Linux kernel on FreeBSD

3 vues
Accéder directement au premier message non lu

Loren M. Lang

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 03:21:3810/12/2004
à FreeBSD Mailing list
I recently ran across an intresting project, Debian GNU/FreeBSD, a
FreeBSD kernel running with the standard userland from the GNU Project.
This surprised me as it almost seems like the exact opposite of what I'd
want. Now this does give me an idea, what about making Linux/FreeBSD,
the Linux kernel with the userland from FreeBSD. Ideally, I'd just like
to run a straight FreeBSD system, but I can't seem to get rid of my
Linux partition, and it's mainly because of features/drivers that linux
has, but freebsd does not. For example, I recently ran across the
problem that my realtek 10/100 nic is not supported under the freebsd
kernel, but it is very supported under linux for some time now. My
intel sound card is also not supported, neither is my webcam nor my sony
clie, all of which is supported under linux. Also, I've found the
Netfilter firewall in Linux to be, IMHO, a little better designed than
ipfilter or ipfw in freebsd, and it definetely has more features than
those two freebsd firewalls. Now I'm not trying to slam freebsd, but I
do think that linux has better driver support, if for no other reason
than that it has more developers that use linux. I do believe that
freebsd has had a much better firewall than linux's former firewalls,
and I have yet to look at pf to see how it compares. I also think that
the quality of the freebsd source code is also higher overall, but
the linux kernel seems to work well enough and, for a desktop, I find it
much nice for hardware support, but I still prefer freebsd userland to
the bloated gnu userland. I hate distro's that decide bash is the best
choice for writing all the system startup scripts in when I'm trying to
run linux on a system with minimal ram, or even with plenty of ram.
--
I sense much NT in you.
NT leads to Bluescreen.
Bluescreen leads to downtime.
Downtime leads to suffering.
NT is the path to the darkside.
Powerful Unix is.

Public Key: ftp://ftp.tallye.com/pub/lorenl_pubkey.asc
Fingerprint: B3B9 D669 69C9 09EC 1BCD 835A FAF3 7A46 E4A3 280C

Kees Plonsz

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 06:18:5410/12/2004
à Loren M. Lang,freebsd-...@freebsd.org
Loren M. Lang wrote:

> For example, I recently ran across the
> problem that my realtek 10/100 nic is not supported under the freebsd
> kernel, but it is very supported under linux for some time now.

You have a lot of unsupported hardware under freebsd.
Is this your realtec nic ?


rl0: <RealTek 8139 10/100BaseTX> port 0xdc00-0xdcff mem
0xdfffff00-0xdfffffff irq 18 at device 19.0 on pci0
miibus1: <MII bus> on rl0
rlphy0: <RealTek internal media interface> on miibus1
rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto

Eric Kjeldergaard

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 08:48:5510/12/2004
à Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
> Also, I've found the
> Netfilter firewall in Linux to be, IMHO, a little better designed than
> ipfilter or ipfw in freebsd, and it definetely has more features than
> those two freebsd firewalls.

Which features? Is there something I'm missing with the firewalls
available in FreeBSD?

--
If I write a signature, my emails will appear more personalised.

Jeff Lawlor

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 09:49:5010/12/2004
à Eric Kjeldergaard,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
machine? Has anyone tried this?

Ruben de Groot

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 10:07:4310/12/2004
à Jeff Lawlor,Eric Kjeldergaard,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 08:49:50AM -0600, Jeff Lawlor typed:

> For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
> the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
> machine? Has anyone tried this?

Please name 1 program that requires linux kernel source code to run.

Jeff Lawlor

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 10:32:3310/12/2004
à Ruben de Groot,Eric Kjeldergaard,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list

Cisco VPN.

Jerry McAllister

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 10:50:4010/12/2004
à Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list

Most people who run FreeBSD (the enlightened) are especially attracted by
the reliability as one of its main features. Most people who complain
about FreeBSD (the unenlightened, of course...) are unhappy with its
userland features. Given this, why would someone want a less reliable
kernel matched with a less feature-ful userland - eg. Linux kernel with
FreeBSD userland?

