedHat5.0 to

:>install properly on my machine, works fine on a similarly configured
:>machine of a friend, but not mine. I have also found FreeBSD to be a bit
:>more straight-foward about setting things up than Linux. I Re-built my
:>FreeBSD kernel in about 20 min. still haven't done it successfully w/
:>Linux.

Oh definitely... lots of FreeBSD kernel builds off the CVS tree for me
too. Linux is way behind in the source-management department. I was
refering mainly to mass-consumer-level installations in my previous
posting.

:>> conversation that heads towards the consumer and small business side of


:>> things, and I emphasize FreeBSD in any conversation that heads towards
:>> the server side of things.
:>It does seem like that is the way development is going doesn't it?
:>RedHat Linux is moving more towards the people that can't function w/out
:>a GUI, and FreeBSD is getting to be a better server.

It should also be kept in mind that FreeBSD has linux emulation... I feel
*very* comfortable pushing linux at the software makers and PC OEMs.
I don't think they are clueful enough to understand FreeBSD. If we
push both at them we will only fragment the market. The key is to get
linux in the door first. The compatibility code will do the rest and
pull FreeBSD in along with it better then if we tried to push FreeBSD
to the exclusion of Linux.

The time is ripe for this now that Mickysoft's anti-competitive
and blatently illegal tactics have come to light and forced them into
a slow retreat. I don't usually root for the DOJ, but I am this time.
I am getting sick and tired of MS telling everyone that they are doing
"what is best for the consumer", or that the "economy will collapse"
if windows 98 is delayed or if the DOJ wins. Unbelievable!

-Matt

>--
>"I love it when the point and click commandos attempt to portray
>themselves as real computer experts. Using a mouse only makes you a
>computer user, not a computer expert"
> Someone in comp.unix.advocacy

--

Matt Dillon

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

Careful. Keep in mind that RedHat is designed almost exclusively for a
CD install. FreeBSD's ports are much more sophisticated. RedHat's
installer and FreeBSD's ports are designed for two very different types
of users. It really isn't fair to compare them.

-Matt

Dinesh Nair

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

this should really belong in one of them advocacy groups before it gives
rise to a periodic religious war. ;)

Zenin wrote:
> Is the user required to hunt down the
> locations of the packages for all these dependences AND
> build/install them manually, or will the Red Hat and/or Depian
> systems handle this all automatically? FreeBSD ports will do
> this all in two commands:

that's the _main_ reason why i prefer to recommend freebsd to my
clients. just to day, i got a client to install astrolog by the above
method over the phone. he was mighty impressed with it and it took me a
while to convince him that the procedure was developed by the good folks
at core development and not me. ;)

--
Regards, /\_/\ "All dogs go to heaven."
din...@alphaque.com (0 0)
+=======================----oOO--(_)--OOo----=========================+
|for a in past present future; do |
| for b in clients employers associates relatives neighbours pets; do |
| echo "The opinions here in no way reflect the opinions of my $a $b."|
|done; done |
+=====================================================================+
http://pgp.ai.mit.edu/htbin/pks-extract-key.pl?op=get&search=0x230096E9

Brian Somers

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

In article <slrn6ogpeo...@localhost.my.domain>,
ra...@goteborg.netcom.com (Rajat Datta) writes:
[.....]
: But, I'm just noticing that ppp continues to hang on me after

: some unpredictable period of time. I have no clue what to do
: now. The only symptom I see is that the logfile logs a 'sent'
: LCP EchoReq with a particular id with no matching 'rcvd' entry.
: The 'sent' entry keeps repeating.
:
: I guess now I get to learn about LCP EchoReq. This is more
: about ppp than I ever wanted to learn.

Assuming you're using ppp (aka user-ppp):

An ``LCP EchoReq'' is like a ping but at the link level. If no
replies are coming back, then either the peer is dead or it's
pretending to be.

If the peer is still exchanging data then you should complain to
whoever administers it.... and while they're fixing their LQR bug
(*snicker*) you can remove the ``enable lqr'' from your ppp.conf.

: rajat

WRT finding it difficult to get up and running, the latest sources
(which will probably never make the 2.2 branch) make things alot
easier - the only change to the pmdemand entry in ppp.conf.sample
that's required is that the ``set login'' and ``set dial'' commands
are tuned according to your ISP.

