Slashdot Mirror


Is FreeBSD really 'The Other Linux'

Why2K writes "This article provides some interesting comments on the differences between FreeBSD and Linux, and the reasons why Linux is more popular. " Its sorta an outsider fluff piece, but its a nice summary. Talks broadly about the technical differences in the code, the sociologies, and of course, the fact that BSD has a cooler mascot ;)

1 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Not a bad article, but missing some points by toastyman · · Score: 4

    While they went to great lengths to say that one of the differences was how code was added to the base, they didn't really say why that matters that much.

    Before, when I did a lot of custom drivers for Linux, I was continually annoyed with kernel interfaces changing, and code that was 'current' a week ago, suddenly becoming legacy.

    With FreeBSD, I've had amazing longevity with my code. Not because they're slow to change, but because, in my opinion, (flame proof clothes ready) it was designed 'right' the first time.

    The works of people like Kirk McKusick and David Greenman are quite possibly some of the best designs I've ever seen. Even if you don't plan on using FreeBSD, I think all developers should at least take a look at how it works, and I promise you'll learn a thing or two.

    I also hold 'good design' as the reasons for why I've had systems with 400+ day uptimes, that were sometimes under nearly constant attack and/or intrusion attempts.

    Finally, the BSD license. My 'day job' is designing an embedded product, which is using FreeBSD for it's OS. Why? The license. Many companies are hesitant, or even contractually prohibited, from giving out changes made to the system, which the GPL rather insists on. The BSD license is very open, which I think may become more important in the near future.

    Go download a boot floppy, or buy a CD from Walnut Creek or even Cheap Bytes and give it a try. Even if you don't end up keeping it, if you're a hacker, you'll learn something. :)