Driver support is mainly a matter of weight in the marketplace.
Hardware vendors want to market to the (unwashed) masses because of
presumed volume of sales and don't give much attention to the relatively
small niche that is the (enlightened) FreeBSD user. Of course the
1000 ton rabid gorilla in the market is MS. Out of greed or terror, every
hardware vendor creates drivers themselves for MS first. But Linux has
just enough weight to get most, but not all, of the hardware vendors to
give at least some support to making drivers for it - at least the specs.
Unfortunately, FreeBSD is thought to have low enough weight in the market
that many (unenlightened) hardware vendors will not provide any support for
driver development for FreeBSD and some will not even release information
that can be used by others to write drivers. Some (enlightened) vendors do
give some about of support or at least release specs for driver development.
So, make a point of buying from (enlightened) vendors whose hardware will
support FreeBSD and thus help support enlightenment in the digital community.

////jerry

> --
> I sense much NT in you.
> NT leads to Bluescreen.
> Bluescreen leads to downtime.
> Downtime leads to suffering.
> NT is the path to the darkside.
> Powerful Unix is.
>
> Public Key: ftp://ftp.tallye.com/pub/lorenl_pubkey.asc
> Fingerprint: B3B9 D669 69C9 09EC 1BCD 835A FAF3 7A46 E4A3 280C
>

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org"
>

Mark Cullen

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 12:22:0910/12/2004
à Jerry McAllister,FreeBSD Mailing list,Eric Kjeldergaard,Ruben de Groot,Loren M. Lang,Jeff Lawlor
Jerry McAllister wrote:
>>Port: vpnc-0.3.2
>>Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
>>Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
>>Maint: de...@lackas.net
>>B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
>>libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
>>R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
>>libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
>>
>>
>>This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
>>Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?
>
>
> I think it was sort of a newbie question from someone who has yet to
> learn about ports and also the Linux emulation available in FreeBSD.

Oh right :-) I read something earlier in this thread about the lack of
features in the *BSD firewalls. Dunno about that because I haven't used
Linux for years, but I think the BSD firewalls are fab! The syntax is
understandable and a dummy like me can get a vague idea of what's going
on anyhow.

>
> First they seemed to think they would have to somehow import the Linux
> kernel in to FreeBSD somehow to run a Lunix driver, showing unfamiliarity
> with the Linux emulation already there that allows Lunix stuff to be run.
>
> Then they did not seem to know about the vpnc (or other stuff) already in
> ports to perform the function[s] they want. I have to admit, searching
> /usr/ports can be a bit time consuming and tedius if you get started on
> a wrong track.

Yeah, sometimes! http://www.freshports.org/ was nice last time I looked
:-) Has someone perhaps pointed him/her towards the handbook?

>
> Anyway, hopefully, you have enlightened them.

I think you did all the enlightening needed in your last post!

>
> ////jerry
>
>


--
Internet Explorer? Try FireFox at http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
Outlook Express? Try ThunderBird at
http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

Mark Cullen

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 12:05:2110/12/2004
à Jeff Lawlor,Eric Kjeldergaard,Ruben de Groot,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list

Port: vpnc-0.3.2


Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
Maint: de...@lackas.net
B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5


This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?

>

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org"
>

Jerry McAllister

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 12:16:4910/12/2004
à Mark Cullen,FreeBSD Mailing list,Eric Kjeldergaard,Ruben de Groot,Loren M. Lang,Jeff Lawlor
>
> Jeff Lawlor wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 09:07, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 08:49:50AM -0600, Jeff Lawlor typed:
> >>
> >>>For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
> >>>the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
> >>>machine? Has anyone tried this?
> >>
> >>Please name 1 program that requires linux kernel source code to run.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Cisco VPN.
>
> Port: vpnc-0.3.2
> Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
> Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
> Maint: de...@lackas.net
> B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
>
>
> This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
> Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?