The latest sources from -current can be installed from the archive
at http://www.Awfulhak.org/ppp/.

--
Brian <br...@Awfulhak.org> <br...@FreeBSD.org> <br...@OpenBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !

Jordan K. Hubbard

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to

acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan) writes:

> It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than

> Linux because FreeBSD is less polished. That people would seek

Albert! How nice to see you back here again - we haven't had
anywhere near enough gibberish in this newsgroup lately.

In any case, it seems like your latest gibberish lacks even a
reasonable attempt at self-consistency. I don't know what kind of
snobs you're familiar with, but most of the ones I've met tend to
prefer things polished rather than unpolished, especially if one is
talking about gemstones or Mercedes automobiles. So in order for us
to have more snob appeal, we'd have to be more polished than the
alternatives. If we weren't, we wouldn't.

Please show more care and attention with your gibberish in the future;
your previous postings have somewhat spoiled us and we've grown to
expect only the finest gibberish from Albert D. Cahalan.

--
- Jordan Hubbard
Co-founder/Release Manager, The FreeBSD Project
Walnut Creek CDROM

Gregory LeBaron

unread,
Jun 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/18/98
to


John S. Dyson wrote:

>
>
> How do roast puppy or boiled kitten compare?

Well, I've had quite a bit of experience with both puppy and kitten. Both
are quite tasty but I tend to prefer the crispy skin of the puppy. Basically
it's a matter of personal preference.


Mike

unread,
Jun 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/19/98
to

In article <8981330...@thrush.omix.com>, Zenin wrote:
>Albert D. Cahalan <acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu> wrote:
> >snip<
>: It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than

>: Linux because FreeBSD is less polished.
>
> ...Less? Linux is arguably "less polished" then Windows 95.
> At least on most Windoze boxes you're somewhat likely to
> have the same base system as another box claiming to be
> "Windows"...
>
>: That people would seek
>: an OS or anything else with snob appeal ("I'm better than people
>: who can't understand this...") exposes one of the many gross
>: aspects of human nature.
>
> Funny, I switched to FreeBSD because the system was more coherent
> and therefor *more* understandable then the *Linux systems.
>
>--
>-Zenin
> ze...@archive.rhps.org

Would have to agree. Right now I'm running FreeBSD -current, but a
couple of minutes ago I was running Slackware 3.4. I *really* wish
Linux had a ports collection. Other than that, I haven't used
Linux enough yet to comment on it as far as performance, etc. But I
definitely miss FreeBSD when I'm running Linux.

Mike

Albert D. Cahalan

unread,
Jun 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/19/98
to

j...@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes:
> acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan) writes:
>
>> It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than
>> Linux because FreeBSD is less polished. That people would seek

> In any case, it seems like your latest gibberish lacks even a
> reasonable attempt at self-consistency. I don't know what kind of
> snobs you're familiar with, but most of the ones I've met tend to
> prefer things polished rather than unpolished, especially if one is
> talking about gemstones or Mercedes automobiles. So in order for us
> to have more snob appeal, we'd have to be more polished than the
> alternatives. If we weren't, we wouldn't.

Snob appeal varies. In this case, it is intellectual snob appeal.
You may be more familiar with the financial kind. The main issue
is use of a product or service that is in some way exclusive.
People who wish to display economic power can display that by
using goods and services that are costly, even when the additional
cost does not procure a better product. People who wish to display
intellectual power choose products that other people would be unable
to use, and may even forfeit useful features to use those products.
(and FYI, I can use BSD just fine even though it sucks)


Albert D. Cahalan

unread,
Jun 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/19/98
to

Peter Mutsaers <p...@xs4all.nl> writes:

> I would have preferred FreeBSD (for its more orderly directory layout,

It is orderly and standardized, but may have a SysV influence that
you are not yet comfortable with. One of the goals is read-only
mounted root and /usr filesystems, perhaps on ROM for security.

Detailed justification of the standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/

Tom Keats

unread,
Jun 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/19/98
to

Albert D. Cahalan wrote:

> It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than
> Linux because FreeBSD is less polished.

<snipped>If i were a Snob, i'd see about doing something like running
Ultrix orHP/UX on an Alpha-fitted MicroVAX. Then i'd shove it in
peoples'
faces until they get sick & tired of me. Now, _That's_ Snobbery.

