FreeBSD 4.1.1 vs. Linux 2.4

A reader writes: "This byte.com article finds byte.com's Linux guru wondering why he isn't running FreeBSD. 'Linux 2.4.0 is available for no money. So is FreeBSD. Linux uses advanced hardware, so does FreeBSD. FreeBSD is more stable and faster than Linux, in my opinion. We penguinistas sometimes believe we are having more fun than anybody. But then I lean over the fence and discover the FreeBSD folks are having a hell of a party, too. And their OS is as fast as I have seen. I have to ask myself why I don't just switch my server to FreeBSD.'"

Comments

Re:Why I use Linux on my main machine:

[dvdeug]

It shouldn't be a matter of dumping the Hurd - if Debian dumped the Hurd, we'd lose the developers that develop the Hurd. But if you want Debian GNU/BSD, subscribe to debian-bsd@lists.debian.org and start working. The biggest problem with Debian GNU/BSD is interested workers, not anything political and certainly not anything having to do with the Hurd.

Re:Penguin vs Daemon - Argument

[Cerb]

The FreeBSD handbook is pretty much THE reference for FreeBSD, and it's on every FreeBSD box that has the docs installed. You can get a dead tree version too if you want. I know of at least one other dead tree text on FreeBSD, it has regular updates posted to the freebsd-questions@freebsd.org list.

And what's this about no sound drivers? When was the last time you actually used a FreeBSD machine? Or, if you claim to be a FreeBSD user, have you not read LINT? There are tons of sound drivers. The pcm device runs many PCI and ISA cards. And what qualifies as "and the like"? My hauppauge WinTV card works better in FreeBSD than it did in Linux. The machine doesn't slow down when I watch TV. My USB mouse was spotted and configured as soon as I started the install. The ONLY thing I miss about Linux is the Nvidia drivers.

No, I'm not a FreeBSD bigot. I use both Linux and FreeBSD. If you look, I'm actually a Debian developer. They both have a place in the world. But, if you are going to post something, post facts.

Better Switch!

[jackal!]

We should all switch to FreeBSD anyway now that Microsoft has declared Linux doomed!

J

Re:Better Switch!

[frob2600]

I also don't want to see someone else taking my work, "embracing and extending" upon it, and then profiting off a piece of software that I originally intended to be free for everyone. The GPL guarantees that what I intended to be free will stay free.

Don't you see? The code you have written and intended to be free is still free! Nothing changed that. If they have added, or improved your code, so much -- they should have the right to do what they wish with that code. They are only benefiting from their work. They can never really benefit from yours. Why? It may appear like they are benefiting from the work you have done, but they are not. They can never force people to buy their code on the merits of your code alone. Because the people will just go out and use your code; if they don't want the additional stuff.* What gives you the right to tell them what they can or can't do with the code they wrote? In a truely free society, nothing.

I can see where the GPL people come from with their ideas. And the ideas are noble. But you are going about it in the wrong way. Be honest with yourself and read the GPL (I have a nice highlighted hard copy for when I discuss these issues). Ask yourself if I have a point. If I do have a point, think about what you are doing when you GPL a piece of code. I am not going to tell you that you have to switch or you are anti-anything. I will just ask you to be honest with yourself.

Personally, I used to think the GPL was the only way to go. I didn't know much about other licenses out there, at the time, and I would have probably argued the same way as many of you do. But, over time, I started to question the ethics of forcing someone to chose one license over another and that in itself is so against freedom that I had to change my view. I am not saying the BSD license in the best [although it is my favorite]. You might want to release code under the Beer-Ware license.** I do this with code I write for people on campus and it pays off very well.

*Yes, I know they are able to just sell your code without changing anything. But, they will almost never succeed at locking everyone into using their code that way. Because people will still be able to get yours for free. Remember, you have chosen what gets done with the code you wrote. Nothing, and I mean nothing, will change that unless you do it yourself (and even then -- good luck getting that opensource code locked down).

**Note: I did not write this, I just like using it.

"THE BEER-WARE LICENSE" (Revision 42):
wrote this file. As long as you retain this notice you
can do whatever you want with this stuff. If we meet some day, and you think
this stuff is worth it, you can buy me a beer in return. Authors Name

---
"Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,

Re:Better Switch!

[Pinball Wizard]

I realize you were joking but... MS would never say nasty things about the BSD's since their TCP/IP stack and kerberos are largely based on BSD code.