I think it was sort of a newbie question from someone who has yet to


learn about ports and also the Linux emulation available in FreeBSD.

First they seemed to think they would have to somehow import the Linux

kernel in to FreeBSD somehow to run a Lunix driver, showing unfamiliarity
with the Linux emulation already there that allows Lunix stuff to be run.

Then they did not seem to know about the vpnc (or other stuff) already in
ports to perform the function[s] they want. I have to admit, searching
/usr/ports can be a bit time consuming and tedius if you get started on
a wrong track.

Anyway, hopefully, you have enlightened them.

////jerry

Loren M. Lang

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 13:00:2410/12/2004
à Jerry McAllister,Ruben de Groot,Mark Cullen,Loren M. Lang,Jeff Lawlor,Eric Kjeldergaard,FreeBSD Mailing list
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:16:49PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> >
> > Jeff Lawlor wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 09:07, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> > >
> > >>On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 08:49:50AM -0600, Jeff Lawlor typed:
> > >>
> > >>>For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
> > >>>the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
> > >>>machine? Has anyone tried this?
> > >>
> > >>Please name 1 program that requires linux kernel source code to run.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Cisco VPN.
> >
> > Port: vpnc-0.3.2
> > Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
> > Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
> > Maint: de...@lackas.net
> > B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> > libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> > R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> > libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> >
> >
> > This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
> > Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?
>
> I think it was sort of a newbie question from someone who has yet to
> learn about ports and also the Linux emulation available in FreeBSD.

First, I don't consider myself a newbie, but I do have a lot less
experience with freebsd than linux. And I don't think this idea is that
impractical, but maybe just not that useful as a better answer might
just be a more bsd-like distro like slackware, but I think even
slackware likes to use bash as it's main shell.

>
> First they seemed to think they would have to somehow import the Linux
> kernel in to FreeBSD somehow to run a Lunix driver, showing unfamiliarity
> with the Linux emulation already there that allows Lunix stuff to be run.

Does linux emulation allow me to run the usb visor driver on freebsd or
enable me to use the latest ati 3d graphics driver available for linux?
If there's a way than tell me. The linux emulation is just for running
linux binaries like doom 3 which it does very well, but it doesn't help
in kernel space.

>
> Then they did not seem to know about the vpnc (or other stuff) already in
> ports to perform the function[s] they want. I have to admit, searching
> /usr/ports can be a bit time consuming and tedius if you get started on
> a wrong track.

I never brought up vpnc or anything about vpns, that was someone else,
but I did mention the freebsd kernel seems to be lacking some hw support
that linux does not, and that's a much harder problem to fix then trying
to get linux software to run on freebsd. There isn't really any
replacement in ports that I can find for my realtek card or my sony
clie, both of which were given to me, not specifically my choice.

>
> Anyway, hopefully, you have enlightened them.
>
> ////jerry

--

Rod Person

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 07:35:1310/12/2004
à freebsd-...@freebsd.org,Ruben de Groot,Mark Cullen,Loren M. Lang,Jeff Lawlor,Eric Kjeldergaard,Jerry McAllister
On Friday 10 December 2004 5:16 pm, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > Jeff Lawlor wrote:
> > > Cisco VPN.
> >
> > Port: vpnc-0.3.2
> > Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
> > Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
> > Maint: de...@lackas.net
> > B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> > libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> > R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> > libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> >
> >
> > This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
> > Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?
>
> I think it was sort of a newbie question from someone who has yet to
> learn about ports and also the Linux emulation available in FreeBSD.

Not to be overly critical here, but if the original poster is try to use the
Cisco 5000 vpn client, you need Linux kernal headers to build it from source.
The pre-built version won't run on FreeBSD (although I haven't tried it since
4.8 or so).

My company requires the Cisco 5000 client to connect to our vpn. The 3000
client will not work for us. I tried for sometime to build the 5000 client,
but I could never get it to build properly on FreeBSD.