As it is, i'm just plain "used" to *BSD. I like the economy, stability,

available resources, opportunities to learn, and the warm-fuzzy
familiarity of *BSD, and especially FreeBSD, running on a humble
Intel. I don't give a rat's ass what other folks think about my FreeBSD

sys --- *I* like it, *I* use it, and *I* maintain it. And I migrated
to it
from BSDi (which might have even more "snob appeal" than any "free"
OS),because it suited me to do so.

"snob apeal" ......... pffffffffffffff

Relating "snob appeal" to free OS's is so blatantly oxymoronic.

It's not about snobbery; it's about having the choice to adopt the
OS to suit the individual's/organizations' needs. It's about
preference and suitabilty.

Have a nice cup of tea, and count your blessings. I'll do the same.

cheers,

Tom Keats

Matt Dillon

unread,
Jun 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/19/98
to

:In article <35889D28...@cam.org>,
:Gregory LeBaron <leb...@cam.org> wrote:
:>
:>

<<Shudder>>; how sickening. I tend for more conventional fare myself.

Roast PENGUIN, now *there* is a delight worth waiting for! It brings
new meaning to the phrase "Crispy Critters" :-)

Nigel Gorry

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

In article <slrn6ogpeo...@localhost.my.domain>, ra...@ix.netcom.com
wrote:

>On 17 Jun 1998 19:43:43 GMT, Merlin <ckn...@shell3.ba.best.com> wrote:
>>Rajat Datta <ra...@goteborg.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>Odd.. It took me about an hour to get PPP with -alias working. I
>>had the box working as a gateway to the net via a dynamic IP dialup
>>within two hours (including configuring the four office computers.)
>>
>>Did you read the installation notes on the FreeBSD site?
>
>Oh yes! And the Complete FreeBSD book (which I bought). And
>searched Dejanews (which gave me some posts from Mark Hodges
>which helped a lot).

I recall reading in the handbook about this prob and the solution (which Brian
has explained yet again in another post).

Maybe FreeBSD is only for people that can read.


Nigel Gorry
Systems Administrator http://www.tropinet.com
Radio 4KZ, Kool-FM and Zed.Net ISP http://www.znet.net.au

Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:32:43 GMT, Nigel Gorry <ni...@koolfm.com.au> wrote:
>In article <slrn6ogpeo...@localhost.my.domain>, ra...@ix.netcom.com
>wrote:
>>On 17 Jun 1998 19:43:43 GMT, Merlin <ckn...@shell3.ba.best.com> wrote:
>>>Rajat Datta <ra...@goteborg.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Odd.. It took me about an hour to get PPP with -alias working. I
>>>had the box working as a gateway to the net via a dynamic IP dialup
>>>within two hours (including configuring the four office computers.)
>>>
>>>Did you read the installation notes on the FreeBSD site?
>>
>>Oh yes! And the Complete FreeBSD book (which I bought). And
>>searched Dejanews (which gave me some posts from Mark Hodges
>>which helped a lot).
>
>I recall reading in the handbook about this prob and the solution (which Brian
>has explained yet again in another post).
>
>Maybe FreeBSD is only for people that can read.

I note that with a lot of help from somewhat more friendly FreeBSD
folks, the problem persists.

Brian's solution did not help. I had already done what he had suggested
(that is, deny and disable lqr). The problem persists. I have downloaded
the latest ppp from www.awfulhak.org and the problem persists. I have
sent Brian my configuration and the log files I've been able to gather.
I hope he can help.

Thanks for your kind words.

rajat

Louis Epstein

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

Tom Keats (tom_...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:

: Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
:
: > It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than
: > Linux because FreeBSD is less polished.
:
: <snipped>If i were a Snob, i'd see about doing something like running
: Ultrix orHP/UX on an Alpha-fitted MicroVAX. Then i'd shove it in
: peoples'
: faces until they get sick & tired of me. Now, _That's_ Snobbery.

You wimp,you're not prepared to port Multics to a Radio Shack Color
Computer?

Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:51:07 +0100,
Brian Somers <br...@shift.lan.awfulhak.org> wrote:
>Assuming you're using ppp (aka user-ppp):
>
>An ``LCP EchoReq'' is like a ping but at the link level. If no
>replies are coming back, then either the peer is dead or it's
>pretending to be.
>
>If the peer is still exchanging data then you should complain to
>whoever administers it.... and while they're fixing their LQR bug
>(*snicker*) you can remove the ``enable lqr'' from your ppp.conf.
>

I don't believe LQR is the problem, after studying and reflection.
For whatever reason, packets from the ISP is not getting through,
or they have ceased sending them. I think the latter is unlikely,
since, on this same system, same ISP, same login id, but with Linux
or Windows'95, the ISP has never ceased sending me packets or
pretend to be dead.

