Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Taking MicroBSD for a Test Run

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the not-picobsd-or-nanobsd dept.

LiquidPC writes "In this article Jeremy Reed of BSDNewsletter.com talks about installing MicroBSD, what features make it special, troubles and successes I encountered, and the beauty of the BSD license."

4 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. I don't understand... by Taylor_Durden · · Score: 0, Troll

    I don't understand why people ever think this type of operating system would ever be useful. The time you invest into "finding the IP address of your primary name server" and figuring out what "fstab, hostname.fxp0, hosts, myname, mygate, resolv.conf, sysctl.conf" mean will negate any postive effect this has on your development time/bank account. The only reason anyone would want to install an operating system like BSD or Linux would be to increase their geekness factor, and that can be easily accomplished by not showering for a week.

  2. Better choices... by Krapangor · · Score: 0, Troll

    aren't usually very successful. Very often it's only hype and FUD.
    The failure of BSD is the best example.
    Superior license (not blocking use for embedded devices), superior IP stack (why else is everyone ripping it off) with full functional IP6 support, superior kernel structure (that's why MAC OS X adopted it and not lunix), better file system, better performance ...the list is virtually endless.
    And where are we know ?
    The OS world is ruled by bug-ridden Windows and hobbyist Linux with their very own design flaws (security, no microkernel etc.). And *BSD, this high quality, scientific system is obviously dead.
    There is some support out there but these groups are all dying in the long term.
    Sad but true.
    Sometimes I think if this Darwin "survival of the fittest" stuff is nothing but a huge scam. At least Darwins theses would imply that *BSD would in fact dominate the OS market, right ?

    --
    Owner of a Mensa membership card.
    1. Re:Better choices... by Peaker · · Score: 1, Troll

      Probably a troll but:

      Linux and BSD are both just *nix.
      *nix is *nix is *nix. Crappy ACL-type security (as opposed to Capability Systems security [EROS, for example]).

      Performance differences are negligable. The areas where BSD and Linux do differ, usually the Linux way is better known around. The Stack is ripped off in closed source OS's because Linux doesn't use a license that supports Closed Source distributers.

      In hardware support, Linux probably beats BSD, but I haven't followed it much.

      Also, Linux has a native Debian distribution, and many others, while BSD has second-hand ports of such and its native distributions are in many oppinions far worse.

  3. BSD License Not Developer Friendly by codepunk · · Score: 0, Troll

    I hate to say it but BSD is going away due to it's insane licensing. The BSD license is not friendly at all to the developers producing code. It removes the developer from any claim he has to the code. I produce code and place it on the web and then Apple or any other hostile for that matters, takes my code and attempts to sell it back to me? Now I don't know about the rest of you but that sounds pretty damn stupid for me to pick a BSD license.

    Behold the beauty of the GPL

    --


    Got Code?