--
Rod

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"I have to struggle with wanting to kill you every day"
- Horsey
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jerry McAllister

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 14:14:2910/12/2004
à Loren M. Lang,Ruben de Groot,Mark Cullen,FreeBSD Mailing list,Loren M. Lang,Jeff Lawlor,Eric Kjeldergaard,Jerry McAllister
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:16:49PM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> > >
> > > Jeff Lawlor wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 09:07, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 08:49:50AM -0600, Jeff Lawlor typed:
> > > >>
> > > >>>For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
> > > >>>the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
> > > >>>machine? Has anyone tried this?
> > > >>
> > > >>Please name 1 program that requires linux kernel source code to run.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cisco VPN.
> > >
> > > Port: vpnc-0.3.2
> > > Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
> > > Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
> > > Maint: de...@lackas.net
> > > B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> > > libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> > > R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> > > libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> > >
> > >
> > > This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
> > > Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?
> >
> > I think it was sort of a newbie question from someone who has yet to
> > learn about ports and also the Linux emulation available in FreeBSD.
>
> First, I don't consider myself a newbie, but I do have a lot less
> experience with freebsd than linux.

I think this thread got additional questions dropped in.

> > Then they did not seem to know about the vpnc (or other stuff) already in
> > ports to perform the function[s] they want. I have to admit, searching
> > /usr/ports can be a bit time consuming and tedius if you get started on
> > a wrong track.
>
> I never brought up vpnc or anything about vpns, that was someone else,

Someone did and I responded to that.

> but I did mention the freebsd kernel seems to be lacking some hw support
> that linux does not, and that's a much harder problem to fix then trying
> to get linux software to run on freebsd. There isn't really any
> replacement in ports that I can find for my realtek card or my sony
> clie, both of which were given to me, not specifically my choice.

That was a different response.

Probably someone 'borrowed' this thread so it was getting responded
to in two different ways, I didn't pay close attention to which
thread was which, but rather commented on the immediate question.

////jerry

Parv

non lue,
10 déc. 2004, 21:17:1810/12/2004
à Eric Kjeldergaard,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
in message <d9175cad04121...@mail.gmail.com>,
wrote Eric Kjeldergaard thusly...

>
> > Also, I've found the
> > Netfilter firewall in Linux to be, IMHO, a little better designed than
> > ipfilter or ipfw in freebsd, and it definetely has more features than
> > those two freebsd firewalls.
>
> Which features? Is there something I'm missing with the firewalls
> available in FreeBSD?

Yes, i am genuinely curious too. (And don't forget newer pf, from
OpenBSD, available on FreeBSD).


- Parv

--

Loren M. Lang

non lue,
11 déc. 2004, 15:31:0411/12/2004
à Eric Kjeldergaard,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 07:48:55AM -0600, Eric Kjeldergaard wrote:
> > Also, I've found the
> > Netfilter firewall in Linux to be, IMHO, a little better designed than
> > ipfilter or ipfw in freebsd, and it definetely has more features than
> > those two freebsd firewalls.
>
> Which features? Is there something I'm missing with the firewalls
> available in FreeBSD?

DISCLAIMER: At this time I have had no time to look at pf.

Netfilter seems to have better nat proxy support for protocols like ftp
and h.323. If you setting incomming ftp connections to an ftp server
behind a nat router on port 21 with state matching, then the ftp proxy
modules will monitor the traffic for passive transfers, modify the
traffic as needed, then add a related connection to the connection
tracking module. If you allow incoming related connections as well,
which you normally would then your router will support passive transfers
transparently, and securely as well. Same goes for active ftp client
transfers. When I was reading about the ftp proxy support in ipfilter,
they stated that you would have to allow a range of ports in for
passive ftp to reach the server, but there was no way of associating the
transfers with the ftp connections allowed in, so it was less secure.

Same with h.323, only different module and different port. There is
also many other protocols supported as well like TFTP, IRC, RTSP, Quake
3, MMS, Amanda, GRE, RSH, PPTP, CuSeeMe.

Here's an example with netfilter:

# Load proxy handler modules
modprobe ip_nat_ftp
modprobe ip_conntrack_ftp

# Enable nat for ftp server port
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ${OUT_IF} -j SNAT --to ${ROUTER_OUT_IP}
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -i ${OUT_IF} -p tcp --dport 21 -j DNAT \
--to ${FTP_IP}

# Allow access through firewall
iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -s ${IN_NETWORK} -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED,NEW \
-j ACCEPT
iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -d ${IN_NETWORK} -m state --state ESTABLISHED,RELATED \
-j ACCEPT
iptables -t filter -A FORWARD -d ${FTP_IP} -p tcp --dport 21 -m state \
NEW -j ACCEPT

Basically I allow outgoing connection, and NEW incomming connections to
port 21 which is natd to point to the ftp server, and I allow all
incomming ESTABLISH or RELATED connections and that allows the incoming
passive ftp transfers because they are related to another connection,
but random connections to those ports won't work. The ftp server knows
nothing of this and thinks it's just talking on the internet like a
normal server would. The same goes in reverse for active ftp clients
behind nat routers.

There is a time match in netfilter which I find very handy when using
firewall rules in combo with traffic control so during the work day, ppl
using P2P software won't be stealing all the bandwidth, but after
midnight, they have free reign. I have not seen this match in ipfw or
ipfilter.

Also, there are lots of add-ons in the patch-o-matic on netfilters
website like the TCPLAG target which can be used to report lag on tcp
packets. And also connection marking which I can use to keep track of
connections that match certain conditions, so I can have certain
connection that may trigger a condition with one packet going through,
like an extra large packet, but take action on every packet since then
for that connection.

Now some of this may be done in different ways with BSD firewalls or may
already be supported in pf, but I haven't figured out how to do them
yet. But the general impression I've got it that netfilter is very well
designed to previous linux firewalls and has a bigger feature list to
the BSD firewalls. But before netfilter, BSD firewalls were most
definetly far superior, too bad I started using BSD after having lived
through both ipfwadm and ipchains.


>
> --
> If I write a signature, my emails will appear more personalised.

> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org"

--

Loren M. Lang

non lue,
11 déc. 2004, 18:16:4111/12/2004
à Jeff Lawlor,Eric Kjeldergaard,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 08:49:50AM -0600, Jeff Lawlor wrote:
> For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
> the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
> machine? Has anyone tried this?

This make make it compile, but it does not mean it will work. For
example, if the program requires the kernel headers to define the ioctls
used for V4L2, it may now compile under freebsd, but the device file
won't know what to do with that ioctl and fail, assuming the device file
even exists.

>
>
> On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 07:48, Eric Kjeldergaard wrote:
> > > Also, I've found the
> > > Netfilter firewall in Linux to be, IMHO, a little better designed than
> > > ipfilter or ipfw in freebsd, and it definetely has more features than
> > > those two freebsd firewalls.
> >
> > Which features? Is there something I'm missing with the firewalls
> > available in FreeBSD?

--

Loren M. Lang

non lue,
11 déc. 2004, 18:18:0011/12/2004
à Mark Cullen,FreeBSD Mailing list,Eric Kjeldergaard,Ruben de Groot,Loren M. Lang,Jeff Lawlor
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 05:05:21PM +0000, Mark Cullen wrote:
> Jeff Lawlor wrote:
> >On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 09:07, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> >
> >>On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 08:49:50AM -0600, Jeff Lawlor typed:
> >>
> >>>For programs that require linux kernel source code what about copying
> >>>the linux kernel source files from a linux box on to the FreeBSD
> >>>machine? Has anyone tried this?
> >>
> >>Please name 1 program that requires linux kernel source code to run.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Cisco VPN.
>
> Port: vpnc-0.3.2
> Path: /usr/ports/security/vpnc
> Info: Client for Cisco 3000 VPN Concentrator
> Maint: de...@lackas.net
> B-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 gmake-3.80_2 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
> R-deps: expat-1.95.8 gettext-0.13.1_1 libgcrypt-1.2.0_1
> libgpg-error-1.0_1 libiconv-1.9.2_1 perl-5.8.5
>
>
> This one? I have no idea what this thread is about, but that's in ports.
> Wouldn't Linux emulation work anyway?