Since my ISP and I are no longer exchanging data, I don't think
they are experiencing an LQR bug.

I don't yet understand why this problem is occurring, but it is
happening with both userland ppp and pppd. Userland ppp, I
understand, disables LQR by default and my conf file is denying
LQR.

What makes this really difficult to debug is that I haven't found
any way to make it happen on command. Packets simply stop getting
through after an indeterminate period of time. Sigh!

rajat

Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:51:07 +0100,
Brian Somers <br...@shift.lan.awfulhak.org> wrote:
>WRT finding it difficult to get up and running, the latest sources
>(which will probably never make the 2.2 branch) make things alot
>easier - the only change to the pmdemand entry in ppp.conf.sample
>that's required is that the ``set login'' and ``set dial'' commands
>are tuned according to your ISP.
>
>The latest sources from -current can be installed from the archive
>at http://www.Awfulhak.org/ppp/.

Also, regarding difficulty of getting ppp up and running, one kind
soul, Mike <mu...@ida.net> (I don't know his last name), pointed me
at his ppp-setup script at http://www.ida.net/users/muck/. This
worked wonderfully, and, in my opinion, would be very useful for
newbies. Thanks Mike.

rajat

Dana Booth

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 03:24:40 GMT, Louis Epstein <l...@put.com> wrote:

>You wimp,you're not prepared to port Multics to a Radio Shack Color
>Computer?

I knew a guy once, who ran a bbs on a CoCo. Had a cool 300 baud modem, too.
:) Used to post messages from my Kaypro!

--

------------------------
Dana Booth <da...@oz.net>
------------------------

Steve Sheldon

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

da...@dana.oz.net (Dana Booth) writes:

>On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 03:24:40 GMT, Louis Epstein <l...@put.com> wrote:

>>You wimp,you're not prepared to port Multics to a Radio Shack Color
>>Computer?

>I knew a guy once, who ran a bbs on a CoCo. Had a cool 300 baud modem, too.
>:) Used to post messages from my Kaypro!


ahh, the good old days when computers were completely understandable,
because the entire OS could be dissasembled, printed, and carried in your
briefcase. :)

Ted Mittelstaedt

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to


Jordan K. Hubbard <j...@time.cdrom.com> wrote in article
<yfg1zsl...@time.cdrom.com>...


> acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan) writes:
>

> > It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than

> > Linux because FreeBSD is less polished. That people would seek
>
> Albert! How nice to see you back here again - we haven't had
> anywhere near enough gibberish in this newsgroup lately.
>

> In any case, it seems like your latest gibberish lacks even a
> reasonable attempt at self-consistency. I don't know what kind of
> snobs you're familiar with, but most of the ones I've met tend to
> prefer things polished rather than unpolished, especially if one is
> talking about gemstones or Mercedes automobiles. So in order for us
> to have more snob appeal, we'd have to be more polished than the
> alternatives. If we weren't, we wouldn't.
>

> Please show more care and attention with your gibberish in the future;
> your previous postings have somewhat spoiled us and we've grown to
> expect only the finest gibberish from Albert D. Cahalan.
>

Aww Man! Jordan, I'm crushed that you didn't crosspost that to
rec.humor or alt.flame.albert.die.die.die at least!!! Simply crushed!

You'd better be careful Jordan, if you say too much he might get wind of
that secret army of FreeBSD fanatics we have stashed away ready to raid
Finland, and carry Linus off to be chained to a PC running nothing but pure
FreeBSD for a month, until he shrieks in repentance!

Now, with Albert's logic, I propose the following chart:

Linux: High polish, no snob appeal.
FreeBSD no polish, more snob appeal

so far, so good.

Emacs: High polish, no snob appeal
Vi: less polish, more snob appeal

Hmmm. Alright.

Pine: High polish, no snob appeal
Elm: No polish, more snob appeal

Interesting, that.

