Re: [tlug] FreeBSD.....Linux what's the difference

[Gavin <gauin_36@example.com>]

Once again my friend thank you.  as for usage,  8.0 has not given me to many 
problems but I'm thinking about changing my gateway software. (mandrake 8.0 
too) Thinking of using SNF or Free BSD 4.5.  I also like redhat, its running 
on my hot box! no problems there!  I wish some of you guys live up here in 
(Green acres) Fukushima. I was reading about the tokyo linux convention 
coming soon. is it worth coming to or what, never been to one. holla back 
when your free.

Thanks again.
Gavin



On Thursday 02 May 2002 01:45, Jonathan Byrne wrote:
> Gavin (gauin_36@example.com) wrote:
> > Need your help, I'm running Mandrake Linux 8.0
>
> Got any hair left? :-)  I tried Mandrake (8.2) but found it so aggravating
> for its blackbox-isms and poor firewalling (oh yes, and installer quirks)
> that after a couple days' test run, I replaced it with Red Hat 7.3
> beta 2.
>
> > BSD.  First, is there a difference between Free BSD, OpenBSD and NETBSD?
>
> Yes, but they are all much more like each other than they are like
>
> Linux (I believe both Net and Open were forked from Free), where:
> > two. What is the difference between Linux and BSD?
>
> Umm, everything :-)  Both are in the Unix family (*BSD moreso than
> Linux, because FreeBSD and its cousins are actually derived from
> BSD Unix, whereas Linux is a from-scratch implementation of
> Unix, properly called a Unix-like operating system).  You
> probably saw the discussion between Chris and Steve about
> Linux Vis. BSD; it covers it pretty well.
>
> If you're familiar with Linux, it's not hard to use BSD. Some things
> are in different places, and BSD uses (quite naturally) BSD-style
> init scripts rather than the SYS V style followed by Linux.
> For software packaging, BSD uses the ports system (read about it
> at freebsd.org), which is quite nice.  Want to install some
> program? If it's in ports, just cd to its directory and type make.
> The source tarball will be downloaded, it will be configured, and
> compiled.  Then do make install.  You're done.
>
> Each of the BSD cousins has a point of emphasis. For FreeBSD,
> it's stability.  For OpenBSD, it's security. For NetBSD, it's
> being able to run on everything from standard Intel gear to your
> office water cooler.
>
> Two of those approaches are covered in the philosophy of one
> Linux distro as well, Debian. Debian places great emphasis on
> stability (Debian Stable is indeed that) and also runs on a
> variety of hardware (11 platforms, I've read, but don't ask me
> to name them).  Debian is also pretty secure.
>
> So why, you might wonder, do I run Red Hat? :-)  Two reasons.
> One is that I've been using Red Hat and clones thereof (TurboLinux)
> for a long time and it's easy to do on autopilot (we could
> call this laziness and inertia, but we won't :-) and Debian Stable
> is so stable that it seems kind of old to run on a workstation,
> where you often want to try latest-greatest stuff.  Debian stable
> is great on a server, however.  In fact, a certain very solid mail
> system that I know runs on Debian.  For workstation use, I'd
> want to run Debian Test (currently codenamed Woody, and approaching
> promotion to Stable status, probably in May), or Debian Unstable,
> which is aptly named (no pun intended), since this is where they
> can and do test/break stuff at a moment's notice.
>
> I am putting together a Frankenputer out of dead parts right
> now, so I probably actually will install Woody on it because I've
> always wanted to learn Debian.  The package manager is a bit, well,
> challenging, but once learned, I think everyone would agree that
> it's just plain better than RPM [1].
>
> If you want the ultimate in stability for mission-critical server use,
> you can't go wrong with BSD.  If you want the latest bleeding
> edge stuff, staying current on Red Hat will do.  If it's a Red Hat
> .0 release, there will probably be quite a bit of bleeding indeed.
> They tend to suck.  Debian Test is a reasonable middle ground.
> Mandrake?  Unless you really, really need a locale that isn't in
> one of the other distros (VNese, for example), Just Say No.  SuSE
> is reputed to be pretty good, I hope to test out 8.0 if it shows up on
> an FTP mirror someday  :-p
>
> If you want to get into Linux up to your elbows, get Gentoo.
>
> Jonathan
>
> [1] urpmi is said to do a reasonable job of implementing APT functionality
> for RPM, but I haven't tried it yet.  If it's true, RH would do well
> to incorporate its features into the RPM core.