Re: OS Imperialism

[turnbull@example.com (Stephen J. Turnbull)]

>>>>> "Jim" == Jim Schweizer <schweiz@example.com> writes:

    Jim> Hi all, All this talk of OS imperialism reminded me that I
    Jim> got this in the mail yesterday:

    >> Linux booth? Linux is for the child...
    >> 
    >> All of my associates agree that if you have to use unix, a
    >> version of BSD is the way to go.  Besides, unix is becoming
    >> less and less popular (with NT gaining in strength), at least
    >> with BSD you won't face any of the "linux" type of problems.

I'm not sure what the "linux" type of problem is.  Linux is a hacker's
OS for all hackers.  I assume this is the kind of problem they're
talking about.  There is no real control of what goes into a Linux
system, and when I tried to install my new Slackware system (sort of
new: Sept. 95 Infomagic) to a DEC something-or-other, I found that (1)
the SCSI boot kernel didn't work with the Adaptec AIC7xxx SCSI board,
and (2) the AHACDROM kernel, which did have an AIC7xxx driver, didn't
have the ISO-9660 file system built in!  No Makefile/.config, of
course.  Hey, that's what Linux is about.  I haven't successfully
built an appropriate boot disk, yet, but it's only a matter of time :-)

The BOGUS distribution does not have this kind of problem.  This is
because BOGUS is a closely controlled distribution developed for
internal purposes at UNC, and made available because others might want
such a distribution.  OTOH, it is not bleeding edge; there still is no
BOGUS-ELF.  And there is no boot kernel for the AIC7xxx.  This is
because BOGUS is a closely controlled distribution developed for
internal purposes at UNC, and made available because others might want
such a distribution.  :-)  Win some, lose some.

The various "free" BSDs are a similar kind of situation.

    Jim> Well excuuuuse me. Personnally, I've found that taking
    Jim> something apart then putting it back together a few times is
    Jim> the best way to learn something.  (Yeah, I always have a few
    Jim> screws left over - I wonder where *that* one went:-) In
    Jim> addition, I doubt BSD fosters the sence of community I've
    Jim> found with linux people.

Not across the spectrum.  But certainly within the somewhat closed
group of registered BSD hackers there is a strong sense of community.
It's closed only in the sense that (a) there is a controlling
committee for the whole project (both the FreeBSD and the NetBSD
versions; I don't know what happened to 386BSD; unlike Linus, who
controls only the kernel), and (b) you can't contribute and disappear,
you have to be around a lot, or you don't get status in the community.

On the other hand, the situation is much more stable for the
non-hackers.  In particular, BSD process control, threads, and
networking are somewhat stronger than Linux.  Linux's terminal control
was much better, especially in the variety of consoles.  These
evaluations are as of a year ago, and are second-hand.

In general, I don't think users see much difference.  But Linux, being
more open, is better for serious system hackers, eg, people who want
to create firewalls.  The "free" BSDs provide a fine environment for
that kind of thing, of course, but you're less likely to get as much
help from the core group of workers, since they tend to concentrate on
the "officially" prioritized projects.

    Jim> Anyone have any statistical or emperical ammunition for my
    Jim> reply?

Read the comp.os.*.advocacy groups, look in the archives.  There's
plenty of that stuff.  There was a long discussion of this on the
BOGUS list about a year and a half ago.

Disclaimer:  I am not a core hacker, and I only lurked in the relevant 
discussions.

Steve

-- 
                            Stephen J. Turnbull
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences                    Yaseppochi-Gumi
University of Tsukuba                      http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp/
Tennodai 1-1-1, Tsukuba, 305 JAPAN                 turnbull@example.com