Steak: High polish, no snob appeal
Meatloaf: no polish, high snob appeal

Fancy house: high polish, no snob appeal
run-down apartment: no polish, high snob appeal

Nice neighborhood: High polish, no snob appeal
High crime neighborhood: no polish, high snob appeal

My wife's new car: High polish, no snob appeal
My rusted beater car: no polish, more snob appeal


So, I guess from this we can conclude the following:

Those nonSnob Linux-runners program in Emacs, read mail with Pine, eat
Steak, live in Fancy Houses in Nice Neighborhoods, and drive around in New
Cars.

Us FreeBSD-running Snobs, program with Vi, read mail with Elm, eat
Meatloaf, live in run-down apartments in crack neighborhoods, and drive
beater cars.

Guys, I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm beginning to think we all
picked the wrong operating system!!!!!

Ted

Richard June

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

Warning, this is completly off the threads topic
Do you know how to mount a Linux filesystem remote and have the Linux
box execute all the commands?(besides the obvious)
Also, just what is needed to get the damn floppy to boot off of the
floppy?( I can handle NFS, but would like to make a stripped down copy
on the disk too.

Tom Keats

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

Louis Epstein wrote:

> Tom Keats (tom_...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:
> : Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> :

> : > It's called "snob appeal". FreeBSD has more snob appeal than


> : > Linux because FreeBSD is less polished.

> :


> : <snipped>If i were a Snob, i'd see about doing something like running
> : Ultrix orHP/UX on an Alpha-fitted MicroVAX. Then i'd shove it in
> : peoples'
> : faces until they get sick & tired of me. Now, _That's_ Snobbery.
>

> You wimp,you're not prepared to port Multics to a Radio Shack Color
> Computer?

Yes, i'm a wimp because i'm not prepared to port Multics to a Radio
Shack computers. I'm a wimp --- but not a snob :)

But I'm happy w/ what i've got (FBSD) and i hope you're happy
w/ whatever you've got (Plan9 distributed over a gajjilion pocket
calculators <friendly leg-pulling> )?

I gtuess that's enough wasted bandwidth.

cheers,

tom keats


Dom Mitchell

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

acah...@jupiter.cs.uml.edu (Albert D. Cahalan) writes:
> (and FYI, I can use BSD just fine even though it sucks)

Actually, I found that when I put BSD on my computer, the fan blew,
just as it always had.

Nice try. You can't confuse this old duckling.
--
"Remember the Golden Rule: he who has the gold makes the rules" -- WoID

Phillip Musumeci

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

I wonder if your link is just doing an automatic timeout and dropping off.

A /etc/ppp/ppp.linkup file like the following would ensure a ping every 3
minutes in case there is some timeout system to "free up" the dialup lines.

MYADDR:
delete ALL
add 0 0 HISADDR
!bg /sbin/ping -q -i 180 HISADDR

Cheers,
phillip

UNIX _IS_ user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.
--unknown

Louis Epstein

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

Tom Keats (tom_...@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote:

I run FBSD actually...there's problems getting enough Babbage Difference
Engines to run my hack of MTS...

: I gtuess that's enough wasted bandwidth.

no,now....

John Bitar

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

Snob appeal, wimps, this is getting weird. wasted bandwidth, guess where all
running 14.4 modems.
The old "who is better then who"... and yes its old and stale. I use FreeBSD,
my choice, I use Win 95, point and click. I am a user. I am an expert. Point
is who really cares .... I guess I do, enough to give my 2 cents worth :-)
Cheers!!! to a world with billions of people and not one alike.

=====
John Bitar a FreeBSD "USER"(point and click(with a 3 button mouse)) who is
best known for questions he posts, that often get ansewered by
experts(hackers(people with no life(people who live in dark basements(people
like me *(FreeBSD))))

Rajat Datta

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98
to

On 20 Jun 1998 19:22:27 +1000,

Phillip Musumeci <phi...@mirriwinni.cse.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>
>I wonder if your link is just doing an automatic timeout and dropping off.
>
>A /etc/ppp/ppp.linkup file like the following would ensure a ping every 3
>minutes in case there is some timeout system to "free up" the dialup lines.
>
>MYADDR:
> delete ALL
> add 0 0 HISADDR
> !bg /sbin/ping -q -i 180 HISADDR
>

Nope. Solved the problem by switching to 2.2-STABLE. Exact same
ppp setup but different kernel and the session stays active.

rajat

go

unread,
Jun 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/20/98