Slashdot Mirror
Migrating from Linux to FreeBSD
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."
How to migrate from FreeBSD back to Linux
Unlike certain Linux distributions, the FreeBSD package system seems to work great, even on packages that are on an FTP site somewhere else.
How to forget the whole Unix thing and migrate back to Windows.
Don't know anything and don't bother to read before you get beligerrent. You guys give open source a bad name. Get a clue or get it given to you on a clue by four.
Jerk.
Why isn't this on the front page?
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.
/. is not the intended audience.
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.
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.
Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is dead
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..
I just want to state for the record that I think linux really sucks.
The Linux Gay Conspiracy shall be re-issued.
"Why did they cancel my favorite Sci-Fi show? I downloaded ALL the episodes!"
that BSD sucks.
Out of solaris, linux, and freebsd, guess which OS is the slowest and shittiest?
That's right! BSD.
Read the test results at SysAdmin magazine.
First up, I'm not a purist -- not by any stretch of the imagination -- i tend to migrate to a "best fit solution"
;)
I develop FreeBSD based embedded server apps for clients -- but until recently I had to use Linux in order to get support for my commercialware programmers editor (slickedit) -- took over two years of sending "nastygrams" or rather good natured pokes to get them to make an honest port instead of trying to get it work under the emulator.
Oracle would be great on freebsd, but that seems unlikely for awhile.
Coldfusion would be awesome on freebsd -- but considering Macromedias arcane licensing policy even when it comes to the Solaris version (jeezus I spent less money on my SparcEngine ATX motherboard then I did on my last Intel supermonster -- do they care? no they think their server is worth $5000 for the privilege to run on sparc -vs- the reasonable windows/linux server pricing they have)
The fact is, unless you can live with all the portable "free" stuff, get used to either being a cheerleader or a jeerleader when dealing with commercialware vendors.
Yeah, like its that friggn difficult for them to recompile on freebsd
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
Yeah, like its that friggn difficult for them to recompile on freebsd ;)
Recompiling is a snap. Any commercial Unix program can be ported to FreeBSD in about a day. The developers at these companies know this. But that not the roadblock. The management at these companies don't want to support another platform. Simple. They don't want to write another help script for the techsupport crew. They'll have to invest in people who know FreeBSD inside and out so that when a customer calls with a tough support question they can handle it.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
this is the exact sort of thing that was the argument against linux early on
and the sort of thing that you could either "download without support" at a reduced price etc
but seriously, for most application level issues, the fundamental differences between the two is almost non-existent.
if anything it gets their developers to write autoconf scripts, and helps to reduce the number of things that are "taken for granted"
Old age and treachery almost always overcome youth and skill.
Your mother, who's slow, but also fast. She likes eating shit, too. Last night, I took a big steaming dump on her face. Before you could say, "Cleveland Steamer," she started munching on it like it was a warm chocolate burrito. I tell you, that bitch sure is slutty.
Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
Fact: *BSD is the weakest link. Goodbye.
"Yeah, like its that friggn difficult for them to recompile on freebsd ;)"
;-) You have to remember that not all commercial code is as "clean" as many open-source projects are, mainly because they simply don't target anywhere near the number of platforms. I can't think of any commercial products of the top of my head (Oracle maybe?), but I do know *MANY* of them include enhancements (read: hacks) to get them to run on different platforms, like Linux, or Solaris. Sure, they're all UNIX, so to speak, but there remains differences between the two, and it is those differences that commercial vendors are worried about; it's never just a simple recompile, though it would be nice. And the cost of doing a port The Right Way is prohibitive, especially for more "exotic" operating systems like FreeBSD. From a commercial point of view, Linux is growing at a faster pace than FreeBSD, and *THAT'S* what companies care about. We aren't in the dot-com mode of spending anymore; money has to be allocated towards those areas where companies will make the most money, because that is their job. Sorry for the rant . . . this just hit upon something I've been thinking of lately. :-)
Well, the recompiling might not be difficult.
An excerpt from an IRC discussion on #freebsd:
...funny...
:)
:)
:)
...a fool and his money are soon parted...
:)
Greetings
As a newbie, my question is: How simple is an upgrade of bsd?
too easy for us, too difficult for you (because you're too lazy to
read)
shamz: No; I am new, and haven not yet installed it. That is why
I am asking first; I am used to System V, and Linux.
you mind has been too warped to use *bsd's, seek medical/psych.
attention first
By System V and Linux?
yes
shamz: What would U tell a winxx user?
he hasn't asked yet, hehe
I can get The Complete FreeBSD for $22,-; it comes with version
3.1, would you reccomend I do; or get the 4.0 version?
just download and make the install disks and install 4.x over the net
i would recommend yo go to the website and read for a few _days_ first
shamz: So, I don't use the CDs that come with the book, right?
*sigh*
go to the website, i'm not going to explain what's already there
i refuse to help the lazy
So do I.
shamz: That reading thing - for sure; I guess with a 33.6kbps
modem, I am better of getting some new CDs.
doh
* WiseSon is not lazy
Hey, I learned from man pages; give me some credit
that's a shame
1 credit added, inifite to go
it must be a matter of intelligence then...
TX
shamz: I was considering which to get first; P/390, or BSD.
shamz: I want to get familiar with that too.
there has to be an OS collectors site for you, go find it
shamz: Last Q; what is the smallest usable install of freebsd -
console mode?
* shamz doesn't support multi-boot anymore
use a 2GB harddrive and get the src's
EOD
shamz: K, got a 2.6 handy
Then why are you still here? GO INSTALL IT!
On it.
Ack!
CDs get here some time friday.
Ah just install F-BSD 3.4 it's good enough
(That's the version included with the book, right?)
SNOWDUDE: No big differences with 4.0?
SNOWDUDE: The book has version 3.1
A lot of differences, but not important for a newbie
must be an old book
* SNOWDUDE is away, brb
shamz: Yes, cdrom.com is selling their overstocked stuff.
*** TCM has joined #freebsd
hmm, mergemaster used to be a port, right?
*** shamz sets mode: +o TCM
shamz: Have not yet bought the book; the 3rd ed. is 69.95 - bit
high...
for the last time: go to the website and read!
shamz: How nice of you to be so polite to an inquisitive mind.
how nice of you to be dense and redundant
Thank you for you kind advice, and goodbye.
good ridance
*** WiseSon was kicked by shamz (you were leaving, weren't you?)
Thanks, Snowdude!
My $0.02 (Canadian)
Riiiiight
For the first time that I can remember somebody acrtually god the meaning of the acronym correct: Berkeley Software Distribution. Who told the secret?
The article has been written with good intentions. As a sys admin/developer, I am personally more concerned about the immediate job, i.e. the issue of migration. It would be helpful to have a precise/specific checklist of things to worry about DURING the migration. Following which, a relative comparison (tabular, fairly specific) would be very helpful.
This is what I am talking about:
Unix Guide
Hopefully this should help others.
Best Wishes!!