[ale] free bsd vs. linux

[Dylan Northrup]

A long time ago, (15.03.03), in a galaxy far, far away, Chris Fowler wrote:

:=I hear it all thi time in #freebsdhelp,  Linux sux.  Linux can't be a
:=server as well as BSD.  I'm not totally sure that is true anymore. I
:=installed BSD and I had to spend hours in /usr/ports and in source to
:=get the programs that come with Linux districutions into BSD.

You could use /stand/sysinstall to install pre-compiled binary packages.
This takes much less time in general than using /usr/ports.  However, I
get warmer fuzzies when something's compiled on my local box than if it's
just a straight binary install.

:=I spent hours in Solaris 8 x86 doing the same.  Everytime I have to
:=install Solaris, I end up having to prot programs over.

For Solaris I have packages that I've made and put on my jumpstart server so
they gett installed during the OS post-install step.

:=Every OS has its place.  Some OS's overlap in certain areas. I do not
:=believe the BSD is suited for an embedded arena,  Apparently the market
:=agrees with me.  The big players have not been pushing FreeBSD, NetBSD,
:=OpenBSD, etc..  That could be marketing.  The kernel developers of Linux
:=are doing a good job in the UNIX area.  GNU can run on almost any
:=system.  When we talk about Linux Vs. BSD, we are talking about the
:=kernel.

Actually, I tend to talk about the system as a whole.  Just like a single
server doesn't make an architecture, a kernel does not make an OS.

-- 
Dylan Northrup <*> docx at io.com <*> http://www.io.com/~docx/
"Harder to work, harder to strive, hard to be glad to be alive, but it's 
 really worth it if you give it a try." -- Cowboy Mouth, 'Easy'

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale