Re: [tlug] maybe a repetitive question about distros

["Luke Kearney" <lukek@example.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Glover" <jmglov@example.com>

> Luke Kearney wrote:
> >>
> >>Right. FreeBSD is absolutely *renowned* for its comprehensive hardware
> >>support... *koff*
> >
> >
> > Do you feel that FBSD is not stable ? The HW requirements for it are
very
> > modest.
>
> No. I dare you to find that in my post. To the contrary, I am a big fan
> of *BSD, but mainly on servers. I will stick to Linux for my 3D gaming
> needs! ;) (Actually, I only game on the console systems, but I digress).
>
> > For as long as you are not trying to use the absolute latest in video
> > cards FBSD is quite good
>
> I agree, though I think that video cards are not the only area in which
> FreeBSD lags behind Linux in hardware driver availability. Granted, BSD
> drivers tend to be a bit more stable than Linux ones, as the BSD
> developers are a lot more cautious when it comes to releasing new code.
>

Precisely, I found out the hard way just how cautious the FBSD developers
are with new Video Cards ( any one want to buy an ATi Radeon ? )

>
> > NetBSD and OpenBSD are the pits when it comes to hardware so not sure
why
> > you give FBSD the thumbs down.
>
> I may be misinformed. I was under the impression that Net supported more
> hardware than Free. Is this not so?

My experience is that Net is no better but this gets a bit gray because both
Open and Net work on more platforms than Free. In terms of strictly x86
architecture I would not say that they support more HW than FreeBSD

>
> > I would put a FBSD system up against any of your linux
> > varieties any day in terms of performance
>
> I quite agree. In fact, BSD seems to outperform Linux under heavy loads
> (i.e. busy webservers (read: Google)).
>
> > although Linux is nicer as a
> > desktop if you want to have something close to winblows but not quite.
>
> I think you mean "GNOME / KDE are nicer..." ;) My Linux boxes look
> nothing like Windoze. I only use X on one of them regularly, and it
> runneth Blackbox. Gotta keep that GNOME shite away at all costs!

No, what I meant is that Linux has more tools to make life easier than
FreeBSD and has better Multimedia support than FreeBSD it also does more
things for the user in terms of being able to configure things with out ever
going near a cmd line.

>
> > I just feel that RH has gotten a bit too automated
>
> What do you mean? up2date? Kudzu?

RPM and other update tools. Funny though I watched a friend of mine tear his
hair out over the fact that his RPM did not automatically install the
package dependancies. Hmmm

>
> As I am fond of saying, sysadmins *can* use Redhat's tools as a crutch,
> or they can dust off vim, get in the config files and do things properly!

Agreed on this point anyway