They love BSD for this reason. They have told their developers to not even look at GPL code while on the job.

If anything BSD is doomed by their license(trying hard not to troll here). Most open source developers would rather not have their code end up in Windows. Hence, eventually the popularity of Linux and the GPL with developers will mean that Linux will likely overtake the BSDs in performance in the not-too-distant future.

Re:Better Switch!

[bob x johnson]

Yeah, MS may have used *BSD code for some of their TCP/IP utils, and great code it may be, but has *BSD gotten anything in return?

You mean besides the benefits of standard protocols?

[In case you fail to fail to miss the point, like most mindless GNU drones, answer this question: How many successful protocols have their reference implementations licensed under the GPL?]

Re:Better Switch!

[frob2600]

Most open source developers would rather not have their code end up in Windows.

Being an open-source developer myself, I would personally never release any of my code under the GPL. And I encourage all the coders I talk with to do the same. And once they see the reasoning behind why, most will switch. They honestly want to give their code away for others to use as they see fit. You are not giving your code away if you are requiring something back.

I tried to use the BSD license in a class where the teacher was pro-GPL and he refused to agree. Although we discussed it at great length. It turns out that at my college any professor has the right to determine the license for all code his class produces. But, even if the school had not been on his side the GPL would have allowed him to win. All he had to do was require that a GPL'd base class be included in all assignments, and everything would be forced under the GPL! He told me he was going to do this, no matter what verdict he school returned. This is just one of the reasons I hate the GPL.

I am sorry, but your little disclaimer about trying not to troll is not going to change what you said into anything less offensive to those who have been forced into submission by that filthy beast of a license! If the cost of giving my code away means it goes to Windows. Great! This again proves my favorite saying, "Those who hate Windows use Linux; those who love Unix use FreeBSD."

If the GPL becomes as prominent as you think it will be, there will be a lot of excellent coders who will take up other hobbies where freedom is maintained. But it won't happen. Communism failed in use with politics it will fail in use with code developing as well. FreeBSD will remain 'Free' and so will all the code I, and those who know the truth about giving, produce.

</rant>

---
"Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,

How much RAM? ;)

[ssimpson]

From the article:

'I chose -- once again -- IBM's Netfinity 5100 server. This one is a dual CPU system with PentiumIII 900-MHz processors and 768 GBs of RAM. The disks are under a RAID controller, letting the five 18.2-GB disks be visible under RAID5.'

Damn. Makes my half a gig of RAM look very sad :)

and the bell has rung...

[popular]

OK, no hitting below the belt.
Let's see a good clean fight.

Also on tonight's fight card:
GNOME vs. KDE
Perl vs. PHP
MySQL vs. Postgres
RMS vs. ESR

--

Re:FreeBSD is free'd from the pressures.

[stripes]

FreeBSD is a pure server OS. Nobody has to worry about the other possible applications, it is designed purely for one purpose, and one purpose alone. It does it well.

If FreeBSD is a server-only OS why did it get USB support before Linux did?

If FreeBSD is a server-only OS, what is PicoBSD all about?

Fact of the matter is FreeBSD serves multiple intrests as well. And it does them all reasonably well.

Good.

[SimplyCosmic]

Hey, although it's an attempt at humor, your post is actually kind of close to my philosophy of "using the right tool for the right job".

I've had plenty of people ask me if they should switch from MS Windows over to Linux. For some the answer is yes. But only if they're ready for the headaches that come with breaking from the pack. For others, I realise early on that they're going to be much more productive on a machine with an operating system that they're pretty much guarenteed to be able to be fixed by the local Best Buy.

It really isn't about which OS is the holy grail, perfect for all situations and godsend to all who use it. That's because such a beast doesn't exist. It's about finding the right tool for the job, and the right tool means not only the proper amount of control and features, but support and comfort for the person using it.

Despite what we geeks tell ourselves, an operating system is just a tool, not a lifestyle. Right? Right? Guys? Hello?

Why this Penguinista uses Linux over FreeBSD.

[SimplyCosmic]

I've played around with several of the distros, as well as FreeBSD and OpenBSD, and the absolute most basic reason I use Linux over FreeBSD is simply because I have an easier time finding out how to install, maintain, admin or fix some problem from the various Linux sites out there.

