The diffrence between Linux and FreeBSD
Marc G. Fournier
On Tue, 23 Jul 1996 al...@esi.co.il wrote:
> Hello
> What is the diffrence between Linux and FreeBSD.
> I know that they are diffrent in the core but i'm talking
> about what does freeBSD offer that linux doesn't or can't
> offer with some effort put in to it?
FreeBSD offers Linux binary compatibility, so whatever Linux
offers pretty much works under FreeBSD...
Linux doesn't have *BSD binary compatibility though...
Marc G. Fournier scr...@ki.net
Systems Administrator @ ki.net scr...@freebsd.org
al...@esi.co.il
Hello
What is the diffrence between Linux and FreeBSD.
I know that they are diffrent in the core but i'm talking
about what does freeBSD offer that linux doesn't or can't
offer with some effort put in to it?
--
Shai Almog al...@esi.co.il ESI Expert Solutions International.
http://www.esi.co.il:8080/~almog/
Hr.Ladavac
In his e-mail Shai Almog wrote:
> At 10:02 23/07/96 +0200, you wrote:
> >In his e-mail al...@esi.co.il wrote:
> >> Hello
> >> What is the diffrence between Linux and FreeBSD.
> >> I know that they are diffrent in the core but i'm talking
> >> about what does freeBSD offer that linux doesn't or can't
> >> offer with some effort put in to it?
> >
> >Everything can do everything something else does if you put some effort
> >into it.
> >
> >This way seen, they differ in philosophy driving their development.
>
> You are correct I did not explaine.
> What need is there for a second freeware Unix?
Second? There are, IIRC, three freware Unix clones: FreeBSD, NetBSD, and
OpenBSD... The split is lamentable but unavoidable (personal problems among
developers, no monetary incentive to work together, other reasons;) the
camps are still cooperating rather tightly and tracking each other.
The curious fact that free unices have BSD in their names stems from the
original Berkeley licensing terms which made this possible (you can
find a copy of the license in every BSD source file; I can mail it to you
if you don't have one handy.)
Linux is not free. It is covered by the rather infamous GPL license which
you can find almost everywhere (I can mail you a copy if you don't have
one handy.)
So it seems that I have already given you the answer you wanted: the BSD's
and Linux differ in the philosophy of their respective developers; BSD
developers want to create a product freely usable by everyone, for any
purpose without strings attached--Linux fols are governed by the GNU
Manifesto (all similarities with another Manifesto dating from 1848
seem to be intentional.)
/Marino
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> Shai Almog ESI Expert Solutions International (Israel)
> http://www.esi.co.il:8080/~almog/
>
>
Stephen Hovey
Linux will hang if you use an ne2000, freebsd will not
freebsd has a really great disk caching subsystem so if your application
does alot of disk IO it behaves better with more thruput.
On Tue, 23 Jul 1996 al...@esi.co.il wrote:
> Hello
> What is the diffrence between Linux and FreeBSD.
> I know that they are diffrent in the core but i'm talking
> about what does freeBSD offer that linux doesn't or can't
> offer with some effort put in to it?
Hr.Ladavac
In his e-mail al...@esi.co.il wrote:
> Hello
> What is the diffrence between Linux and FreeBSD.
> I know that they are diffrent in the core but i'm talking
> about what does freeBSD offer that linux doesn't or can't
> offer with some effort put in to it?
The way you phrased your question, no intelligent answer can be given.
Everything can do everything something else does if you put some effort
into it.
This way seen, they differ in philosophy driving their development.
/Marino
Howard Goldstein
On 23 Jul 1996 23:07:25 +0200, Stephen Hovey <sho...@buffnet.net> wrote:
: Linux will hang if you use an ne2000, freebsd will not
: freebsd has a really great disk caching subsystem so if your application
: does alot of disk IO it behaves better with more thruput.
There are many excellent reasons to select FreeBSD over Linux, but I'm
afraid ne2000 hangs are not one of them. My comment is based on
running a couple of non-hanging terabytes through ne2ks on 1.1.x and
1.2.x kernels in recent years, and recently a few dozen gigabytes in
my office between FreeBSD 2.1R and STABLE and 1.2.13s.
--
Howard Goldstein <h...@n2wx.ampr.org>