Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD 4.11-RELEASE Available
noackjr pastes "'The Release Engineering Team is happy to announce the availability of FreeBSD 4.11-RELEASE, the latest release of the FreeBSD Legacy development branch. Since FreeBSD 4.10-RELEASE in May 2004 we have made conservative updates to a number of software programs in the base system, dealt with known security issues, and made many bugfixes.' See the release, hardware and installation notes for more information. Currently there are no errata. FreeBSD 4.11 is available via BitTorrent or one of the many mirrors."
FreeBSD vs Linux - The Definitive Comparison
Flamewars between FreeBSD and Linux advocates occur all the time, so it's often hard to make a judgement. Our 500-employee company (which will naturally go un-named) recently decided to convert almost entirely to Open Source software and OSes; I was put in charge of making the decisions. It boiled down to FreeBSD and Linux, and without letting any bias or emotions get in the way, I established the following criteria.
Performance
This is a complicated issue, so let's consider these three types of machine (in use at our company):
Single CPU server: FreeBSD just edged ahead of Linux on this one. The differences weren't drastic, but large enough - consequently, score 1 for FreeBSD here.
Multi CPU server: With kernel 2.6, Linux performed considerably better than both FreeBSD 4.9 and 5.2.1. The updated SMP code and revised scheduler have worked wonders here, so 1 for Linux.
Desktop: Linux 2.6 is much faster than either FreeBSD, particularly when the system is heavily loaded. Application start times are slightly better, while responsiveness is remarkably superior to FreeBSD. Another 1 for Linux.
Result: FreeBSD 1, Linux 2
Stability
Linux distributions vary greatly in terms of stability, with Mandrake Linux and Fedora Core aiming for bleeding-edge desktop features, while Slackware and Debian put great emphasis on stability. FreeBSD is indeed a reliable OS, but the smaller development and testing community puts it behind Linux - additionally, there are more full-time Linux developers working with commercial companies on hardware support and core component testing.
Our Debian and Slackware systems have never crashed or suffered any other major glitches in five years of use, and we know of other individuals and companies that can say the same. With the correct distribution selection, Linux systems are extremely reliable. The far greater amount of testing by the community and companies gives Linux a boost here.
Result: FreeBSD 0, Linux 1
Support
Ease of updating: Although a third-party binary updaing system exists, it's not yet part of the official FreeBSD system (and consequently, problems with trust occur). Current FreeBSD releases rely on manual CVS updating, patch applying, compilation and installation. Debian GNU/Linux, conversely, only needs a single command to update; this is a major win for Linux, as it saves a huge amount of time on a large number of machines. 1 to Linux.
Length of support: Each FreeBSD point release is only supported for 12 months. The Debian Project supports each of its releases for over two years, and other distros such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux are supported for five years. Although upgrading FreeBSD is fairly simple, the changes in userland tools and Ports means that extensive re-testing of home-grown apps needs to be made. A major win for Linux here.
Commercial support: FreeBSD is significantly weaker on this front, with Linux vendors offering a much greater range and variety of support contracts than are available for FreeBSD. 1 to Linux.
Result: FreeBSD 0, Linux 3
Hardware
Server: FreeBSD's driver range for server-class machines is very good, and the drivers themselves are robust and well-tested. Linux is strong on this front too, but FreeBSD just pips it to the post. 1 to FreeBSD.
Desktop: Linux far surpasses FreeBSD in terms of desktop hardware support, with a gigantic range of drivers and subsystems from both kernel developers and third parties. 1 to Linux.
Other platforms: Debian supports more architectures than FreeBSD, although the gap is narrowing. NetBSD supports even more, but that involves throwing another BSD variant into the mix - and this causes problems. Similarly, Linux's laptop support is quite complete and is more mature than FreeBSD's. So 1 to Linux.
Result: FreeBSD 1, Linux 2
how long is it going to take to get over the "well you can fsck in the back while the system is running" At that rate you're back up to 100% in no time at all ... like 3 hours
.... it's journaled, it boots, it recovers ... it's just better
ext3, reiser, jfs, xfs linux