It's not really a matter of which is technologically superior, and I suspect that FreeBSD may in fact be so. However, in the particular style of searching for information on how to accomplish a particular task, I've always found the Linux information quicker and easier than for the FreeBSD way of doing things. Again, this doesn't mean that Linux is better, far from it. It's just easier for me to run thanks to the types of online resources I come across.

Your mileage, as always, may vary. Offer void in most major cities. Not to be taken internally, while pregnant, or running for Congress.

Fishy benchmark

[Pemdas]

The overall conclusions may be valid; I don't know. I've used NetBSD for a few things here and there, but don't have enough experience with FreeBSD to make any sort of judgement.

This, however, caught my eye:

• int x;
  long y;
  y = 28.2839281;
  x = 339829;
  y = x / y;
  ...
  

Notice how I included some simple floating point arithmetic in the C program to make things just a tad tougher.

He admits he's no benchmark specialist, but any compiler worth its salt (and many that aren't) will optimize the floating point operations away. Also, since the result of the divide is never used, that will be optimized out, too.

I don't know what the real story is, and I do know a lot of knowledgeable people split on the Linux vs. FreeBSD issue. However, such a blatant error in benchmarking methodology gives me large doubts about this guy's credibility as a competent judge.

Re:Why not FreeBSD...

[AntiBasic]

And because when I talk to the network managers at work, my fellow consultants/contractors, and my clients, they all talk about Linux, not FreeBSD. I've convinced a few of the wonders of OpenBSD and audited source, but many still compare Linux and FreeBSD in terms of market share: who is the bigger? Linux. Which is a customer more likely to ask for? Linux over BSD, but Solaris and AIX and HP-UX above Linux.

Popularity is really not a good reason to choose something. Windows is a lot more popular than Linux. It has more users, more commercial programs, more programmers, certifications, and possibly books, training courses, and any number of other things. It doesn't make it any better, really, now does it? Yes, there are more Linux users than FreeBSD users. It doesn't really make that much of a difference.

And besides that, FreeBSD out of the box isn't as friendly as most Linux distributions.

Care to justify that statement? Easier to learn, again, is questionable. It's easy to learn something if you have, say, a friend next door that runs the same thing. At my university, FreeBSD became very popular (much more so than Linux) because the people who took the time to help out and organize things knew FreeBSD best, and suggested people try it. Those same people who used Linux before considered FreeBSD much easier to learn. The same may apply the other way around in your area. It isn't a matter of ease, but your surroundings. If you go it alone, like I pretty much did, it ends up being a personal matter (discussed below). As for documentation, I'd say it depends on the person. The FreeBSD Handbook helped me through most of my trials, but some find it too complicated, and some find it too abstract. Greg Lehey's book is good. There're FreeBSD courses offered by BSDi, amongst others. The NetBSD documentation is technically great and complete.

Maybe when my hardware needs change, I'll run FreeBSD. If FreeBSD NFS and Linux NFS start talking to each other faster,...

The problem there is Linux NFSv3 implementation. Quite honestly it sucks.

Penguin vs Daemon - Argument

[BluedemonX]

Well, I look at it this way. I can walk into any bookstore and get an O'Reilly book detailing how to write drivers for Linux, another explaining Linux internals in detail, yet more describing for newbies how to install same. There are wonderful distributions like Debian and (well, at least when they can make a release that allows you to get the kernel to compile) RedHat, etc etc etc.

On the daemon front, I've seen books available by mail, none in the bookstores. There's certainly a lot less in terms of choice. And you can forget finding sound drivers, or the like. What you do get is the suggestion to take the drivers from the Linux people and port them yourself. Of course you can do that, because you're a g0d l337 ha>0r d00d, right? Otherwise you'd be running Windows.

FreeBSD is free'd from the pressures.

[Lover's Arrival, The]

Linux is being pushed in several different directions by different groups and organisations. Some want it to be a Desktop OS, some wish it to be a Server OS, and some wish it to be in the world of embedded devices. Everybody has a different agenda for a free OS, and the means, if they wish, to take Linux and mould it for their wishes.

FreeBSD is a pure server OS. Nobody has to worry about the other possible applications, it is designed purely for one purpose, and one purpose alone. It does it well.

If I were running a server alone, I would use FreeBSD. For any other purpose, I would use Linux. Each have their strengths.

They fuck you up, your mum and dad.