Not if it requires a kernel module, linux emulation only support linux
user-space, not kernel-space.

>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >freebsd-...@freebsd.org mailing list
> >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> >To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> >"freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org"
> >
>
>
> --
> Internet Explorer? Try FireFox at http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
> Outlook Express? Try ThunderBird at
> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

--

Loren M. Lang

non lue,
11 déc. 2004, 18:43:4611/12/2004
à Jerry McAllister,Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:50:40AM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote:
> >
<snip>

>
> Most people who run FreeBSD (the enlightened) are especially attracted by
> the reliability as one of its main features. Most people who complain
> about FreeBSD (the unenlightened, of course...) are unhappy with its
> userland features. Given this, why would someone want a less reliable
> kernel matched with a less feature-ful userland - eg. Linux kernel with
> FreeBSD userland?

Actually, I am fine with freebsd's userland and like it very much. I
chose freebsd over linux for setting up a mail server for a customer
after using linux for 6 years and freebsd for only 3 months because I
liked the userland better. Everything seemed so consistent and using
rc.conf to configure it was nice. My biggest reasons for having all my
freebsd machines dual boot with linux is because of the kernel, drivers
that aren't supported under freebsd and a couple programs. One machine
I boot into linux less than once a month, and it's only because it
supports my creative extigy remote control feature which is real nice
when using my laptop to watch dvd movies on my tv.

I do feal that freebsd 4.x has always been more reliable than linux
since I've been using, but 5.x seems a little less reliable than linux
2.4, but I'm sure that will change after a little while. But, the
reliabity of linux is fine for my purposes, one of our linux server has 120
days uptime with no maintainence needed.

>
> Driver support is mainly a matter of weight in the marketplace.
> Hardware vendors want to market to the (unwashed) masses because of
> presumed volume of sales and don't give much attention to the relatively
> small niche that is the (enlightened) FreeBSD user. Of course the
> 1000 ton rabid gorilla in the market is MS. Out of greed or terror, every
> hardware vendor creates drivers themselves for MS first. But Linux has
> just enough weight to get most, but not all, of the hardware vendors to
> give at least some support to making drivers for it - at least the specs.
> Unfortunately, FreeBSD is thought to have low enough weight in the market
> that many (unenlightened) hardware vendors will not provide any support for
> driver development for FreeBSD and some will not even release information
> that can be used by others to write drivers. Some (enlightened) vendors do
> give some about of support or at least release specs for driver development.
> So, make a point of buying from (enlightened) vendors whose hardware will
> support FreeBSD and thus help support enlightenment in the digital community.

I would like to help enlighten hardware vendors, but I was suggesting
this as a temporary cruch until this happens. I would ultimately prefer
to stick with a solid freebsd system, but it's a pain rebooting just to
sync my sony clie that was a $200 christmas present from my parents.

Matthias Buelow

non lue,
11 déc. 2004, 20:42:2211/12/2004
à Loren M. Lang,FreeBSD Mailing list
Loren M. Lang wrote:

> want. Now this does give me an idea, what about making Linux/FreeBSD,

One problem might be that the BSD userland was written explicitly to
work on BSD, that is, under the BSD kernel, and hence is inherently less
portable than the part of the Linux userland that is the Gnu tools,
which are rather portable and can be built on many systems. Therefore
it is a probably a lot easier to get the Gnu userland running under a
BSD kernel (the early Gnu tools were written for a "BSD-like" operating
system) than the converse situation of running the rather specialized
BSD userland on top of a Linux kernel. It is for sure possible but of
rather questionable merit and most likely a lot more work than you'd
want to invest.

--
Matthias Buelow; mkb@{mukappabeta,informatik.uni-wuerzburg}.de

Répondre à tous
Répondre à l'auteur
Transférer
0 nouveau message