Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Migrating from Linux to FreeBSD

Posted by timothy on from the two-nice-destinations dept.

Eugenia writes: "OSNews published a guide that could help users migrate from Linux to FreeBSD by spotting the main differences between the two popular systems. Interesting read & relevant to the recent FreeBSD 4.5 release a few days ago."

7 of 81 comments (clear)

  1. Bad article -- frankly not worth the /. link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The article spends waaaay to much time talking about the licensing differences. When we want to migrate from one OS to another, reading the licesnsing is probably near the bottom of our lists. We want to know what the OS does, and if it'll perform well in our situation.

    No mention of the different CPU types that BSD runs on, how many drivers are available (just that the authors look down their noses at the "flashy new features" that new hardware offers, migrating user accounts, does CRON or anything have to be dealt with, etc. A little bit of information on the different directory structure.

    His main bitch seems to be that the default install of FreeBSD is small, and the default install of SuSE isn't.

    This thing reads like it was written by a C.S. major for a 200 level English course. /. is not the intended audience.

  2. Re:Followed by by sirket · · Score: 3, Informative

    Reasons for running FreeBSD:

    1. It is a single entity. I do not need to worry which version of libc works with which kernel

    2. FreeBSD is consistent. I do not need to worry about where a particular FreeBSD system has installed an application.

    3. FreeBSD's ports tree is an excellent utility for managing my system

    4. Stability. FreeBSD is stable as can be.

    5. Performance. FreeBSD has always be an excellent system when it comes to performance, and it does so without making the sacrafices in stability that Linux traditionally made. (Async file systems anyone?)

    Does FreeBSD have a journaled file system? No. FreeBSD has SoftUpdates. Why? Because it gets you everything you want from journaling without the overhead.

    How many journaled file systems does it have? One. Why on earth would you need more than 1? Softupdates isn't even seperate from the standard file system. As of 4.5 Softupdates are enabled on file systems by default. The wonderful thing about softupdates, though, is that you can turn them on an off when you want to.

    The Windows installer is better? Perhaps you had better stop sitting in front of the radiation that your monitor emits. The last time I checked the Windows installer screwed up about half the time. I also do not see a global menu from which I can tell Windows to install any one of thousands of useful utilities all by typing one command. More importantly Windows sure as hell won't go out and get the software for me!

    apt-get is a pretty nice piece of software. It is the first time the Linux folks have released something comparable to the ports tree and I am glad to see it out there.

    Also, rpm does compile and install under FreeBSD.

    Finally, FreeBSD has always doen an amazing job of running Linux applications when required so I just do not see an advantadge to using Linux.

    -sirket

  3. License Differences by ulmanms · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...the GPL requires any changes to the source code to be made public and be licensed under the GPL...

    Small things like this are what contribute to the FUD about the GPL. Say it with me - you only have to release your changes if you distribute them. It's these misinterpretations that allow MSFT to claim that using Linux will 'infect' your company.

    For reference, it's here in the GPL.

  4. few things left out by Partisan01 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think a couple points need to be made. I'm a avid linux user, OpenBSD user and FreeBSD user. I also have a win98 box laying around. But I think when migrating to BSD most linux users don't realize that the GNU utils arn't there anymore. This is a big thing, same with the bash shell. Another point to be made is that for webserving FreeBSD is about as fast as you can get. If you want high loads and need to serve up lots of info FreeBSD is the answer.


    Nate Tobik

    --
    ahh, the egg in the basket..
    1. Re:few things left out by RinkSpringer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uhrm, you can just install Bash by going to /usr/ports/shells/bash and make install. Same goes for most other utilities.

    2. Re:few things left out by Metrol · · Score: 3, Informative

      But I think when migrating to BSD most linux users don't realize that the GNU utils arn't there anymore.

      Ahh, you mean like this tiny sampling of GNU applications?

      This is a big thing, same with the bash shell.

      Are you referring to, like, bash?? Perhaps you didn't know how to properly install it?

      You say you've actually used FreeBSD???

      --
      The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
  5. Re:FreeBSD Has Some Merits by gsutter · · Score: 3, Informative

    I am aware of _no way_ to do a complete system upgrade under any of the Free/Net/Open BSDs without visiting the box and taking it down to single user mode to "make world" the whole thing.

    No single-user mode necessary:

    # cvsup cvsupfile.src
    # cd /usr/src
    # make buildworld
    # make buildkernel
    # make installkernel
    # make installworld
    # mergemaster
    # reboot

    Now, take the same situation with, say, Debian or RedHat. I want to upgrade a package? apt-get or rpm it. That particular program will be down for precisely the amount of time it takes the package manager to replace the appropriate files, which would be a minute or two, TOPS.

    # pkg_add -r packagename

    or, better yet,

    # pkg_add -r portupgrade
    # pkg_update packagename

    ...which will handle all dependencies as well. Portupgrade is an awesome package!

    HTH.